There are a multitude of gurus and anti-gurus out there. All of them, it would seem, have a way, a method, a system to follow. ”If you do these things, enlightenment, freedom, moksha, will be yours. Just follow what I say. Sit in this position, chant these words, silence your mind, control your thoughts, and freedom will appear”.
How many of us do these things? How many sit, exhausted, on the cushion, trying to get what others have described? But does anyone listen to what is said, and then question it?
In the past, I wondered why this went on. Why do we follow without question? Why do we keep going from one authority to another, only to be left in the same place?
Now, I see clearly what has, and is, taking place. The cause of my own stupidity is clear to me.
Is yours clear to you?
You’ve heard what they have told you, you have listened intently, and have read tirelessly. Why not cast it aside, and find out? Find out if what they have said is true.
And if there is something to be had, it will arrive beyond your desire, one way or another. It will arrive despite all you might have done to bring it about.
Don’t try so hard. Let life happen.
{ 15 comments }
Welcome back Takuin! Woo!
Yes, thank you. Indeed, let it happen. We sit under the thumb of discomfort of seeking, wanting, striving for something abstract, until it all becomes irrelevant. The seeking apparently has to happen, has to run its course.
Alan, so true. I’ve been reading up on the experiences of many people who have “found”, and all of them say that they have to stop seeking. But I was always wondering – how? If you make a conscious decision to stop, there’s always a hidden background element of “I’m stopping now, hopefully now it’ll happen”. Perhaps the best way is to just seek with all our hearts, and then when it stops, it stops. What do you think? I’m not sure if that would be the right way. Cheers!
My lesson for the past 8 years has to listen to my own inner teacher. So many of us want some “outer” teacher that we think is smarter than we are or more successful than we are or something else that we are not. The reality is that all of the knowledge that we need is inside of each of us if we would just take the time to listen. We are everything we need.
And a WOO-HOO to you, Albert!
Thanks Alan and Albert.
Although I can understand what you mean, I still can see no need for the search. Everyone always says that what we need is within, but at the same time, they rely on others to tell them what to do and how to live. It makes no sense to me.
I understand…they say the want to grow, to become something else, etc. But can they be anything else other than what they already are? I am not saying that there is not chance to change a habit, or to live one’s passion, or whatever it is. Someone might not know how to speak German, but through practice and repitition they learn, but that is not what I mean.
Is there time involved, becoming, getting better, and all of that, within the self? It might seem that way, but I am not interested in how things seem; I want to know what is really there. Any growth within the self is limited to the desires, prejudices, and beliefs of the self. I want to know if there is something beyond that.
If there is a search, what is it that searches? Can this things that searches ever be free? What is there to be free from? What is there to find?
Keep asking, keep asking.
Thanks so much for your comments, guys. I appreciate it and I am glad to see you both here.
Takuin
Patricia…nice to see you again!
That is a question I have asked myself; Do we really listen? What is it to listen? Can there be an interpretation? If so, what is it that does the interpreting?
After all, the ears are mere instruments. They cannot measure, calculate, or differentiate. They can only hear.
I wonder why we cannot.
Takuin
Something else…
Someone might consider self-inquiry to be “seeking,” and I can see that. But the emphasis is that there is no reliance on outside authority.
With inquiry you niether accept or reject anything. It is just there. You see it for what it is, but if your thoughts are involved, with your preferences and prejudices, you are still enslaved to an outside authority.
Does that make sense?
Things are not rejected because of what you know. Rather, they fall away on their own, when seen as they are.
Hmm…you ask, what searches? And to be free from what? I guess…the ego searches to be free of the ego. Until it realises how absurd that is. But even though I understand intellectually how crazy that is, I can’t fully stop it. I don’t know if that makes sense.
There is that analogy of a fan. When unplugged the blades continue to spin. The self and the seeking are the same and when it is seen through nothing takes its place, ‘someone’ and ‘home’ cannot be localized into an anyone or anyplace. If no-one is home then freedom is the residence. That being said, this Alan person still takes it personally. This Alan person still ‘thinks’ it is seeing through or not.
Hey Albert. It makes perfect sense. As you have stated, the ego searching for the ego IS absurd. And even with knowing that, one still goes back to the search. So, what is to be done about it?
Could it be that understanding through knowledge is not enough? That “knowing it” is not the same as “living it”?
Do we “understand” through what we know? One’s definition of that word might be “to grasp with the intellect,” which would seem to imply, seeing with knowledge. But if one sees through intellect, or knowledge, what is being seen, other than a memory? If that is the case, then knowledge, and understanding, can only take us back to what we already know, and cannot reveal to us what is beyond it.
So, if we are in agreement so far, then what is to be done? There are several questions one could go into at this point; perception, understanding, knowledge, seeing, the “I” movement, and so on. I would take all of them, and more, in turn, and question them; find out what is at the core. I usually look up a word in a reputable dictionary to see the etymology and the various meanings. Then I see how it relates to memory, action, movement, stillness, etc.
But when I relate these things, I do not start from the idea that I am right. Or that I have the right idea that everything should be compared to. It is more of a matter of seeing how one’s mind works. How the knowledge contained therein is used, accessed, and stored. How our prejudices dominate over all things.
It seems daunting, and diligence IS needed, along with a certain amount of sincerity and seriousness. But if it is what you are interested in, go for it. The time will pass anyway, so what would you like to do with it?
You always give me a lot to write about, Albert. Keep it coming.
Takuin
Hey Alan. Thanks for all of your participation.
The self always takes things personally, because that is the only way it can operate. It is always relating those things to whatever it views as important.
For its own security, the self gives everything permanence. Life, experience, nearly everything (and quite possibly, EVERYTHING). But there is great security in that permanence. If the self is convinced that things are the way they are and that is it, then that gives a feeling of certainty. It KNOWS that it can expect things in a certain way, and therefore, feels secure.
And what happens when something contrary to the solidified fantasy occurs? Conflict. And why is that? Because the self cannot let go of what it has built up to be real. It can only see things the way they should be. And when something runs contrary to what is believed, it cannot really consider that it (the self) might be wrong. It is too dangerous to consider.
After all, if the self is wrong about what it believes, what else could it be wrong about? And could the entire notion of the operation of the self be useless?
This is a sequence similar to what happened to me last December. Questions just kept coming, one after another. I wasn’t really aware of the source of the questions, either. But for whatever reason, I just hit the mark and everything exploded.
When you hit at the core of an issue, it is like pulling out the wrong block in a game of Jenga; it all falls to pieces.
Takuin
Thats a brilliant form of inquiry Takuin, and thanks for taking the time to reply to my questions. could you give an example, maybe a walkthrough, of one of your inquiries? For example – let’s say I inquire into the self. My sensations say that there is a body here, and that body is Albert.
After that, you’ve sort of lost me. What happens then? How do I see how that relates to all the things you mention?
Thanks again for your time Takuin – I always appreciate it a lot.
Thanks Albert.
I have been thinking about a walkthrough, as you have suggested, and I am still thinking of the best way to deliver. That sort of thing might go better as a podcast. Even if I wanted to make it a normal post, I would still probably record it first, then transcribe it for the blog.
I’ll think on it. What would you say?
Takuin
Hmm… a podcast will be very interesting. And I also agree that it might be the best for something like this. I think reading it will not be as “raw”, or fresh. And also, I’m really curious to hear what you sound like
. Thanks for considering my request.
{ 1 trackback }
Comments on this entry are closed.