I suppose even talking about this is dualistic.

It is all One, but we have to be careful. When we say this, is it just an idea? Something that sounds good to us at the time? Or is it something lived and expressed from the very depth of the organism?

So many gurus just say these things, and the spectators in the audience bow their heads in agreement. No! Don’t agree or disagree! Go into the cave and see what is there.

In order to find out, we cannot already have an idea of what is there. Of course, the ideas of what is there may turn out to be correct, but there will be no way of knowing, once you are clear.

The mind tries to make it too complicated.

Reject it all. You may eventually see the embrace you sought after was always present.

But don’t expect it.

the light of fireflies, snow by the window

best regards and thank you for your article have to read it slowly at the evning

I think it is possible. But we also have to consider that the search in humans is constant. If someone has that need to search for anything, it is really the same thing. It needn’t be about enlightenment.

Freedom from the self is possible, but even considering that one needs to be free from something is dualistic in itself. A person that is truly free has nothing to search for. Maybe they will search for their car keys, but that is an altogether different matter.

The self is all search. Can there be a search without a self?

Thanks Albert.

It’s like even when we think it’s not the self, it’s still the self, if that makes any sense. If almost everything is seen and done from the self, all that searching, and questioning. If that is just the self pretending to be something else, a watcher perhaps, then how do we really see?

Is it possible for a non-enlightened person to be free, even just temporarily, from the self – or is it all just an illusion? The self pretending to be a watcher.

Thanks again for taking the time out for such a long and detailed reply.

Many of us are prone to violence of this kind, so you would think the question might come up at some point. But it rarely ever does.

The anger helps to solidify the self. YOU (the self) never feel more real than when you are angry. It weighs heavy in the mind, and seems to slow time.

Have you noticed this for yourself? When you are angry, you are very compressed. There is definately a center that is projecting. The thoughts that race through your mind almost seem solid. Everything is tight, and not only physically. It effects the movement of the organism greatly, right down to the cell. Holding this violence in the mind is one of the most destructive things we do to our own bodies.

That question, “If you have no belief, can you be offended,” leads one into other questions. If one realized the answer to this question, I am not sure that it would lead to a transformation. Dealing with belief is important, but it is still on a superficial level of sorts.

One might start with, “What is belief?” “How is belief projected?” “Can one have a belief without conflict?”

One of the most important questions one might ask is, “Can one be free of belief completely?”

One thing important to consider is, you cannot really answer these questions. You cannot say yes or no. I am not trying to sound enigmatic, but if you have a conclusion, how did it arrive? You can only have a conclusion through knowledge, no? If you say YES or NO, how did you get there? What is it that answers the question?

One might ask, “ Why should I ask these question if I cannot answer them?” That is something that one might want to go into. Why do you need an answer? Any conclusion you reach will be made through belief or knowledge. So where does that put you? If you are answering based on belief or knowledge, that is just more of what you already have.

This is a very heavy subject that one has to face at some point. But only if they are serious about it.

Looking at the world, as it is, one can easily see the suffering brought about by belief. It is not a secret, and there is nothing really cryptic about it.

But if one sees this, what happens? Do they say, “That is so awful,” then go back to their own violent life? Or does it touch them in such a way that a fundamental change takes place? Do they see the danger then say, “That is it. Never again will I live my life in this mechanical way,” or not?

That is one thing I cannot understand; if one knows fire burns, why do they keep sticking their hands in it?

It all leads back to the monument of the self. Such an impressive, yet precarious, structure of thought exists. And this structure of experiences and thought – the self – has grooves that run deeper than any habit. But the danger, and the structure, is there to see. The problem arises with the way of seeing.

How does one see it all? Are they looking with their conclusions and experiences? If so, it is the structure, the monument, the self, that is seeing. And the self is only capable of seeing what it feels is important; from its own point of view.

It is the greatest difficulty one might come up against; how to see.

If someone calls me a dickhead, it is my belief that I shouldn’t be called a dickhead, (or maybe a secret shame that my head does look like that), that causes an emotional reaction. Is that what you are referring to?

There could be a few different reasons for that kind of action. But you may find that others are less willing to let go of being slighted because it is a blow to their identity. It is an over-protective mechanism.

You might say it is a knee-jerk reaction of the self. Some are more forgiving than others, so it may easily pass, but some will carry the sting to their ego for years and years.

A question I like to ask is, “If you have no belief, can you be offended?” It is deeper than it seems on the surface.

As always, thanks for the great comments.

Takuin

This is one of the lessons I’ve been trying to strongly integrate in my life for the past few months, thanks for pointing it out so succinctly.