Limitless

Only a Monarch Butterfly caterpillar will turn into a Monarch butterfly. There are over twenty thousand species of butterfly on the planet, and only the Monarch caterpillar will turn into a Monarch butterfly. To think of all the varieties of personality and character that each of us is imprinted with, or have created, the varieties of "expression" in "enlightenment " are truly limitless.

Limitless is a good way to look at this, as limitless is what we are dealing with here. Is it silent? Oh yes, but dynamically so. Is it stillness? Yes, among the unfolding, within the unfolding, there is stillness. Darkness? But with infinite light. Limitless. As soon as it's one thing, it's another. It's a shape changer like the butterfly.

Shape changers. We are this. I went to sleep as a boy and dreamed I was a man. I awoke to find I am a man, and the dream appears as a nightmare. But shape changers don't need to accept this illusory reality. Oh, the "rules " have to be "accepted " (the parenthesis are a kind of fingers crossed behind my back), but only the limitless reality need be actually accepted.

I can, by "God " I must, awaken that boy; that sleeping fool dreaming of being a man. But this is it isn't it? We dream of manhood or womanhood and liberation from an imagined oppression we have piled on ourselvers since we forgot the joy we traded for "security ". Along comes a guru, a teacher. He or she tells you that they have experienced "awakening ", a new view, a new life. They have books, CDs, DVDs, a newsletter (social networking!) and a website to die for.

On their Facebook page, and in their Notes, they let you know what a "real " enlightenment "experience " looks like, as opposed to, I guess, everyone else's. Yours. I have had people write me and tell me how saddened they feel when their "experiences " are held up as "inauthentic " and judged by someone else's measure. The Monarch caterpillar is born, eats, and has it's life experience on one type of plant. If it takes advice from a Swallowtail, eats what it eats, tries to imitate the life of the Swallowtail, it will die. Why? Butterflies all, seekers all?

The innumerable unfoldings that occur within the "great unfolding " of Love that each of us, sentient and non-sentient alike are "created " in, result in a kind of temporary "uniqueness ". There is but one unique "awakening " for us, built in from the "beginning ". You are not a Monarch caterpillar, no Monarch Butterfly in your future! The Swallowtail can't convince you either, as you are not a Swallowtail youngster with a Swallowtail dream. You are a unique illusory character, a puppet seeking desperately to see where your strings go as they vanish into the darkness above.

When you come to realize that the puppet you have taken yourself to be, is manipulated by none other than the observer of the show, you can open your uniquely marked wings and fly. Not as some other butterfly. Not in their colors. Not on their plant. Not parroting another's words, or behaviors, but a spreading of wings (awakening) that is yours alone, and with you since "birth". Limitless.

Peace

The Tingle itself

If you write Notes on Facebook very often, and if you write about non-dual spirituality, you will, without question, begin repeating yourself. There is only so much to be said, and much of that shouldn't be. Yet, one of life's little paradoxes is that the pull to offer, console and even attempt to explain remains like the pull of gravity, even when there are no objects to be "pulled ".

I don't think that you can point to Love, as our true nature, or becoming like a little child too often, or emphasize them enough. We are One with "God " through Love. We do not "become" "God ". We do not "dissolve" into "God ". Love "connects" us, to each other, as well as "God ". "God " and "we" are only expressions of Love, our "existence" coming out of the "need " of Love for expression.

If I reach out my hand to you like a child looking for that magic of touch, the magic lies in that connection, the second of touch itself. Love; the tingling in your friends hand. It's palpable, it's in the air. Even as adults, the tingling remains; a visible spark, a recognition of "connection". Your hand is in mine, and for that moment "you " and "I " are gone, only the tingle; the connection, Love is present.

Of course, if you remember way back, not in faulty or enhanced memory, but remember back to the heart of the dancing, open hearted child that lives in you still, your encounter with the sunrise, the sunset, the hawk on the wing, or the grief of a friend, will bring that tingle, that connection, thatLove.

Opening the heart, exposes it to pain. As soon as this is discovered in childhood (childhood is also a very scary time!), masks go on, and defenses go up. Love is cast out or at least "filtered" in such a way that we feel in control. To cast out pain, often life itself, we reject real "connections". We replace them with "power " and "sex ". These are tangible control and "connection ". The spirit that flows from Love is distorted and perverted into lust and desire. Control and possession stand in for true connection, which comes only from surrender.

So becoming as little children, and therefore recognizing Love as our true nature, is a constant rejection of masks, a fearless living in the connection. When we hold hands, I don't ask you to vanish, nor do you seek my absence. We seek, are indeed pulled, to be what we are created for, to be expressions of Love, the tingle itself.

Peace

Reinventing the Wheel

The old adage about not reinventing the wheel is useful in most of life's endevours. In spirituality however, it may not always fit. The spiritual texts, books and literature are filled with "sage " advice and sound descriptions of the journeys of "others ". The making these things "real " for us requires our "own " experiential contact, not simply listening to other's words.

Any "advice " given to us or made by us must live in experience, all the while realizing that "experience " itself becomes a story, after the fact. I can only "engage " this moment. If I try to avoid "reinventing the wheel " in spirituality, I find myself accepting "other's " concepts, even repeating their words. The truly scary thing is that we all sit on the perch, beg for crackers and parrot the words from time to time, and we don't even realize it!

It is very easy, over time, to fill the mind with so many non-dual concepts and words that you don't even realize it's happening. There have been so many studies of the "wheel " from before Shankara to ongoing Facebook Notes, including this one! I quote him or her, you quote me or someone else. We paraphrase, we "clarify ", we may even argue, but we are just a breeze against the cheek. To quoteBob Dylan: "You know that something's happening, but you don't know what it is. Do you? Mr. Jones".

Unlike Mr. Jones, we do know what it is, we just can't squeeze it into the limited world of words. I guess, not unlike the clown, we can silently point to the big smile, even in the face and awful reality of pain, and mime a follow me gesture. But I can't think that you will perform my pratfalls, accept my pies in the face, or be asked to squeeze into tiny cars designed for me. No, your embarrassments, show stoppers and vehicles are waiting in today's script. You will find them as you go. No rehearsals here. Everything is "live ".

There is no "wheel " until "you " rediscover it, and it makes you it's own. Once rediscovered, this pearl of great price is understood to have been there all along. Yes, I remember, it's all one. Nothing was ever lost, it just "looked " that way. So I run out and say, "Look, nothing was ever lost!, stop seeking, identification as the "seeker" will just keep you bound.", as if I expect you will understand my words. Here, you must reinvent the wheel. You will only understand that there is no "seeker" when he vanishes before your very eyes.

As I have said, as we repeat the biblical or traditional verses, or memorize ancient texts, they become "part " of us. Some of us, like myself, scatter biblical references around like salt and pepper. I, for one, have to say that I try not to. I try to describe my experiences in my own way, but we live in a world of words and memory, and it all becomes a muddy stream a piece down the line!

Your rediscovery will not be like Ramana Maharshi's. Nor will it be like mine. The "wheel " exists. It does not need so much "reinvention " as rediscovery. "Your " rediscovery. Maybe not so much about death experiences or clouds at all, but "your " rediscovery. It may come from the appearance of a "person", guru, lover, or the sudden overwhelming feelings over finding a dead butterfly in the gutter. It may come from finding the Love in a child's eyes, or seeing for the first time the wickedness in your own.

Yes, dare to "reinvent the wheel ". Look for your own "experience ". Not an "experience " that will live in memory or anticipation, but this experience; this life!

Peace

Teaching, Life, and the Potential of Love

My approach to "teaching " is founded in living life as example and sharing life as it is lived, day to day. This no doubt has arisen, in part, from my having written the Rule for the Religious Community my partner and I founded.

Writing a Religious Community Rule is very much different than composing spiritual prose or doctrine. It has to be more than words, because these are words that need to be lived out. While I followed loosely the Rule of St. Benedict , and a style suggested by "Rule for a new Brother ", by Rogel voor een nieuwe broder of the Brackkenstine Community of Blessed Sacrament Fathers, Holland, much of the Rule was based on my life together with my Partner.

Our life together had involved middle class beginnings, but quickly found us living in less than modest surroundings. Our downtown Tenderloin experiences however, became a classroom of acceptance and sacrifice. Prior to that, both my Partner and I had experienced youthful years of Psychiatric treatment and torment. By the time it came to write the rule, much life had passed this way.

I was not so much concerned in the Rule in shaping another's spirituality, but to shape a life around which the spirit could shape it's own way. "Meetings", and meals were set aside as places to "communicate". Meetings based on a little bit of "group therapy" in a "family meeting" kind of setting. Quite sharing during meals. These all need to be part of Community where Brothers and Sisters can not only get along in Joy, but grow in spirit.

Spirituality is a very personal thing. It is the great recognition of Oneness. There is nothing more "personal " or "universal " that that. But earnestness, devotion and Love call for a life, not just for some "space" to be made in it. This is why I teach. Not that I posses a great secret, though I might. Not that I am "realized ", though I might be. But because I call you to a life. Not an idea, a philosophy or a religion, but a life. It involves eating sandwiches and talking on the phone. It involves sitting up with sick parents and children, and cleaning up puke and urine. It involves becoming lost in a child's laugh and the best sunset of your life. It is life, and it giggles through the tears.

That's what I "teach". After 44 years with one Partner, years of psychiatric inquiry, bubbles of magic "happenings " enchanting my life on a regular basis, I feel called to "teach ", "teach" that; life is what there is, in all it's wonders and sadness. I was reminded by a cloud, like a thoughtfully silly child, that I am Love. My whole "purpose " is to tell you that. I can not explain this to you, as it is beyond words, and you know all this stuff anyway.

All I can do is live my life before you. Knowing I am watched, I must accept the pains and joys and fail again and again. For I am no example if I only win. Our life may not seem like a satsang or spiritual gathering on the surface, but it is. Every smile, gesture, sigh or tear is an expression of the One; the Love that we live in. When our lives become a continual gesture of worship, devotion, and silence, the ground is prepared for the growth of potential; the potential of Love.

Peace

A Lovely Bear

In this hot weather in New Mexico, I am remembering a cool Winter spent in London, and the reactions of a small boy in Harrods's Department Store.

Visiting Harrods's for the first time, being me, I wanted to see the Toy Dept. It was the Holiday Season, and the store was fully decorated, especially the Toy Dept. While I was getting lost in the fascinating displays, a boy, about 8 to 10 years old was coming along with his father. We were in the stuffed animal section of the Dept, and all at once the boy exclaimed "Oh daddy, what a lovely bear! "

Having been in London for only a few days, the accent grabbed at me of course. But the sincerity and absolute love in that voice was startling. First, no boy in America, even back in the 1970's, would have called anything "lovely ", and in particular, a stuffed bear. While I accepted this difference, I was unable to let it go without examination. A American boy, in that age group exclaiming "Oh daddy, what a lovely bear", would attract all kinds of the wrong attention. A psychiatrist may be summoned. But that gets us off the point; freedom.

That boy was not thinking about what others (me) were analyzing about the situation. At 8 to 10 he was able to be free enough to exclaim, to his dad no less, a lovely bear. This may seem a small thing, but it's the biggest thing there is!

This is what is meant by "becoming " as a child. Although, in this case, it was simply giving in to a recognized but diminishing force. Opening up, being free and open is so much more comforting than hiding. There were times in my life where a "lovely bear " would have been much more comfort than a baseball. But boys in my time hid their old bears and monkeys from one another, just as we often keep secrets apart from loved ones. To finally open up our tender heart, not only showing the "lovely bear ", but our love for it, willingly accepting what may come next, is to open that door, closed for so long.

"Oh daddy, what a lovely bear!" Oh daddy, what a lovely world!" To openly, not only say this, but proclaim it, is the very essence of freedom. Shout it like a three year old, or an 8 to 10 year old who is sure of who he is!

Peace

Phantoms

I have always liked the word Phantom. The Dictionary defines Phantom as something apparent to sense, but with no substantial existence. That's really fabulous; something of the senses, but no substance. I appear as a phantom in a phantom world. Again, amazing, but what about it ?

The senses themselves, by this definition, have no substance either; being only sensors of that which is without substance. That seems to give them some kind of value, if not substance. Value without substance; an interesting combination of words, that upon examination, run through the mind like water through the fingers.

We have taken these senses; these channels of feeling that, by this definition, give birth toappearance, which has no substantial existence, and concentrated all our attention on them. We center the feelings; the senses themselves in what we falsely perceive as the "I am ". This is what we come to accept as the limited little "I ". Senses become "My feelings ". Thoughts become "My thoughts ", and the projection of "others " is "sensed ", along with the projected "me ". Phantoms.

We are all Phantoms here; apparent to sense, but with no substantial existence. You can touch me. I can touch you. That, in itself, is wonderful. Fabulous, even, but there's more! The Phantoms rise up out of the substantial ! Clearly the substantial cannot rise up from the insubstantial! The insubstantial, the illusion, the Phantom, arises from the substantial.

It is part of the Great Paradox that, that which is substantial is also not definable. This nebulous stillness upon which all this plays out, is life itself, nothing else. The child's smile, the elder's cry; all play out against this stillness I call Love. Call it what you will; The Absolute, "God", Pure Awareness, it does not matter what brings you to the understanding of our wonderful "Phantomness ".

As Phantoms we have little, or no input into the play of life, save maybe a little "style" or panache. We can either surrender or resist. Resistance is futile, surrender is imminent. But there is nothing wrong in reveling in our "phantomness". I guess that's "what about it?" You can touch me. I can touch you.That, in itself, is wonderful!

Peace

Offering False Hope

On Sunday I put up a Note called "Enlightenment and Depression." It was about those who suffer with clinical/chemical depression, and how by seeing through the body/mind, it is still possible to live as Love. It was well received, and many resonated with it's message.

The following day, another Facebook friend, put up a Note saying that "enlightenment " or "awakening " could turn that around, and even suggested that the DNA could be changed. I must admit that this Note made me rather angry. Regardless of the language, which basically called those with depression, people with a "victim mentality ", it was the offering of false hope that upset me.

It was my intention to let people with depression (myself included) know that "awakening " is happening "right now " in the present moment, even in the face of apparent depression. I wanted to say that Love is what you are, even if sadness, even despair, is present in your mind. In my Note of response, I questioned why someone who claims "awakening " could make such a hollow promise of hope.

The first response I received from the writer, was "An ugly distortion by a depressed mind ". Not a very kind remark, but it made me laugh, coming from one who makes a point of touting his "love and compassion ". The personal remarks aside, he later wrote that "my writing is meant to offer hope." And therein lie the rub! Hope is holding out a carrot of some future event that will make "everything blissful and pristine ". Not going to happen!

There is only the present; the past and future being only in the mind. To offer hope is to make a false promise of "change", even a change in DNA, in some imaginary future. Hope lives only in the future! Even the Christ had his agony in the Garden of Gethsemane, and turned it into acceptance. He asked the Father to remove it from him, but he knew it must be endured and accepted. His suffering in the face of being an actual victim, did not give him a "victim mentality", it gave him the opportunity to accept and surrender. Depression gives us such an opportunity.

To offer false hope, when acceptance of what is, is the only answer, is cruel. and misguided. Like hope, Depression lives only in the mind. Living in the heart accepts the "externals ", pleasant, or not. Pleasant or unpleasant are only judgments of the mind, and have no power over the understanding that Love is what you are.

Peace

Is it Possible to Love too Much?

Can we be "too nice "? Is it possible to love too much? Not in my experience. When I was a small boy I was taught to love my neighbor as myself. The old "Golden Rule"; do unto others as you would have them do unto you, was the credo of my family. My Father would bring home the homeless and hungry. My Grandparents, who ran an apartment building, would have the whole building in for Thanksgiving and Christmas. They had even done this during the Depression, and believe me, they were poor!. Love was a visceral feeling in my home and in my life.

Today, psychology, and some philosophy would want you to believe that you need to "love yourself first" . There are those psychologists who believe that we "hate " ourselves, and therefore "seek " outside of ourselves for love. And of course, the "teachers " of non-duality, want us to concentrate on the "I am ". and love our "self " so we see through the false self to the inclusion of the "other ". These often simply become excuses for abiding in our selfishness.

This idea that, if I love myself, I am loving others, because we are all one, is a snow job. It's selfish. If we are all one, then loving others is loving yourself. This is also much more to the point and a safer position. It is much more difficult to love others as yourself, than to love others through yourself. We all start from a position of "I am ". This is the seed of selfishness. To lose your "self " in the love and service of others, is to find the "Self " that lives in us all.

My Mother used to tell me a saying my Great Grandmother used to tell her; "Brighten the corner where you are." An old fashioned saying for sure, but well remembered all the same. Bringing light, living as Love, this is what we are called to do. This does not mean using our minds to make judgments of who is pure or "loving ", but always being loving, even in the face of what appears to be evil.

The story is told of a robbery at Ramana Maharshi's Ashram. While many panicked, The Maharshi, even though mishandled by the intruders, told others to let the robbers have what they wanted. This was not out of fear, but out of loving kindness. The Maharshi was loving kindness itself. He had no choice but to follow his nature.

When I was a boy and in my teens, others would often tell me that so and so was taking advantage of me in some way. I would simply answer that I was aware of what was happening, and that no one could take advantage of me, as there was nothing that was "mine " that could be taken away. If you know who you are, you do not fear being taken advantage of, you have nothing to lose.

We can not stand as the "self " and make demands for "space ", or property, or even personal "peace ". If life, "God ", Love, sends into our lives "others ", then, if we are true to Love itself, we accept what is sent, no matter how "flawed ". Jesus, bleeding and dying on the cross, after suffering brutal humiliation and apparent "human failure ", said "Father forgive them, for they know not what they do." Those who "hurt " us, or "ill use " us are only engaging in Love in a "perverted " sense; self love, self protection. Our casting them aside, putting our own purposes and "self " protection before our love for them is no different.

The Christ's prayer at the Last Supper asks that the disciples "love one another " as he had loved them. How was that? How did he show his love for them? He hung on a cross and died. Ramana allowed his meager possessions to be stolen. Submission to life's situations is flowing with love. To hate another, to cast away another is selfishness, no matter what pretty philosophical or psychological bows you wrap it in.

Peace

Nothing But Love

On a hot day, as we look along the road from the car window, we see reflections in the road ahead of "water " shimmering on the pavement. As we approach, we see that it was a mirage. If we accept the vision we see as water, we are fooled. It is an illusion of water only. But if we see the shimmering, and we understand that it is heat moving the air that creates the effect, then we understand that it is hot outside the car. We are not fooled, as the "heat waves " are a true indicator of heat, not an illusion.

It has always seemed strange to me that in spirituality, the mind is cast into the role of villain, or at the very least into the character of charlatan. Concepts of maya, or the dream are created to dismiss the workings of the mind, and thoughts are seen as illusory.

The mind is not an independent entity. The mind is simply a "bag of thoughts ". The thoughts themselves make up the mind. When there are no thoughts, where is there a mind? The thoughts too, are looked at as misleading charlatans. But can they not be pointers beyond themselves to a vision of the Truth?

In Non-duality, we understand that there is only one substance. We can call it the Absolute, "God ", Love, Truth, or the "space " in which all appears, but we can all agree that there is only one substance. This being the conclusion, it becomes obvious that the thoughts are within that "space ". Thoughts passing through; expressions of the unfolding, are either allowed to "go on their way " or are "held " together in time, "forming " the bag of thoughts that appears as the "mind ".

Both the thoughts, and the bag that holds them, are not unlike the mirage we observe in the road; illusions if we take them for what they appear to be, but indicators of truth if we see them as theytruly are. The thoughts, the mind, are not villains or charlatans, they are simply misinterpreted as objects, movements, and feelings suspended in time. The mind, being really nothing but this collection of thoughts, is not the "creator" of the thoughts, but simply interprets them suspended in time. The thoughts themselves are part of the unfolding of the Absolute, of Life.

Those of you who know my teaching, know that I use the term Love in place of the Absolute. I do this for two reasons. The first, because this is how Love presents itself here. The second, because Love's understanding is in the heart. While the mind is not a villain or charlatan, it does tend to see the "shimmering " in the road as "water ". The collection of thoughts suspended in time, is seen by the mind as objects, movements and feelings, while the heart understands that there is only Love unfolding.

While many Non-duality teachers advise us to stay in the "I am " until it is recognized that the only thing in the "bag of thoughts " we can "know " is that we are. This only brings us to the door of understanding. To open the door, the key is in the Absolute (Love) itself. Just as we intellectually (bag of thoughts) understand that the "I am " is as far as the mind can go, we must exhaust ourselves in the search before this is real (realized). So it is with the key; the Absolute (Love). In order to "realize " Love as the "space " in which all unfolds, we need to see that we ARE Love. We do this by "being it ".

If we understand intellectually (bag of thoughts again), that Love is what we ARE, we need to make love a "practice ". This is done through service. To a "seeker ", especially one who is called to solitude or silence, this is sacrifice. To serve without reward, even praise or gratitude, opens the heart in a way that may even be missed by the dedicated "server ", but ultimately opens the heart to the Love that is the "space " in which everything unfolds.

This service, this living for Love alone, is the key to getting beyond the selfishness of the "I am ". Trying to escape the mind which clings to the "I am ", is only to strengthen it. To live for Love alone is to seek the "pearl of great price " . Just as we continue to see the mirage as "water ", we understand, have the conviction, that it is "heat waves " expressing as an "illusion " of water. So it is with the appearances of objects, movements and feelings. The mind (bag of thoughts suspended in time), sees objects, movements and feelings, but the heart, opened by living in Love (service), gains the conviction that this is all the unfolding of Love.

In this conviction, the mind is seen, not as a villain or charlatan, but a mirror in which the light of Love shines on the mystery unfolding before us. The tree=Love. The Sky=Love. The pain=Love. The "I am"=Love. When all is observed as love, with conviction, no matter the form it takes in the mind, we understand that we, the mind, and all else we "observe " is nothing but Love.

Peace

"God and I are One, when God and I are not. "

There are so many words for the ultimate reality. We call it God, The Absolute, or, if in "action ",nirvana, moksha or enlightenment and awakening. But none of that says very much.

Many who have "lived " this out, call it Love. This is my term for the ultimate reality, as that is how it presents itself here. But Love can be just another object if we see only the "word ", and not the reality itself. We all know love as an "emotion " or as a "feeling ". Some have felt it toward "others ", and some have felt it toward themselves. And sadly, some have sought it without finding it. But here, we are talking about being it.

Many of us have felt love of a personal kind. Familial love, parental love, romantic love are all kinds of personal love. We may look at love of "God " or love of "spirit " as a "higher " kind of love, but when all is said and done, this too is personal love. We see love as something we give, or something we receive, but this too, is not the same a being it.

I was drawn back to Christianity because of the Love of Christ. Not so much mine for him, as his for me. How selfish is that? "God is Love ", we are told by the Apostle. What can that mean? God IS Love. If this is the case, then the opposite is also true: Love IS God. This may be a better understanding, as it removes an unknown, unseen "God ", and replaces it with what appears to be a known quantity;Love. But this is not the same as being it.

The Love about which we speak, and the Love you are being encouraged to "become " is not personal love. This "God" is not the "God " we have imagined either, no matter how "spiritual " we envision him/her to be. When we examine carefully the image of "God ", it, like the image of ourselves, vanishes. The Love however remains. No "real me ", no "real God ", just the expression of Love, expressing itself through the "me " and the "God " "expressions ".

When we personalize either "God " or ourselves, we reduce love back to an emotion or a feeling. Sure, it's a great "feeling " to love and be loved by "God ", but in this case the "love " stands between "God " and "I ", as it is something we are giving and receiving between two separate entities. I once wrote "God and I are One, when God and I are not. " This is the key to non-duality. When "God " and "I " are no longer believed in as separate entities, only the Love remains. When we see this clearly, then we realize that we ARE Love.

There is no "yoking " with "God ", as the Christian monk strives for. We do not "become " "God " We "become " what we have always been; the yoke! That "yoke ", this Love, is creating and unfolding as the universe. "Our " appearance in this universe is as an expression of this Love unfolding. All we see as life is simply this unfolding of "expressions ". We do not so much "experience " a tree, as Love "expresses " as both observer and tree in order for Love to express as experiencing. In the state of pure "experiencing " (awareness), there are no "objects " observing or observed. This is non-duality. This is being Love. This is the impersonal Love, the universal Love, we hear about.

"I " do not love a "tree ". "I " do not love "God ". There is no "I ", "tree " or "God " separate from the Love that creates them, expresses through them. When we love another; spouse, lover, friend, we are only One when we are Love itself. As was said of "God " above; "You and I are One, when you and I are not!" There is only Love in expression. We call it Life.

Peace

"Wake up!", "Wake up!"

When my partner and I were in Lincoln, England, at the Cathedral, we were responsible for a variety of duties, one of which was opening the Cathedral during week days to prepare for the early Mass.

In addition to the opening procedure (which included letting out any pigeons that had made there way in through the bell tower over night!), John served the priest at Mass, and I was responsible for ringing the morning bell, calling the City of Lincoln to worship.

I can not explain the great joy I experienced ringing that bell. The bell had to be rung a certain number of times to indicate the time and day. I am afraid, after 25 years, I have forgotten the formula, but when I was ringing the bell however, I never forgot. In "The Usages of the Cistercian Monks", it reads "The Abbot will confide the task of ringing the bells to a monk who is noted for punctuality, so that all may be done at the correct time." I took this very seriously. I am a punctual person.

When ringing the bells, which was a tradition that went back hundreds of years at Lincoln Cathedral, the Cathedral being at that time over 900 years old, I could feel the history. I was often "accompanied " by a medieval ringer, who although imaginary, had left a presence that was unmistakable. To fit into a centuries old tradition in Lincoln, being an American, was a great and humbling honor.

To call the town to Mass, to worship, was a great gift. "Wake up ", Wake up ", the bell would ring. I sometimes thought of those who might take exception to it all. "There are those damn bells again", I could hear the non appreciative sleeper say. But the bells were for the "believers ", not the sleepy."Wake up ", "Wake up " the bell would ring.

Today, as I write my notes and blogs, I again call "Wake up ", "Wake up ". The bells are ringing. Know this; you and I are One. The bells ring for us to "Wake up " out of this "dream " of you and I, and realize we are One. Hear the bells. They say OM.

Peace

Earnestness - Damn it! It is as Simple as That!

Questioner: Your words are wise, your behavior noble, your grace all-powerful.

Nisargadatta Maharaj: I know nothing about it all and see no difference between you and me. My life is a succession of events, just like yours. Only I am detached and see the passing show as a passing show, while you stick to things and move along with them.

Q: What made you so dispassionate?

M: Nothing in particular. It so happened that I trusted my Guru. He told me I am nothing but my self and I believed him. Trusting him, I behaved accordingly and ceased caring for what was not me, nor mine.

Q: Why were you lucky to trust your teacher fully, while our trust is nominal and verbal?

M: Who can say? It happened so. Things happen without cause and reason and, after all, what does it matter, who is who? Your high opinion of me is your opinion only. Any moment you may change it. Why attach importance to opinions, even your own?

- I Am That - Nisargadatta Maharaj

"Trusting him, I behaved accordingly and ceased caring for what was not me, nor mine." As simple as that. Damn it! It is as simple as that! Nisargadatta describes his life as "...a succession of events, just like yours." , only with detachment. Nisargadatta trusted his Guru, behaved accordingly, and became not only detached, but realized.

Whether you trust an "external " guru, or an internal one, the behaving accordingly is the "proof of the pudding " and the "practice " all rolled into one. This living accordingly, is non-duality lived out.

Living out non-duality is not simply walking around with a smile on your face telling "others" that they are free. To hear it told, we are all free. This is a mantra; We are all free. Do you truly understand this "freedom"? Is this in your experience, or did someone tell you? Could you have read it somewhere? It's easy to do! Why, you were never bound, you have always been free! But is this how you feel?

The step into the unknown seems a potentially dangerous step. We often will put up with a great deal before we will act to change anything. This is why it often takes personality breakdowns, divorce, substance abuse, mental illness, or other traumatic events to get us started on the search. Why is this? Because of the need for earnestness. When life kicks your backside once too often, an earnest desire for change begins to grow like a callous.

Of course, earnestness can come simply from a love of "God ", or spirit, or the "search " itself. As much as many teachers will insist that there should be no "search ", as that only reinforces the belief in a "searcher ", the search itself is part of the uncovering of the "truth ". The earnestness is already present. It is the "flow" of Love in action. We do not have to "muster " it, just catch it's tail and accept the ride. Yes, it is as simple as that, but only to the truly earnest.

The strange question asked by the questioner above; "Why were you lucky to trust your teacher fully, while our trust is nominal and verbal?" tends to answer itself in the asking. "Our trust is nominal and verbal ", says why the lack of earnestness, but lays it at the feet of destiny or luck. Nisargadatta's reply put's it up to Grace; "Who can say? It happened so. Things happen without cause and reason and, after all, what does it matter, who is who?" . This is his answer then; those who are favored by Grace will have the earnestness to realize the self. Is that you?

It certainly is not you if you are one of the "no effort ", "no practice" kind of seekers. It is certainly not you if you simply follow your teacher without question or discrimination. While Nisargadatta trusted his teacher, he also behaved accordingly. This means that before his complete understanding, Nisargadatta lived his life "as if " he had the understanding of his teacher, simply on love and trust for his Guru. Nisargadatta did not blindly follow, but lived a life that revealed, both before and after realization, the truth of his teacher's wisdom.

I have written before of this living "as if ". This is not pretending. This is the earnest acceptance of the "truth " on trust, until realization. This is the sacrifice. This is the earnestness. It's kind of like crank starting an old Model "T ". Effort is required at first, but once going it runs on it's own. Without this effort, which comes from Grace, there is no starting this "journey", let alone staying with it until completion.

Later in I Am That, Nisargadatta points out the ultimate earnestness he is talking about;" We discover it (the self) by being earnest, by searching, enquiring, questioning daily and hourly, by giving one's life to this discovery". By giving one's life to this discovery. That is really the description of earnestness; to give one's life. If this "search " that is not a "search ", is to bare fruit, it must be the most important thing. You must not let yourself be satisfied with mere intellectual knowledge, but seek to be that which you seek. Does Grace offer you that opportunity? Do you have the Grace of earnestness? As I said at the beginning, Damn it! It's as simple as that!

Peace

The Loving Eyes of Poverty

I wanted to write something more about poverty. I know I wrote a previous note on poverty called "Non-Duality, Poverty, and the Cross ", but it was a bit on the "cerebral " side. I know that this, like much of what I write about, is not a popular topic, but it strikes me that "living out " non-duality must at least accept poverty, if not "embrace " it.

I use the word "embrace " a bit factitiously. In an article in the Lincolnshire newspaper, our religious community was described as "embracing poverty ". Again, more recently, the idea of "rejoicing " in poverty came up in an interview. I have never wanted to give the impression that poverty is something that I either relish or look forward to.

I wanted to tell a couple of stories that I hope will give a bit of insight into how I see poverty.

When my partner and I were forming the Community of the Living Sacrifice, we were sent to live for a time with another Anglican Community. One of the things being "tossed around " in the community formation was whether we were going to adopt habits, and what they would look like.

While we were staying with the Brothers, we were all invited to the adjacent town to a church gathering. Their car having been recently in a collision, we all had to walk. It was asked by one of the monks, if they were to wear their habits, and the abbot insisted upon it. So we walked, maybe four or five miles, John and I being the only ones in "street" clothes. A whole new view of the monk's habit permanently entered my mind that day.

Needless to say, habits were not part of our community's rule.

We were observed like the circus had come to town! As self conscious as John and I felt, the monks seemed to relish the attention. As we walked through town, people would smile or make the sign of the cross, or back away reverently in a most embarrassing manner. These habits; these relics from the past, were once meant to be a willing acceptance of the clothes of the poor. Monks habits are replications of medieval "working class" wear. But in a modern setting, they scream out "Holy Man". They serve just the opposite purpose for which they were intended. Instead of allowing the monk to blend in, to be an unnoticed beggar, they now announce his "separateness", his "specialness". Needless to say, our community did not include habits in the rule.

The second story happened during one of our periods of homelessness. We were lucky in that we were always homeless with a car. On this particular occasion however, the car broke down on a sunday night. We were in Monterey, California, and knew no one there. We arranged to have the car repaired on Monday, so we could make it back to the San Francisco Bay Area, but needed to sleep in it for the night.

We found a Safeway store across from a public toilet, and decided to camp out in the parking lot for the night. It did not take long before we realized that we were not alone. At least another three cars came in and shut down their lights, their occupants attempting to get their heads down. And then we all saw the man with the keys.

They were shutting the toilets. A simple thing. Keeping the town clean. Keeping the homeless out. My God, that's me! This is poverty. This is the kind of poverty that I had hoped to design into the "rule" for the community.

I think a monk must understand real, human poverty. Not some "giving up", or wearing rough clothing, or even hard work, but the real degradation of poverty. Not having the simple dignity of a basic toilet. Being in a city and having to "make do". How often do we have the Grace to experience these kinds of things? Yes, I call it a Grace, because this is freedom. Not the grinding poverty or the humiliation itself. That stinks. But the ability to accept, maybe even thrive in those conditions.

You might inquire, "sure poverty may be great in Christianity or Bhakti Yoga, but what about advaita, or non-duality?" Poverty allows you to be open. As Bobby Dylan sang' "if you ain't got nothin', you got nothin' to lose." And this applies spiritually as well. With no conceptual identification, there is nothing to "give up". To be willing to accept (not necessarily embracing), poverty, should it come, is the willingness to flow with the movement. Relax upon a sea of trust, worrying not for tomorrow.

This means, not only accepting physical, monetary poverty, but that biblical promise guaranteeing you will "posses the kingdom"; poverty of spirit. "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for their's is the Kingdom of Heaven". When you are down to you last dime, and the world holds you in contempt. This is poverty. When you are down to your last concept (I am), and the mind stops of it's own volition in a poverty of ideas, then the holy can enter; you can posses the kingdom of Heaven.

Poverty is the life of Oneness. Jesus, the Christ, Ramana Maharshi, Nisargadatta Maharaj all lived in, and accepted poverty. Sometimes they accepted what was offered, other times not. You must make your decision regarding this "practice" for yourself. I would only say that the amount of earnestness you give to your spiritual life will be shown in that living. Poverty need not be sought, but accepted with joy. The less you indulge the "I", the more readily it will take up it's place as servant to the Absolute.

The photograph of the homeless woman above always brings tears to my eyes. Not because of her poverty, but because of the determined way she eats her yogurt. I can feel the tear filled gratitude of each spoonful. I have known those tears. Those tears are mine. Poverty has removed the seperation I might feel from her. Poverty has given me the Grace to see her love, in the spoon, in the "earnest" way she keeps her things. Sadness here? Perhaps. But Love abounding, seen through the loving eyes of poverty.

Peace