107. Tony Parsons

Tony Parsons

The Open Secret message is totally radical and uncompromising.  It is a rare and singular expression of absolute non-dualism.  It bypasses the mind and speaks directly to the very core of a wisdom that is imminent in all of us. When there is a readiness to hear, all seeking and need for personal endeavor falls away, leaving simply the wonder of what is.

There is no me or you, no seeker, no enlightenment, no disciple and no guru.   There is no better or worse, no path, and nothing that has to be achieved.  All appearance is source.  All that apparently manifests – the world, the life story, the hypnotic dream of separation, the search for home – is the one appearing as two, the nothing appearing as everything, the absolute appearing as the particular.

There is no separate intelligence weaving a destiny, and no choice functioning at any level.  Nothing is happening, but this, as it is, invites the apparent seeker to rediscover that which already is…the abiding, uncaused, unchanging, impersonal silence from which unconditional love overflows and celebrates.  It is the wonderful mystery.

Tony Parsons has been sharing this “open secret” with people for over ten years. His talks and workshops are highly regarded in England and Western Europe.

Tony’s books:

Tony’s website

Interview recorded 2/2/2012

Video and audio below. Audio also available as a Podcast.

331 thoughts on “107. Tony Parsons

  1. I halfto say, it seems the “Rick” has a mental ressitance to the non-dual message…I don’t understand why, it seems like so few people understand what people like Tony are saying…I mean its all just talk..Non-duality is no closer to the truth then zen buddihsim is….Their all wrong….Its absurd to say that anyone is more right or more wrong…..Thats just the ego……Well Rick their just concepts…. Anyways Im not enlightened nor even near it, but i know that nothing can be more or less right…

  2. Sometimes I think that i should be the one sitting in that interview seat conducting the interviews….Or Rick why don’t you interview me? But you won’t, because Im not the enlightened guy…

  3. Anyways yeah…That just brings to mind the idea….What is an enlightened person? Who do we presume is enlightened, and would you reconize an “enlightened” person if you seen one? How would you know?? Someone might think of me par say as an unenlightened wreck…But, it’s interesting to see people who get interviewed…We obviously think they “have” something….I realy think their is NOTHING to seek….It is totally ignorant to seek…This is what Tony is saying…Anyways i just thought i would share my thoughts…But this is why i love Tony he’s just saying it the way it is…I wish more people would understand this message…Your already enlightened… :) Theirs nothing to get…I mean if you get anything, then thats just your ego…Why would you want to reinforce your ego….He’s just telling us the way it is… IT just arises out of ignorance…

  4. That there is no time is not loving what is. Time is the stage on which love and beauty play. A babbling brook is a mere staccato without time. A bab.

    The sophisticated mind and heart flourish in the never ending melodic lines that Beethoven hangs on measures of time. Time is one of his instruments. And he well knows how to play it.

    Stravinsky once said that the more sophisticated the language, the more likely a masterpiece will occur. Without time and the perception of time, all we would have is a universe made of singe pieces of popcorn.

    But I hear melodies and see sequences of light. Even if the cloud appears to be in the shape of cow, the lines are true for the time it takes to exist. And the perceiver is missing the point to say it does not exist as a life form, even if it’s white and fluffy and floating up in the sky.

  5. Tone lives in my backyard but I avoided him for a long time after reading a couple of his books and tossing them aside in frustration.

    I was told by a friend that he’s actually a kindly old boy so I decided to pop down to a Satsang. And it’s true, he’s quite sweet. But as expected, his rhetoric is pure flat-lands and didn’t any depth or subtlety. If I didn’t have ‘proper’ teachers to draw on like Adya and Marlies de Cocheret and was just looking to Tone then I’d have left that Satsang seriously despairing. But as it was, I sat soaking up the lovely presence in the room and was quite amused to see others trying to come to grips with the non-teaching.

    There was hubris too from Tony: his is the ONLY original teaching, according to him, that hasn’t sold out to a dual perspective (citing Mooji…) as though his one-dimensional model of non-duality were a rare and beautiful thing.

    Anyway, I haven’t been back. Presence notwithstanding, three hours in I would happily have decked Tone to put an end to his useless spiel! And just turning up for The Presence feels uncomfortably objectifying, and ultimately not enough, without love and respect for the man himself…

  6. Let me see if I’m getting this:

    I’m not typing this right now. This is typing happening. This is no-thing taking the apparent form of something typing. However, nobody is reading this. And, if anybody responds, it’s nobody responding. Or, it’s nothing taking the form of an apparent somebody responding.

    Am I close? I’m eagerly awaiting a reply from nobody.

    : )

  7. Tony Parsons is a very likable character, but his assertions of what the true nature of reality and self are utterly delusional and inaccurate. One can have the experience that one is not a self… but its quite obvious that someone is experiencing ‘no self’. One can experience that the true nature of reality is that all this is ‘just happening’… but obviously some separate individual is observing this alleged ‘happening’.Tony goes on to allege that science is coming to understand his perception of truth. What does it mean that ‘science’ is ‘happening’ by ‘no one’ which is discovering that neither the self or ‘science’ is real?… science is discovering that its not real?… its just a happening? Science is figuring this out, not scientists? In its poetic simplicity… its just nonsense. It makes no sense cause theres no sense in it. Its important to note that all these experiences are created in the brain via chemistry/neuro-activity. It can be replicated without the story of “spirituality” needing to be attached to it. Its well known in psychology that there is a disociative experience people can experience for numerous reasons, including serious trauma. Neuro/Cognitive science has identified the area of the brain from where which we conceptualize self and noticed that this area is effected when someone is experiencing this dissociation with self or reality. This is not to take away, but rather deepen the mystery. The phenomenon of these experiences is very real… the interpretations of whats really happening and why are subjective… often ignoring or failing to consider the brains role in it all.Its unfortunate that people go about sharing their experience and prematurely play the role of guru or the trendy im not a guru guru role. The phenomenon of the experience is real… others… such as Lisa Crain… See Tony, have the same experience of this phenomenon and then adopt the same exact understanding of the experience as the person who helped facilitate it. This is a huge mistake and how some charlatans take advantage of the suggestibility of the experience. Its as if though once the person experiences the phenomenon they stop the objective inquiry and assume that because such and such teacher was able to facilitate such and such experience…everything else they say about it is accepted as a factual representation of the true nature of reality and self. In this way… the myths about this very real phenomenon are born. From the subjective experiences of ancient mystics to the modern day ‘teacher’… their subjective understanding creates this elusive thing called ‘spirituality’ which is fraught with misconceptions and down right falsehoods that get repeated and take on a life of their own. These metaphorical interpretation become well defined ‘memes’ with very specific things to say about ‘what is’. The collective story of ‘spirituality’, ‘self realization’, ‘salvation’ or ‘unity with god’ if you prefer… is born… and carries with it as much illusion… or delusion… as the not entirely accurate story of self. I was a seeker, I was a hypnotist, a yogi, and a shaman all wrapped up in one. I have facilitated the experience of this phenomenon in others, done past life regressions and witnessed, agreed with and understood many of the same things others have come to agree on and understand about such things…

    , but not so much these days. Ive come to understand things quite differently now. To summarize some of those perceptions as they relate to people who experience such phenomenon and their interpretations of it… Its “self” realization. It insinuates that an individual can only see it for themselves. One should always be suspect of those who claim to only point to your self or the true nature of reality, while simultaneously having very specific detail of what it is and what it means and such. Thats the stuff thats inexplicable and only you can see for yourself.

    Now heres a neat little tool of understanding how your brain works that you can use to observe a speaker and help you determine for your self what state they are actually in and begin to understand states of consciousness or lack there of a little more clearly…

    Generally speaking when you ask someone to remember something like… “What was your favorite toy as a child?”… most people will look to the upper left. This is said to happen because of the area of our brain we are trying to access which stores memory. There are correlations with eye movement and accessing memory, imagination, emotion, etc…

    Its interesting to observe speakers, teachers, gurus, people in general… knowing this. You can’t help but realize that someone seems to have to instigate that accessing of mental information to form those answers, opinions, metaphors, understandings.

    You could say its just an automatic computer program like response… that might make sense… but its curious to me that sometimes when asked about the state they are allegedly in… they clearly access memory.

    It seems reasonable to assume that if they are in a state beyond mind… they wouldn’t need to access memory to recall and communicate about it to others. A “self” definitely appears to be home… it just doesn’t know or is pretending not to know its steering the ship.

    The phenomenon of ‘no self’, ‘self realization’, etc… is very real… the modern interpretations and metaphors describing its alleged true nature inevitably fall for their own charade and miss the point entirely.

Leave a Reply