Imaginary Horses and Spiritual experiences

When my Brother and I were small, we would often play at cowboys. Sometimes we were on the same side, and sometimes we were sworn enemies. One of the things my Mother always talked about, well into my Brother and my middle age, was how we would argue over imaginary horses.

We would argue over who's was fastest, who's was strongest, who's was smartest, and all the rest of it. Sometimes it would even come to blows! "You insulted my horse ", "Them's fighin' words." It's incredible how much trouble can be caused by two boys arguing over imaginary horses! We, in "non-duality" circles can be no less destructive and, dare I say, "childish " in defense of our verbal and written "descriptions " of "enlightenment ", awareness, the Absolute, or perhaps worse, spiritual experiences.

We are waves in the same ocean, if I may use a tired old metaphor, but waves just the same, some tall, and some shorter. No judgment, just appearances anyway. The point being, each "wave " is part of the unlimited potential unfolding. Each will have a slightly "different " view, when expressed in words, or even thought. The Oneness, the Love, is only "actively " present when it is silently, wordlessly present in the heart. So we are all liars!

We all look at the same "object ", but we see it out of "different " windows. "By golly, the view is different from here, you must be wrong!" All this talk about "authentic " experiences, as opposed to, I guess "inauthentic " experiences, or authentic "awakening " opposed to "continuing to sleep ", orwhatever is the opposite of awakening, is simply judging one experience against another. To argue over the differing experiences may be something for philosophers and academics to entertain themselves with, but if we seek realization, we need to go beyond even the division of "authentic ", and "inauthentic ". The moment we take a position, we invite it's opposite.

I never tire of hearing of "others " spiritual experiences. Like I said, It's like seeing out of a different window, and perhaps getting a different "take " on the always present view. One of the things that pushed me away from the organized church, was it's tendency to want to "limit " the spirit. Oh,spiritual experiences were fine, as long as they did not contradict church doctrine or someone's interpretation of the Bible. This "denial " of the active, present movement of the Holy Spirit , and it's ability to continue to create, continue to inform and incarnate, is a denial of all that the Christ stood for. When we allow our minds to commandeer a personal understanding or awakening "experience ", and it becomes a doctrine, or position where we say, "this must be your experience as well, or it is not an "authentic" experience, we deny the possibility of movement to the spirit, which is freedom itself.

To argue, or even give much philosophical discussion to "other's " awakening, or other's spiritual "experiences ", is like arguing over the qualities of an imaginary horse; it's all made up in the first place, and you can keep changing your story as you go along. The only horse worth talking about is areal one. But in the spiritual realm, where do you, and even more important, how do you seek the real deal? Well, the Bible says, you can tell a tree by it's fruits. Now, I realize that I just questioned interpretations from the Bible in the last paragraph, but this is quite a good tool for discernment. "I " think that Love is at the heart of understanding. This is most defiantly a position on my part, as this is how "I " talk about what "I " see out of my window. I can not see out your window, or know your view, but I "know " what you are looking at. "I " can imagine what you see, just as "I " imagine what "I " see, but neither will be the "truth ". Perhaps what I report, or some other "reporter " tells you will resonate with you. If so, this is fine. But if a teacher, guru, or spiritual leader tells you that you must have a particular kind of "experience ", or in other words, he has a faster, smarter, stronger horse,then you need to look at two things; Is there Love here? Do you see the honesty and integrity of Love?, and are you free to work out your own struggle as a "wave " becoming aware that your horse is imaginary.

It's the teachers that continue to argue the qualities of the horse, instead of enjoying the tales of the views from all the windows, that will take up a position at one window only, and tell you that their view, and their horse is the best. But we must let them do this. It's not worth troubling over imaginary horses.

Work out your Enlightenment with Fear and Trembling

In response to a recent post about living out non-duality, I received a few messages regarding peoples' attempts at understanding, but expressing that they felt that they "fell short" or that they did not have "perfect" understanding. I think this may be one of the most common misconceptions of "awareness" or "enlightenment".

The concept of perfection, is simply another concept that must be gone beyond. This concept however, may be one of the hardest to kill, as many of the "non-dual" teachers believe it as well. While no teacher, guru, or spiritual "master" has been "perfect", many seekers, as well as teachers, try to convince others, and worse themselves, that their were/are.

Nisargadatta Maharaj, who I look to as one of my most important teachers, is well known to have had a very fiery temper. Although, a man of infinite compassion, he would regularly throw out persons who he saw as insincere. This was especially true of the followers of Osho, who would arrive at his little mezzanine room in their saffron robes. Nisargadatta's tolerance for this sort of thing was very low. Many see temper, and anger as an imperfection, which in the ultimate understanding, it no doubt is, but Nisargadatta was human, as well as "enlightened". This humanness is often overlooked by teachers of spirituality who fail to see the relative as well the absolute. In the case of Jesus Christ, we see an even better example.

The Church sees Jesus Christ as being both fully divine, and fully human. His humanness however, is often ignored, or excuses are made for it. In the book of Mark, we read the story of Jesus coming upon a fig tree, and being hungry, he hopes to get some figs from it. Upon finding that the tree has no figs, even though it is not the time for figs, Jesus shrivels up the tree in anger. The Church attempts to explain this human reaction by making the tree a metaphor for Israel, and it's lack of "bearing fruit". The fact that it was not the time for figs, is ignored. This denial of Jesus' humanness, is an attempt to make Jesus "perfect", both in humanity and divinity, even though the story's purpose is to show his human nature. Again, in the same chapter, we see Jesus lose his temper at the money changers and merchants in the Temple of Jerusalem. Righteous indignation, no doubt, but also fully human. Perhaps the most important story of Jesus' humanity is the passion in the Garden of Gethsemane, when he asks to be relived of the crucifixion, but submits to God's will. Jesus revels a divine being with both doubts and anger; fully divine and fully human.

In non-duality, we often insist that our gurus and teachers live a blissful life of prefect understanding. Any imperfections we notice are occasions for finger pointing or accusations of fraud. Ramana Maharshi is often looked at as the ideal enlightened sage. And yet, upon close, and honest observation, we see a man who struggled to keep his ashram in the control of his family, spoke of awakening as being universal, yet followed traditional separation of cast, insisting that Brahmins not sit at meals with lower casts in his ashram. Although Ramana saw his true nature, he tolerated veneration, and even worship, with his disciples frequently singing hymns to him, in his presence. Any of these things, in a modern or Western teacher, we would label ego! But Ramana was human.

Much of what is today considered neo-advaita, had it's start with HWL Poonja (Papaji). Papaji would often tell people that they were already enlightened. This, of course was part of his teaching method, and true on the absolute level, but he often failed to make this clear, and sent some of them off to teach. He later said that none of these teachers were even partially enlightened. He often gave seekers "spiritual experiences", which he later dismissed as false experiences. Asked why he gave people false experiences, he answered, "to get the leeches off my back." None of this looks like "perfection", but Papaji was human.

If Jesus, Nisargadatta, Ramana and Papaji were subject to human faults and weaknesses, how are we to become "perfect"? To expect to rise above or beyond human while abiding in the flesh is unrealistic. We can experience the divine within ourselves, but the body is weak. The Christ said "Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.". Our "perfection" is an uphill struggle. Enlightenment is an ongoing, unfolding that happens in the now. Enlightenment is not an event that "happens" and then goes on as a "past experience", but a working out. The Apostle Paul tells us to "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for God is at work in you, both to will and to work in for his good pleasure." Constant action, effort is required. Effortless effort, as they say in non-dual circles, is the key to enlightenment. I read of teachers who will tell you that their enlightenment happened in such and such a year, or at such and such an event, like it was in the past, and they are now living it always. But we know that there is only now, only this. Awareness, enlightenment is either working out now, this moment, or not at all.

If you have ever been on a diet, you know that it is difficult to stick to one. One of the best pieces of advice when dieting, is to stick to it. Even if you backslide and go off the diet for a day, the advice is to go back to the diet the next day and not be discouraged. This is also good advice on the spiritual search. Keep seeking, even when you have "found" something. What you seek is the road you are on. Work out your enlightenment with fear and trembling. Live every day in the present, not in some past enlightenment experience. Enlightenment is unfolding not static. You can experience your true nature, but the body/mind continues until it's end. The humanness, the body/mind is not separate from the reality, use it to work out present awareness.

The body/mind is like a wheel rolling downhill. It rolls until the momentum gives out, or it runs into something, and then it stops. As long as it's rolling, we are meant to see beyond it; to work out our salvation. If we stop it, or the working out, we stagnate or backslide. Perfection is not a state. It is the action of life itself. Perfection is in the being, not something that is finished or complete. We need to constantly remind ourselves that, although we are perfect and divine, we are also inseparably human. We are not only human beings, we are humans being.

Realization, Awareness and Enlightenment

These three terms for an "awakening" ; Awareness, Enlightenment, and Realization are all used to describe the indescribable "state" of "uncovery" we often describe "ourselves" as "seeking". Of these. I have come to accept "Realization" as the most apt.

Awareness and Enlightenment both seem to involve a "future" happening; "I am not aware now, butseek awareness", or "I am un-enlightened, and will become enlightened." While, Realization simply means that I observe the unreal as real and the real as unreal;. a simple slip of the mind!

What is the meaning of "Realization" anyway? It is to "arrive" at the understanding that there is "substance", meaning, particularly without mental understanding. We are talking of an acceptance ofliving for the unseen, inexpressible, but clearly understood, impossible to explain to both others and yourself, but clearly written in the heart with a conviction that is both peaceful and absolute.

To "Realize" yourself as Love, not an intellectual understanding, but to make it "Real", is that which you "seek". It is not a "future" event; it is now. All you need is absolute conviction. You are not moving mountains here, just turning your view. See yourself, not as the seen; body/mind, story, past, future, but as the unseen; Loving, experiencing, living for the "Real". Absolute conviction; the "secret ingredient". Absolute conviction makes the "real" that already is, "Real" as experience; in experience. Live the Love, and it is true. Extend your hand in trust, and your actions become "Real" actions. Don't dismiss the "seen", as it is a "reflection" of the unseen. Don't fall into the trap ofseparation of the "seen" from the "unseen". Just observe them as they are. They are all part of the functioning of the whole.

If you want "Realization", reach out with Absolute conviction, absolute courage. It is with you always, embrace it.

You are Love, make it "Real"!

What are you looking for? - Seeking without the Seeker

The reasons for seeking are many, but much "seeking" is done to "get something", or "get somewhere", not simply for it's own sake, or for love's own sake.

So many seekers in non-duality come from other spiritual "places" where they felt "let down" or "unfulfilled". Many come from mainstream churches who's "rules" or "unbelievable" dogma made no sense. Some are rejecting "belief" altogether, and looking for an intellectual understanding that "fits" with their "intellectual development". Non- Duality has become a favorite of the "educated spiritual" crowd, with proponents appearing on Oprah, and doing "satsangs" all over the world. "Enlightenment" has become the "crown" on the head of a complete "education". Not withstanding, the understanding that the mind cannot grasp "enlightenment", endless discourse ensues about "self" and "no-self", "present awareness", and all the rest of the "non-duality speak". But educational self-improvement is not the only reason so many seek non-dual teachings.

Just recently, I heard a spiritual teacher say that pain or suffering are often the reason for people to be drawn to non-duality. This may be the case with some. It may be the case with many. If this is so, it is a shame, as awareness, or "enlightenment" is not a "cure". Those who seek comfort or a "better life" in non-duality, should realize right from the start, that non-dual teaching does not bring "improvement", it simply brings clarity.

There is so much mingling of psychology and non-dual teaching, particularly in the West, that it might be a good idea to look into where the two meet or dovetail with each other. "Self-help" programs, "Life Coaches", substance abuse programs, in addition to psychologists and psychiatrists, abound in the West. Psychological exploration can be very useful, both as therapeutic recollection, and as "self-inquiry", but psychological techniques should be left to those trained in that field, and no "free-form" psychological experimentation should be attempted by a non-dual teacher unless they have studied and know the "results" well. Certain psychological methods, like group therapy can be very useful in self inquiry, but when the group therapy methods are used as "satsang", or a sort of "hot seat" group session, this can be a problem.

There are places where non-dual teachings and psychology merge, but care must be taken to understand the differences. Clinical Depression is a perfect example. It is recognized that many, not all, depressions have a chemical component. Solve the chemical imbalance, and the mood changes. Simple body chemistry. Sufferers of Clinical Depression are treated with chemical substitutes, and counseled that the depression is the result of chemistry, and has no "real" cause. The depressed person learns that he is not the body., and that the feelings of "loss", "sadness", and other signs of depression are only caused by chemicals, and not "real" events. This can result in the sufferer having a "complete" experience of himself as being not the body/mind, but something that can "look" at itself. But the "depression", the chemical imbalance, goes away only with medication. From personal experience of this kind of depression, I can tell you it is quite fascinating to watch this "depression" as an observer; watching as "pain", like any other thought floats by. Not confusing it as a "feeling" needing a response, but the simple chemical process of "pain thought". This process, this "I am not the depression", is a psychological process, not unlike the beginnings of non-dual understanding. The problem with both this desire for self improvement psychologically, and the desire for self improvement educationally, is that a desire for an improvement to a self, is a selfish desire. Selfish desire does not lead to non-duality, even if that selfish desire is for non-duality.

The only "reason" to be a seeker is that you are "called" to be a seeker. There is no choice. The seeker who loves "God" and goes in search for him or her, without thought of a "heaven" or "hell" is the one possessed with the "earnestness" Nisargadatta spoke of. Of course, there is no need to love a "God" , or an image of a god, specifically, but there must be love. Love of Wisdom, love of Truth, simply Love itself. No other goal will take you "out of yourself"; will allow the "you" to die. The self improvement of the mind is only enhancing the mind, self image and ego. The self improvement of your "happiness" level, or the learning of methods to hide your pain, only give temporary solace to a still existent "you". Only when you are lost in seeking that which you are; that which draws you to itself, will you be absorbed into that which you seek. Only when both sought andseeker are absorbed in seeking is there non-duality.

Only selfless love will BE selfless Love. If we seek Truth, Reality, Love or any other name you like, we must vibrate with a love so strong that we want only that. If we seek intellectual "wisdom", we can find it, but it is not Love, it is just more thoughts. If we seek emotional security or personal self improvement, we might find it temporarily in some practice or group of "satsang" supporters. But that which is sought with love, without fear, or with the acceptance of fear, is that which is. Seeking only with fervent Love, without thought of intellectual reward, and accepting confusion or depression as part of the unfolding will open you to the flow of grace that Love is. Seek only to answer that call. Let the seeker vanish into the seeking. Let "yourself" vanish into Life!

"Enlightenment" and Mental Illness

One of the things Spiritual Teachers and Seekers alike need to remember is that many people searching for spiritual development are trying to escape from lives that seem like nothing but trouble and strife. This frequently means people who society regard as "mentally ill".

I once saw on a spiritual website, the question "How do you tell the difference between "enlightenment" and mental illness?" It is true that some forms of schizophrenia result in a kind of inability to differentiate between one's "own" existence and others, and a kind of "no-self" perception is held. This may indeed be "enlightenment", and if it causes no pain or behavioral problems, may go unnoticed. But if a person, by living this out, comes to the attention of the authorities, they will often be thought mentally ill, and in need of psychological help. The fact is; there may be no difference between "enlightenment" and mental illness.

All my life, I have lived with what is known as Asperger's Syndrome. Now, Asperger's is not mental illness. It is in the Autistic spectrum, but undiagnosed, it often is mis-diagnosed as mental illness. Asperger's, like most autism spectrum conditions, causes social problems; inability to make friends, socially inappropriate behavior, obsessive interests in one or two, sometimes eccentric pursuits. My "obsession" has always been God and spiritual interests, even as a child. Asperger's was not unknown when I was a child, but it was not an "accepted" condition until the 1990's, so few psychologists and psychiatrists knew much, if anything, about it. I did not find out about it until I was over 60, so struggled with it, unknown, all my life. In spite of the struggle, or more likely because of it, I developed spiritually more than any other aspect of "my personality". In recent years, studies have been done with people on the Autism Spectrum, in regards to spirituality, with fascinating results. I myself, having worked with autistic people, have seen many unexpected spiritual insights.

To return to mental illness, it is important to understand that spiritual insight could be interpreted as such by those uninformed. I have seen many autistic, "mentally ill", and others "treated" rather than listened to. It is so easy to label all that are different as "disturbed" or mentally ill, rather than think that they may have a special insight, or be "open" to the "real". A perfect example is the great avatar Ramakrishna. Ramakrishna did not act in a "conventional" way. He saw visions. He jumped and shouted during worship, and even became "monkey-like" during his Hanuman "period". By today's Western standards, Ramakrishna would be considered mentally ill, maybe to the point of hospitalization!

Again, I would site Ramana Maharshi. In his teens he "viewed" his own death, was "awakened" by the experience, and went silent. He was "lost" in meditation for some time. If others had not looked after him, he could have died. This would seem like mental illness in the West, even by the standards of his own time.

Having read interviews of a number of "enlightened" teachers, I have found that many have experienced mental illness, or had alcohol or drug problems. Even without illness or substance abuse, many have had troubled lives with "addictions" to a variety of unhealthy behaviors. These teachers very often found that a crisis, or "life shaking" event, brought about their "awakening". This is something they, and all of us must keep in our mind, especially if we presume to "teach".

As teachers, we need to be aware that for many spirituality is an escape. We must see that some seekers may indeed be mentally ill. I read just today about a young woman who sees herself as "enlightened". She has reached an intellectual understanding that she does not exist, and sees herself as one with God. She expresses that she thinks she IS God. She seems to believe this, and sees herself as "fully in control". This is the problem with telling seekers that "you already are enlightened". Spiritual "beginners" are just starting out on a journey many don't understand. The compulsion to "seek" comes before any understanding. To tell such a seeker that they are God, or that "you are already awakened", as Papaji used to do, is very dangerous. Another well known teacher told a seeker who was happily married, that there "is no doer", and no sense of responsibility for our actions. This confused the seeker, who went about behaving as he chose, engaging in sexual affairs, feeling that he had no need to worry, as there was no doer. He lost his wife, and suffered a breakdown. A true teacher will know who is serious, who is after self "enhancement", and who is mentally ill. The teaching will be tailored to the seeker.

The important thing to remember is that "enlightened" behavior is not always "normal" behavior. Those who follow their own drummer, are often outcast. Look at the Christ. He lived the truth and came smack up against authority. Today, we may not crucify the Christ, but he would surely land in a Psychiatric facility! As teachers we have to have compassion. If your reason for teaching is anything other than compassion, then you may not be a "real" teacher. A great description of the "incarnation" of the Christ, is that God loved mankind so much, that he "became" the "object" of his love: man. Just as a "person" realizes that they are Love (the Absolute), and then is confronted with the enormity of "living that out", a teacher must realize that the "call" to teach requires him to be compassion, and to recognize each "seeker" for who they are, and what they need. Mental illness and "realization" often go hand in hand. It takes compassion to see the difference, when there is one.

Eat your Vegetables first, Enlightenment for Desert!

As a boy, my older brother would often be made to go without dessert because he refused to eat certain foods, often vegetables. I, on the other hand, never had this problem. I always (well nearly!) ate what was put before me. The difference was not that I liked everything, but that I had learned a little truth: that sweet things have more sweetness after the "lesser" things were out of the way. I have found that this applies to life, and "spirituality" as "life".

One of the reasons many children dislike, even despise certain vegetables and other "adult" foods, is that their taste buds are still developing and are not very subtle. This means tastes are stronger, and strong tastes are even stronger. How does this apply to spirituality?

Many Neo-Advaita Teachers, particularly in the West, teach a version of Advaita, or non-duality, that is "strong", or absolute. This is a teaching that says there is no "practice" necessary, for who is to practice? It is a teaching that tells you that you arealready awakened, even though the "seeker" feels that anyone can see that "he" or "she" clearly is not, or they would understand this confusing teaching!

Some are ready for this stark teaching. Those that are ready to hear that no practice is necessary, are the ones with years of practice, for only they will understand what is meant. The only "persons" who will have any understanding of "already awakened", are those who understand "awakening" as an experience. To expect "spiritual beginners" to understand these concepts without a foundation in the "practice" of some "method" of centering, or, in Christian terms, recollection, is like asking a child to eat foods he has not developed a taste for and in fact finds repugnant. Before any understanding can begin, remembering who "you" are; this beginning "mental understanding" of the "I AM", is necessary. Even with one such as Nisargadatta Maharaj, three years were needed for him to realize the words of his Guru. And this was after a lifetime of spiritual curiosity and devotion. When one looks at the Teachings of Nisargadatta Maharaj, one must also look at the life of Nisargadatta Maharaj, which is as much of the teaching as anything he said.

In Maharaj's later years he stuck very much to the basics, as his times of availability due to illness, were shorter and he wanted to cover the absolute ground. But in his earlier life, and in his early teaching, he often engaged in worship, and advised others to do so as well. He once deflated a woman that thought she had it all down. She was telling everyone how there was no practice or worship to perform, and that we were already free. When asked by Maharaj, in his little mezzanine room, what she understood, she replied that she knew she was the Absolute, and that all was one. Maharaj told her to go and engage in devotion and chanting. She couldn't believe it. But Maharaj knew what she needed. A seed will not grow well in unprepared ground. The I AM, the Absolute nature of things, are concepts that can grow in only a prepared mind. In an unprepared mind glimpses of the truth can be confusing, perhaps even detrimental or dangerous. Nisargadatta warned that his teaching would burn away all you conceive yourself to be. This can be psychologically and spiritually very dangerous ground without the proper "settlement" in who you really are. A true teacher will not lead you into confusion, but into clarity. A true teacher knows "where" you are spiritually. He knows whether you need devotion, or emptying, or whether it is time to "get on with it " and take that final "step" into "nothingness/everythingness".

But we must not, just like with the child and his hated Brussels Sprouts, force an absolute on a "person" who is yet to develop a "taste" for it. As much as many want instant gratification, a "taste" for spiritual things must be developed so that the flavors of life can be enjoyed, evaluated and discarded. One must try many "practices". Some you might like, others not. Some will work, others not. You may even find that some of the practices you personally don't like do you the most good. After all, we are "seeking", not engaging our wants and desires. As one grows in spirit, and "opening" one learns to widen one's taste and reject the superfluous. A mature taste that can savor sacrifice, relish non-attachment, and enjoy the subtle flavor of stillness, will be able to enjoy the entire meal, as well as the desert, whatever it may be.

From God to the Absolute - Stepping Beyond the Mind

Spirituality begins for many of us as Children. We learn about God, or Gods. We learn about the life and adventures of Gods, and the spiritual lessons associated with these adventures.

We learn the rites and rituals of our religion. We are told our place in all this. As we grow, we either accept or reject what we have learned. Maturity brings discernment, and we come to a more "realistic" view in our spiritual life. We learn that the body will pass away, but the "spirit" lives on. We call this "spirit" a "soul" or the "self".

Our Spiritual practices, no matter what religion, attempt to make us aware that this "soul" or "self" is the permanent aspect of our existence. We grow to have less interest in the body, realizing that it will surely pass away. But we cling to the thoughts of "soul" and God.

Our learning as children may have given us thoughts of a "heaven" or a "hell". It may have given us scientific theories regarding existence, such as physiology, cosmology, and all the rest of it. We may have accepted or rejected concepts such as "resurrection of the body" "salvation", or "gunas" or the "five elements", or "karma". But if we are on a spiritual path, we cling to "soul" and "God" as the reality that stands beyond the concepts, no matter which we accept or reject.

As we grow in spirituality we combine all this "knowledge" and come to a conclusion that what we see around us is passing and changing with time, including "ourselves". So eventuality we come to ask the question; "Who am I".

Ramana Maharshi told us to ask this question; "Who am I". He told us to meditate on this. Nisargadatta Maharaj said much the same in his admonition to "stay in the I AM". If we follow this advice, we become aware that "I AM", or our "awareness" of our consciousness, is the only true thing our minds can observe. We come to see that, as the "observer" we not only observe the world, but ourselves in it. So we come to the conclusion that the "I" must not be this "person" we observe. When we see the "person" we have taken ourselves to be as simply another part of the manifestation, no more important than any other, we begin to stabilize in the "I AM". We now experience consciousness. This I AM consciousness" Nisargadatta Maharaj expressed as Brahman, or "God".

This experience of God as consciousness, or the "I AM" allows us to go beyond the body, but the mind still "clings" to the thoughts of both the "I" concept, and the "God" concept. We see that both are the same; this "I" and "God". However both the "I" and "God" are still in the mind. This is where many get lost, or mistakenly take "themselves to be God". This is nothing but ego.

The ego, being a "thing", wants to remain a "thing". It can not imagine itself as "nothing" or even "everything".

This is where experience comes. Once you realize you are not the body, you now must let go of the concepts of both the "I" and "God", and uncover the Love that makes the two One. Love is not a "thing", it is an action of unfolding.

Love, the ever unfolding, unchanging reality is Parabrahmin; that which you are.

This is why we are told that we must renounce everything. All concepts must go. All dualities must be resolved in themselves. Good-bad. right-wrong, guna-nirguna. All dissolve in this understanding. No one can tell you this,

it must be found for yourself. As Nisargadatta Maharaj used to say, one must come to this conclusion on your own, and live accordingly.

The living accordingly is the most important part, as the mind cannot conceive it, and words cannot express it, you can only "be" it.

"Sometimes I feel I am everything, I call that Love. Sometimes I feel I am nothing, I call that Wisdom. Between Love and Wisdom my life continuously flows."

- Nisargadatta Maharaj

The Fear of Love

We often hear about the play between Love and Fear. How one can't "see" the Love because it is "hidden" by fear. Or that True Love drives out all fear, and all the other clichés. But when "Love" itself becomes the object of fear; we have a big problem.

I would have to say that this applies to all types of love, even those deemed "inferior" in "proper" society. Romantic love, when it becomes devotion, can bring one out of oneself, and can work toward freedom. The thing to beware of is desire. Desire arises from the "me"; that next step from the "I" thought. Desire wants what the "I" wants. Not necessarily what the situation calls for. Pure Love knows the situation and the response.

But the word Love itself is often the reason for fear. We use words like "self" to describe our "personal" self; our personality, our "person-hood" if you will. And again; we move from the "personal" to the "universal" by referring to the "Self" as God, Awareness, Truth, or whatever lofty idea the mind contrives. Why not just call it Love?

We answer that "Love" is just another "word" for the "indescribable", that we all think differently about the "word", and that the "Self", "God", "The Absolute, must be "nirguna"; totally without attributes. But we all have a "passing acquaintance" with Love. To deny this, is almost as foolish as to deny the "I AM".

It is true that we all have a different mind "concept" of Love. And there are different concepts we tend to agree on like, romantic, love. familial love, and Agape, or Universal Love. But intuitively, we all know something of Love, or at least sadly, the lack of it. Love is the "is-ness", the being itself. It is what started you on this search, sustains you on this search, and leads you to itself. Call it what you like, but never deny it draws you, and that it's existence is more real than the hand at the end of each arm. We must not fear this draw, this Love.

Our attraction for another is too easy an example of love, and too easily misunderstood. Attraction can be desire, as well as simple regard, so needs some discernment. So the point would be lost. Let's use the beauty of a single tree in a forest. We regard the tree as a thing of beauty, created by God, for our use, our pleasure, and our atmosphere. We regard it with awe for it's beauty, with thankfulness for it's usefulness, and with love in it's "is-ness". This is God's "is-ness". This is the "is-ness" of the "Self".

If we now go about dismantling the "mind stuff", we find that first, all but the "I AM" remains of our illusory personal "self". We then, having discovered the "observer", see that the concept of "God" rests solely in the mind, and needs to be discarded along with the "personal self". Of course, along with "God" and the "personal self" goes the tree, and all images that appear to the mind. Does this result in an "empty" mind? A Spiritual Silence? A death to the tree? Not at all.

When the images of "Self" ,"God", "Awakening", even the image of the simple tree are removed, we "see" the movement; the unfolding of the whole. Love, as it "connects" and creates the "points of connection" instantly without time. We need not make Love a concept in the mind. We just have to let go of the mind long enough to let the real shine in on itself. The love we feel. The love we manifest, become "alive" in the light of this Love that we ARE.

Love God. Love the Manifestation. Celebrate your One-ness with them. See that only the Love is real. This is your "Self". Not a new "self", not a "super" you, but your original being as Love

The Simplicity of the Little Child

Studies of Spiritual or Religious beliefs, doctrines and practices can become very complicated.

But the "Masters" have taught very simple truths, very simple practices. Ramana Maharshi asks us to inquire "Who am I?". Nisargaddata Maharaj tells us to stay in the "I AM". Jesus, the Christ, said "Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven."

Becoming as little children is the humbling experience that allows Love, the reality of what we are, to flow. There is nothing complicated about it.

Once we have resolved the fact of our "I AMNESS", and can abide in it, it is a simple step to Awareness. Perhaps it will take much study of complicated beliefs, doctrines and practices for us to realize that our minds can not reach the "Truth". Because we do not listen to the "Masters", we feel we need to "reinvent the wheel", and fill our minds with spiritual dross. But those who trust like little children, will listen and follow the simple teachings. Some need to "exhaust the mind" to come to the realization that the mind cannot grasp, or even approach Awareness, while the simple child like ones come upon Awareness naturally.

Many "Masters" from all spiritualities have spoken of simplicity: Lao Tzu said “I have just three things to teach: simplicity, patience, compassion. These three are your greatest treasures.”. The medieval Monk and author of "The Imitation of Christ" Thomas a Kempis wrote: “Purity and simplicity are the two wings with which man soars above the earth and all temporary nature.” The Indian Sage of the Late 19th and early 20th centurys, Papa Ramadas says "Simplicity is the nature of great souls". It is not hard to see and understand that simplicity is the road to Truth.

We are no less than God's Love. The creative flow of Love is all that there is. God, the "I AM" and the world all vanish in that simple flowing Love.

I am telling you, become like a little child, forget all your "wisdom" and concentrate on this passage from Dattatreya's Avadhuta Gita: 2 "How shall I salute the formless being, indivisible, auspicious, and immutable, who fills all this with His Self and also fills the self with His Self?"

Dwell on this question. It is beyond the mind. Your Heart will answer.

Education - Help or Stumbling Block?

When I was a Christian Monk, it took me some time to "find" the simplicity of the Christ's teachings. There were so many concepts to learn, so much "stuff" to fill the mind. It took what appeared to be a very "long time" to get it all down, and organized.

Then, realizing that the "Church" was not really following Christ's message or teaching, I began to read and study Hinduism and some Buddhist literature and teaching. More "mind stuff".

Learning is fun. An education is an asset in many endeavors. But it can be a stumbling block to realizing. Many here, as well as many "gurus" are vastly educated. Masters in Religion, Doctorates in Philosophy, Doctorates in Eastern Studies, and all the rest of it. But are they aware?

Many here, and on other Spiritual websites post long, scholarly blogs using all the words and concepts they have learned through long, hard study. This is commendable, and done for many reasons, commendable or otherwise. It is not for me to judge. However, learning can be like any other "attainment", or "acquisition"; a source of pride. Nisargaddata comments that we learn our identity from others. Our parents, friends, and everyone we have contact with add to our "image" of ourselves. Our minds believe the projections these "others" tell us we are. So it is with education. As children, as well as in adulthood, we discover many things for ourselves. But if you look closely, you find that in order to "fit in", many of us trade our "own" discoveries, our "own" intuition, for the common, accepted view.

I, and others are constantly being told that our ideas, or methods do not "fit" with the "realized", as if we should care. Ramana Maharshi had his realization, Nisargaddata had his, and you and I have our own. They do not need to fit.

Realization will not fit your concept of it. If you can fit your realization into your concept, your "realization" is in the mind only.

We all seem to agree that "Awareness", "Enlightenment", "The Absolute", are not available to the mind. Yet we study, to fill the mind with concepts. Many, like me, spend time learning concepts of one religion or belief, and later spend more time learning about another philosophy, religion, or belief system. Then we compare, combine and organize the whole into new concepts. This, of course, is all done in the mind, which can not possibly use it for "Enlightenment". Many on these spiritual websites love to play "oneupsmanship". "My mind's full of more concepts than yours" kind of thing. Or we call out someone's ego, or criticize their concepts as not as "good" as ours. This is done because the mind does not want

"Enlightenment". "Enlightenment" means silence to the mind. "Enlightenment" ends the "control" of the mind. If we have filled our minds with a large education, this is an "investment" we have made. This is something to protect. So even if we know that "Enlightenment" is not available to the mind, we still pursue it with the mind, and judge others, even "Gurus", with the mind. This is why so many are "skeptical" of every Guru, every teacher that they can "outsmart", or challenge with their superior education. The wisest teachers in spirituality are the ones who are mostly silent. Ramana was one such. He talked only out of compassion. And this is key. Gurus are often questioned as to why they teach. And of course, the answer is compassion. Just as those who search for "Awareness" or "Enlightenment" are driven by an unexplainable compulsion, the Guru is compelled to teach. I am not talking here of those who see "Enlightenment" as an "achievement" to add to "their" education, or the guru who seeks an ego boost, a following or riches. I am talking about those who realize that "Enlightenment" brings nothing, and teaching is often thankless work, but who are compelled to search and to help.

I find it terribly funny that those who many see as "Enlightened", like Ramana, Nisargadatta, Jesus Christ, were only "educated" in a very cursory manner. Yet many think that they need to have a large education to understand these simple men. Education can be a source of pride beyond almost anything else. Western gurus and teachers are almost all very well educated. Many, like Ken Wilber, Andrew Cohen, and many others are very "full of themselves". This does not a guru make. Many of the seekers who attend "satsangs" are very educated people who are hoping to "top off" their education with "Enlightenment". They seek conformation from their guru that they "have made it". "Enlightenment" is simple. Christ tells us to "become as little children".

I am not saying that education is bad. As I said, learning is fun, and can be used to help others, but it makes neither "seeker" or "Guru". The thing that defines a real Guru or teacher is his compassion, and the living of his teaching, not his educational level. If you seek "Awareness", "Enlightenment" or whatever, then be as the Guru; live a compassionate life. Earnestness, Love and selflessly helping others will lead you to what you seek, without the seeking, and without caring wither you find "Enlightenment" or not. Living compassion is "Enlightenment" Be That.