079. Wayne Liquorman

Wayne LiquormanWayne Liquorman was both a spiritual seeker and a family man with a successful export business, when he met his first and final guru, Ramesh Balsekar, in September 1987. In April 1989 the process of seeking ended when enlightenment happened through the body-mind mechanism called Wayne.

Wayne describes the event as being “of interest only to seekers.” His first book, No Way: A Guide For the Spiritually ‘Advanced’ was published in 1990 under the pen name Ram Tzu because he “didn’t want a bunch of miserable seekers cluttering up his living room.” In fact, Wayne did not speak publicly until Ramesh asked him to do so in 1996.

This enlightenment event and its aftermath are described in Wayne’s second book, Acceptance of What IS, published in 2000. He is also the author of Never Mind… A journey into Non-duality, and the editor of Consciousness Speaks and several other books by Ramesh Balsekar, who refers to Wayne as his “spiritual son.” His most recent book, Enlightenment Is Not What You Think, was published in 2009.

The teaching, as it happens through Wayne, is pure Advaita (non-duality), uniquely presented in a uncompromising, sometimes humorous way, without religious dogma or new age veneer. In his Talks, Wayne is without agenda, speaking only in response to seeker’s questions. He talks about Consciousness: the ground of all being, the source and the substance of everything.

“This Advaita, as I talk about it, is not actually a philosophy, because it does not hold any tenets. It is simply a collection of pointers and concepts, and it posits that none of them are true in an absolute sense. This teaching is not about conveying the truth. It is about prying away the limitations and misconceptions about how things are.” – from Never Mind

Wayne’s message is clear and simple. Although he may suggest areas for further inquiry, Wayne offers no cures, practices, or miracles to reach enlightenment. He invites you to bring your most cherished beliefs to his Talks. If you are really fortunate, you may leave without them.

Wayne’s site: http://www.advaita.org/

Interview recorded 7/24/2011

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

128 thoughts on “079. Wayne Liquorman

  1. What a pleasant surprise.

    I’m accustomed to doing chores around the house at the beginning of many of Rick’s interviews, since they often begin with a storytelling of the interviewee’s past (not my favorite thing to pay attention to).

    This interview caught me by surprise, as Wayne commenced the interview with a discussion of his signature observation of authorship.

    Vacuum cleaning will come later. What a nice surprise and exception to the norm.

  2. Yeah, right? Who wants to listen to these 1970 stories? I prefer to get bored staring at the wall instead…

  3. “Refinements in manifestation have nothing to do with enlightenment” (paraphrased) – Wayne

    An interesting tail-end proposition to conclude the interview with.

    I enjoyed it. Thanks for that privilege.

  4. Enjoyed it.
    It reminded me how essential the point is that enlightenment and behavior are not related. Somehow it opens my heart. There´s more space to breathe.

    The truth is that if we care less about whether our behavior is good or bad this world would probably (and paradoxically?) have less Hitlers and Oslo-incidents etc…The root of painful behavior is often fear and suffering.

  5. Good interview.

    Early on there was a discussion about all the mechanisms inside the brain and body involved in lifting one’s hand. Then a bit about someone deciding to walk across a room but it turns out his foot is asleep. I got the implication at that point that Wayne believed in an initial act of free will, and then once a decision was made, myriad automatic things beyond one’s control kick in to make the act possible.

    I found all of that confusing and unfortunate. Particularly because everything after that was crystal clear.

    Later, when Wayne quoted the zen haiku (“The Spring comes and the grass grows by itself”) it became clear he does not believe in free will. He hit home that point again in telling his story of quitting drugs and booze, and yet again in relaying a story his guru told him.

    So, he’s not a free will guy. In this he is in agreement with the Paul Hedderman (“selfing”) and countless others.

    I also thought the expansion of the classic ocean metaphor was perfectly clear. Waves believing their are isolated drops.

    Finally, I heard a resurgence of a theme I heard in the John Sherman interview. I said at the time that John was putting the dual back into nondualism. So is Wayne. Although Wayne might say putting the wave back into oceaness.

    Wayne goes so far to say the ocean can’t be experienced. It has no qualities. It flat out can’t be experienced at all.

    This is a real divide I’m noticing in the ‘awakening community’, to pick a term.

    There are a lot of waves out there trying to become the ocean and thinking if they do they can stop being waves. There are a lot of teachers out there claiming to have done just that.

    Wayne says this is wrong (so does John Sherman). Not only does Wayne say you can’t experience the ocean, he say’s if you’re trying to that’s the surest sign you’re still in dualism. He’s saying that overcoming dualism isn’t becoming the ocean. On the contrary, it’s being “waviness”.

    We’re waves, folks. True, waves are the ocean, but waves can’t experience the ocean. Waves can only be waves.

    Now comes the question of meditation. Should waves be spending time blocking out their experience of waviness in order to find or become the ocean within (which Wayne says can’t be experienced in any way)? Or, is that futile, pointless, and simply wrongheaded?

    The way I see it at the moment is: if a wave wants to meditate it should be because it’s one more thing a wave can do, and a particular wave might like doing that. His experience while meditating is no more closer to truth than is watching tv or playing tennis or doing algebra.

    I’m thinking that’s how a wave should see it.

    A wave trying to be a quiet wave for 20 minutes a day is fine. A wave thinking it can become the ocean and stop being a wave may be just plain wrongheaded.

    The good news is, there’s no free will, and so decisions don’t need to be made about this, because no decisions can be made.

    The Spring comes, and some meditate, and some don’t.

  6. A nice, terse synopsis, Tim. Thank you for the color commentary.

    Regarding this:

    “Now comes the question of meditation. Should waves be spending time blocking out their experience of waviness in order to find or become the ocean within (which Wayne says can’t be experienced in any way)? Or, is that futile, pointless, and simply wrongheaded?

    The way I see it at the moment is: if a wave wants to meditate it should be because it’s one more thing a wave can do, and a particular wave might like doing that. His experience while meditating is no more closer to truth than is watching tv or playing tennis or doing algebra.

    I’m thinking that’s how a wave should see it.

    A wave trying to be a quiet wave for 20 minutes a day is fine. A wave thinking it can become the ocean and stop being a wave may be just plain wrongheaded.” – Tim

    This wave enjoys the practice of insight meditation (AKA VIpassana) for one simple reason: it assists him in dis-covering the movement of the conditioned (underlined) wave (AKA self).

    Wavedom is celebrated by this wave as the fullest expression of the ocean, and there is no desire to be anything other than that.

    But if I’m going to enjoy being a wave, I prefer to move in an unconditioned manner. Which is why this wave meditates.

  7. The idea that realization has nothing to do with ones actions seems bogus to me. I experienced personality changes from the first day’s meditation. Those changes continue to this day. How can one who sees every one as himself do harm to others. The peace and love lived by the realized make profound changes in their actions. Wayne is a great example of those changes.

  8. “The idea that realization has nothing to do with ones actions seems bogus to me.”

    I’ll have to re-listen to Wayne’s interview once again, Joel, to confirm that he used the “r” word to make that point. I seem to remember that he may have used the “e” one (enlightenment) instead. And the two may not mean the same thing to him, as he admitted that awakening and enlightenment do not.

    The way that you described the fruit of your mediation experience, however, seems to infer that your conditioned self lost considerable grip on your actions along the way. Which is the chief reason that I enjoy meditation.

  9. If you go directly to the 1:25 minute point of the interview, Joel, you’ll hear Wayne state that refinements in manifestation occur (such as the personality changes that you described).

    But that, in his view, they have nothing to do with “enlightenment” (quoted to emphasis his preferred descriptor).

  10. Peter, you are correct.
    Thanks. It is an important distinction. The sage can only be with what is.

  11. Thank you, Joel, as well… for placing some spotlight on this issue.

    I think that if Wayne was asked “are realizations part of the refinements in manifestation that you are alluding to?”, he would’ve responded in the affirmative.

    Agree or dis-agree with that observation, I believe that that is what he was trying to say.

    Thanks again.

  12. “natural ‘refinements in manifestation’ that Peter alludes to” – snowleopard

    Actually, snowleopard, Wayne was the one who surfaced the observation regarding “refinements in manifestation”. I just offered some supplemental comments to help understand what he was trying to say.

  13. I, personally, was hoping that there would be some follow-up discussion on this particular issue. I’m referring to Wayne’s “refinements in manifestation” or Rick’s “improvements in development”… both phrases pointing to the same thingamajog.

    Terms like refinement or improvement or progress, for instance, are not aspects of manifestation, IMO.

    The only constant aspect of manifestation is change.

    If we view a change to be desirable to us, we tend to affix with labels like refinement, improvement and progressive.

    And if we don’t, we tend to affix that change with contrary labels.

    Change is change. How we feel about it determines our experience of it.

    It may be helpful to us to distinguish how we feel about change from its aspect: which is simply change.

  14. Peter: “It may be helpful to us to distinguish…”

    But isn’t that another fix? You can’t have enough of these, can you?

  15. “It’s just what’s happening, and ‘I’ am along for the ride, for however long it lasts and wherever it may lead — which btw doesn’t concern me either.”

    Isn’t that disturbing? It may lead to another holocaust, for instance… It really doesn’t concern you? Who are you, man?

  16. “if perchance another holocaust should happen, insofar as ‘I’ have no control over it, nor can ‘I’ change it, no it doesn’t concern ‘me.’ And insofar as currently it is just another allusion to ‘what’s not happening now’ I couldn’t care less.”

    Really? Aren’t there people dying in North Korea and other parts of the world right now? That’s exactly the kind of radical thinking that saddens me most…

  17. I received this from a friend of mine after posting my earlier comment. It will shed some light on this discussion.

    To my dear friend Joel,

    I just woke up to see some of the comments on batgap including yours…I know advaita speak is not your thing..and certainly, this pure Vedanta that Wayne is expousing – that some call the highest Truth – is not easy to relate to as it involves a complete surrender of control (or seeing through the illusion of control) of the human will, but maybe I can offer something in the way of further explanation..by sharing my own take on it..

    First off, Wayne didn’t say that meditation had no effect…He made it clear in the last few minutes of the tape that in the un-manifest realm – on the level of Being, no change is possible, but on the level of the manifest – the human realm – EVERYTHING is still possible….he left open the possibility of further refinement of the nervous system..We are both human and divine, so not to get the two confused..

    If someone feels the need to meditate and feel they derive a benefit – they continue to do it – and when they see through it, they may stop – the point of the whole teaching being – whatever happens in a human life is what it is – can’t be otherwise – all action is governed by Consciousness – we are not the decider – or rather we are not the SOURCE of the deciding, no more than we can choose to make our breathing go on, or our blood circulate…We just act and live our lives without authorship of them if we are realized….

    In making the distinction between a saint and a sage, Wayne is saying it is still possible for a sage (a fully enlightened being) to act in a way that our culture might consider immoral, because the sage is ruled by Consciousness – the Ocean in his metaphor – which includes EVERYTHING….A sage is beyond the dualistic mind’s idea of right and wrong..The whole idea of what is right and wrong disappears in the highest state…The moral rules and regulations apply only to those who live in duality….A sage is surrendered to what is as it is and can only be with what is..

    And who’s to say whether killing in a certain situation isn’t exactly correct..Is war always correct? To some it is, to some it isn’t…Is it common to act immorally if fully realized, No – but is it possible, Yes… theoretically it is possible..

    Saints are of a different breed – They aren’t necessarily enlightened and primarily adhere to a dualistic code of right and wrong..They often suffer greatly..The sage does not suffer..It is critical for people to understand that we don’t become saints when we realize..If we cling to that notion we will be hugely disappointed..

    This Final Truth that this lineage brings, is surely not for everyone…and in ancient times was not given out to almost anyone, not only because it’s hard to grasp by the mind that wants to remain in control, but because it’s bound to be misunderstood.. Maharishi said as such, and devoted only one page of it in the Gita commentary..the last page..He obviously didn’t think most of the meditators were going to be going there…at least not in this lifetime…
    And it’s true that this non dual teaching could possibly be used as an excuse for unreasonable behavior as Rick brought up in the interview..if it is taken on the purely intellectual level -but of course as Wayne said,, if that happens, there are always consequences..

    I resonate with this truth cause it is in line with my inner experience of Reality…I’ve not become a saint since realization happened more than 10 years ago and haven’t seen others become one either – although some are still trying for the gold medal in that regard…good luck to them with that..It is important to remember that we are who we are on the human level – before during and after the process concludes – some waves have kinder gentler dispositions than others and might remain so…while others play out a different role…not up to us..

    I realized I have no control over things I say or do in any way whatsoever -although before hand, I had the illusion of control cause the mind was running the show…-.I was lucky to not have had a religious background so don’t have the heavy moral conditioning some may have had – so no guilt or shame or blame residue…all action seems to happen here naturally..spontaneously without forethought.. and seems just right…I do know that I always tell the truth to myself and others, and so far haven’t killed anyone…

    I will say that I did not use the spiritual path as means to refine the persona…to become a better person or have a better life etc etc..there are many different ways to refine if one wants to do that, but that wasn’t my motivation in wanting to learn to meditate or to go to satsang…When I began the spiritual journey, I was only interested in Truth…however it showed up…..

    I have no idea whether meditation did this or that or anything for me..can’t say..I realized since stopping though about 10 years ago, that a lot of the changes on the surface that seemed to occur were actually illusory in retrospect…The practice kept a lot of stuff down for 25 years like anger and sadness and fear which I had to deal with when meditation stopped…I realize now that keeping the shadow at bay or transcending it all those years gave me a false sense of well being…It made me believe I was getting better in some way…but now know I was merely avoiding myself..

    When meditation came to a sudden halt in satasng, it was because there was no more IN to go into – Silence was recognized as who I was…and to my great relief, I found there was no difference in energy level or mood or stress etc etc when it stopped…all was well and always was well…The main difference now that I notice is that as Wayne so beautifully put it, we naturally find ourselves giving more than taking..If we’re not concerned with the illusory I, and how it’s doing, there is a huge open space to reach out to others..

    Because we started meditation so young Joel, perhaps a large part of what we thought was us getting better, was more about merely growing up..we’ll never know…I could make the same case that therapy helped me or hallucinogenic drugs helped me or having a wonderful husband and kids helped me, but the truth is I have no idea what caused what in my life….From this vantage point, I think that what occurs in any human life is really a combination of Grace and karmic conditioning..I do think though that if we’re not willing to drop a lot of our old concepts and ‘doings’ or at least examine them, we can’t move on..

    How can we really know or understand cause and effect, and who the heck cares anyway- I do know that I wake up everyday in bliss with the peace that is beyond understanding, because the mind is no longer trying to figure things out – it’s undivided…meditation is not needed because the mind is undistracted…am always present..joy and sorrow are one – good and bad are one – the opposites are not opposite anymore – they have been reconciled..

    Although love and caring is predominant in awareness, I fully accept the fact that I am capable of being both Hitler and Mother Theresa on any given day and everything in between, and so is everyone else…love them anyway….just waves rising and falling..no longer clinging to an idea of a perfect Jill or a perfect Joel or a perfect world….That’s the freedom that Wayne so eloquently spoke of..

    Satsang to me, was, and still is, a living breathing organism that goes on within and without – Everything that was said in Wayne’s talk is alive in me – Truth can never be a concept..

    Love,
    me

  18. Peter: “It may be helpful to us to distinguish…”

    “But isn’t that another fix? You can’t have enough of these, can you?” – Brian

    Huh? *scratches his shaved head*

    Another fix for what? Don’t see anything broken anywhere, so why look for a fix?

  19. Peter: “It may be helpful to us to distinguish…”

    “But isn’t that another fix? You can’t have enough of these, can you?” – Brian

    I guess what I meant to say is that the “helpful distinguishing” itself is a fix. The moment you try to do it, you miss the point, which is that it is already distinguished by itself. Looking at the mind as it is, you recognize that everything is accepted and distinguished the very moment it appears. There is no need to alter anything and the altering itself is also just an appearance…

  20. I’m curious, Brian. Have you ever practiced any form of insight mediation? I ask because a by-product of such a practice is often the enhanced ability to re-cognize the workings of the conditioned self. To include all of the perceptions and beliefs that are generated by the conditioned self.

    I once asked my conditioned self who his best friend was. To which he replied: “Anyone who propagates the belief that I don’t exist of course, silly rabbit. I am free to perform my conditioned ways without obstruction, if I’m not recognized for what I am.”

    Are you presently, Brian, operating under the impression that your conditioned self is non-existent? And that all of your perceptions and beliefs are perceived and believed without conditioning?

    Rather ask than ass-u-me anything, is why I ask.

  21. Only people like him can be librated, poor us
    quite strickt; anyway it took him 20 years.
    Rick he puts you in your tracks.
    since he wouldnt care about my opinion to reptlay.
    anyway he would be the authority wihtout authority;
    I dont care for his way except a few calrification.
    anyway i am niether awake nor elightend.
    and if i woul d take his stricktness as sighn of possibility i have no
    chance; it is better for me to fall for girls and forget
    all this business of nonduality elites.
    i probably die with
    my karma unconsious for ever – fearing it approaching
    in the next 15 years.
    disprate as ever:I will be still meditate or bring
    awarness and idintify with it – Colin Drake adviced.
    me to do.
    nondualit starts sounding like dictator ship.
    I like the immorality thing though.
    still he sounded dry as dry desert.
    no wonder they like him in Russia.
    As stern as him i make my point without
    humor and with the hamra banging on
    the table of a judge.

  22. my 2cents… i haven’t listened to Wayne yet… so this is just a response to Tim’s comments…

    Tim: “A wave thinking it can become the ocean and stop being a wave may be just plain wrongheaded.”

    Anatol: that’s not how i understand the teaching… which is… that the wave already is [part of] the ocean… it cannot be anything else… since ocean is all there is… but this is not realized somehow… what needs to happen somehow… is the realization that one is both the ocean( absolutely ) & the wave( relatively ) … the ocean when still( meditating )… and both ocean and wave when acting…

    Tim: “The good news is, there’s no free will, and so decisions don’t need to be made about this, because no decisions can be made.” … i go with what Rick & others said sometime ago… sometimes it seems there is free will, use it wisely… sometimes seems there is no free will, accept whatever comes as God’s Grace…

    hope the video is up soon…

  23. “Anatol: that’s not how i understand the teaching… which is… that the wave already is [part of] the ocean… it cannot be anything else”

    What teaching are you referencing to here, specifically?

    I ask because I don’t think that that is Wayne’s teaching, from what I heard in the interview.

    TIA

  24. Tim, some comments on your comments about meditation.

    You said, “Should waves be spending time blocking out their experience of waviness in order to find or become the ocean within…?” Not sure what your experience with meditation is, but mine never involved “blocking out” and from day one, I had glimpses, some faint, some crystal clear, of my status as ocean. Having done that for 43 years, the ocean aspect is there pretty clearly all the time along with the wave aspect.

    You said, “His experience while meditating is no more closer to truth than is watching tv or playing tennis or doing algebra.” The whole purpose of meditation is to allow mental activity to subside, so that the pure consciousness which underlies it may more clearly be appreciated. Like diminishing the intensity of the movie so that you can see the screen onto which it is being projected. Repeating that process, it becomes integrated and stabilized.

  25. Peter, the belief in conditioned self doesn’t match my experience and it never did. Perceptions and beliefs are not generated by anyone, I honestly can’t find a source, no matter how hard I look. How does the conditioned self look? Does it exist when you are in sleep? It is not my impression that the conditioned self is nonexistent, it is my experience. As far as I know, all perceptions and beliefs are conditioned, otherwise they would be just random, wouldn’t they? Maybe this process of conditioning can be called “self”? But to make this process into an entity and ask it questions seems ridiculous…

  26. “But to make this process into an entity and ask it questions seems ridiculous” – Brian

    I didn’t think that you would think that that actually happened, Brian. I’ll have to make my efforts at storytelling a lot more obvious then.

    Disclaimer: all my observations are acts of storytelling.

    Which cause me to see yours as well.

    Thanks.

  27. “Wouldn’t the conditioned self be a thought?” – chuckee

    Would a person’s addiction to a hard drug also be just a thought?

    “That’s OK, bud. You’re addiction to a hard drug is just a thought.”

  28. “I honestly can’t find a source, no matter how hard I look” – Brian

    I don’t have a clue re. HOW you looked, Brian. For what you see (or not) depends on how you look.

    But your use of the descriptor “hard” causes me to suspect that your looking may have been significantly effort-full.

    And my experience of effort-full looking has revealed that it is replete with mirages.

  29. Peter… did you miss my first line…” i haven’t listened to Wayne yet… so this is just a response to Tim’s comments…”

    i’m referring to what Tim implied… i do not know yet what Wayne said … waiting for the video…

    did Tim reflect Wayne’s view accurately… in your view…

    i feel what is being missed is the the totality( all of reality ) is both non-changing and changing at the same time… if this sounds like a dualistic statement… it is because language is dualistic… and cannot express non-duality exactly… and this has been said my Maharishi Mahesh Yogi… other teachers… and several of the interviewees here… “both simultaneously” …

  30. like Joel’s friend said… “We are both human and divine, so not to get the two confused” ….

  31. Peter: I don’t have a clue re. HOW you looked, Brian. For what you see (or not) depends on how you look.

    Buddha said: “the deed there is, but no doer thereof”. Maybe he missed something, no?
    So can you point me to the right way of looking so that I can see the doer/thinker also? If not, can you at least describe the self? I’m looking forward to see what I couldn’t see…

  32. Brian:

    Thank you for your invitation to look for a self. You echo a similar invitation made by several other folks, of course.

    The sense of an independent and separate self, however, is a natural by-product of identifying with a thought or set of thoughts… not excluding the thought that there is no self.

    So instead of looking for a self, I prefer to observe any process of thought-identification which may be taking place at the moment.

    Paul Hedderman calls that the process of selfing. Call it what you will, you are still observing a verb in action (identification) instead of a noun (self).

    The process of identifying with a thought or set of thoughts IS very observable, I have found. Which is why I am, in part, such a big fan of anapana sati meditation.

    So permit me to return the favor by inviting you to observe any process of identification with a thought or set or thoughts that may be taking place in you at the moment (to include the thought that there is no self).

    You may get a different result than looking for a self.

  33. Am I the only one who is experiencing audio problems with the video?

    Or do I need to start thinking about a hearing aid?

  34. Scratch that last question, please. I fixed the audio problem. It originated at my end.

  35. Absence of thought is highly overrated, my friend chuckee.

    Their presence isn’t problematic; it’s our reaction/response to them that is.

    Such as the claiming of them to be “our’ thoughts.

    Or our identification with them (i.e. “I am my thoughts”).

    Again, thoughts are not the problem, whatever they may be.

    Insight mediation doesn’t invite you to desire or expect or work towards an absence of thought.

    Rather, it invites you to observe your reactions and response to them. Both in your mind and your body.

    Thoughts are neither your ally or your enemy.

    Our reactions to them, on the other hand, are often the cause of much of our suffering.

  36. since we are not going to be elightend in the next 40 years; I think the idea of having good standard of living
    for everyone is our best second choice-
    Fuller in his book critical path said that mysticesm
    is not going to solve our problem.

    people will be bnevelont if theri is no controls in
    their way to getting somthing-
    anyway: Nathanial Gill once told me that is better
    to be millionair than to be awake.

    I did not kow that nuclear war could destroy
    the world in 30 minutes.
    kill everyone in that time.

    Fuller dictim : redesign the world rather than
    reform man.

  37. Peter: “The presence of thoughts isn’t problematic; it’s our reaction/response to them that is.”

    Not if you are able to recognize that the reaction/response is another thought. Then even that doesn’t matter anymore. You transcended thought, now move a step further and transcend the reaction to the thought. It is the same step, just repeat it with another object. Reactions are not problematic unless you believe they are… See through the belief and let reactions play themselves out naturally.

  38. “Not if you are able to recognize that the reaction/response is another thought.” – Brian

    I used to perceive it that way, before I started practicing insight meditation.

    I’m not talking about succeeding thoughts, or one thought following another.

    I’m talking about a certain quality of attention that has a gluing or adhesive factor with certain thoughts.

    As long as that quality of attention is in place, certain thoughts will adhere to it.

    I know nothing that affects the quality of attention more effectively than certain forms of mediation.

    Which prompts me to ask, again, have you ever practiced any forms of meditation? And, if so, which form(s)?

  39. “I’m talking about a certain quality of attention that has a gluing or adhesive factor with certain thoughts.”

    It doesn’t matter. You switched “thoughts are problematic” for “thoughts are ok, attention is problematic” and then you start to work on your attention. Then you may find that attention is ok, it is our “x” that is problematic. Vicious cycle. Why not solve it once and for all – for every kind of perception, be it thought/reaction/attention/…? You are not your attention as much as you are not your thoughts, right?

    I have tried few types of meditation, but only for a short time. I am too lazy and impatient. To me, meditation is like waiting for something to come, while I can simply go and take it.

  40. “I did a 10 retreat (Goenka version) last summer. My GI trac blew out and I passed a kidney stone, but I did not miss a meditation! Needless to say my experience is probably a little tainted. So for me to be talking about doing insight meditation is not so accurate, and I prolly don’t even remember how, truth be known. – chuckee

    Not tainted, chuckee. A shallow water experience is probably more accurate. It’s natural to enter an unknown pool via its shallow waters initially, which is probably what you did. But had you continued into its deeper end, you’d probably be resonating with some of the things tat I’m saying. A shallow water experience of anything will only give you that: a shallow water experience of it.

    Old habits become old habits via repetition, chuckee. And new habits become new habits, to replace the old ones, via repetition as well. If you want to replace an old habit with a new one, you can’t escape practicing the new one. And practice is an effective way of moving from the shallow end of the pool to its deeper end.

    “While I do believe what I said about thoughts, I find myself bored with my “understanding”, and I’m stuck.” – chuckee

    This typically candid expression of yours, chuckee, is revealing in more ways then one. Being or feeling stuck is precisely a symptom of sticky attention. Or a quality of attention that forms a bond with certain ideas or thoughts.

    Here’s a simple litmus test that you can apply on yourself to gauge the stickiness quality of your attention:

    the next time that you recognize you are advancing or defending a certain thought or idea rather strongly, ask yourself “why am I so glued to this particular idea or thought, at the expense of relegating a differing view to a lower value or unacceptability?”

    Sticky attention tends to bond with certain ideas and dismiss others. Whereas non-sticky attention tends to treat all ideas as just ideas. Neither one is more worthy of personal subscription to than the other.

    If you choose to re-enter the waters of insight mediation once again, chuckee. don’t be to eager to exit its shallow waters. Its deeper end has some very revealing insights for you to experience.

    Thanks for asking.

    P.S. An advaita platitude is just like any other platitude. It’s not what you believe that has a contributory effect to suffering. It’s more how you believe it.

  41. “I have tried few types of meditation, but only for a short time. I am too lazy and impatient. To me, meditation is like waiting for something to come, while I can simply go and take it.” – Brian

    Your thoughts evidence that.

    Thanks for the response.

  42. To anyone else whose experience of mediation closely
    proximates Brian’s (“meditation is like waiting for something to come”)…

    may you one day try meditating for the sole purpose of observing what is happening here and now.

    Observing for the sole purpose of observing. Being aware for the sole purpose of being aware.

    Even if you experience Brian’s experience of “waiting for something to come”, observe that… for the sole purpose of observing it… as well.

    Whatever appears in whatever form… observe that, for the sole purpose of observing it.

    I return you to your regularly scheduled program.

  43. thanks Rick… thanks Wayne…

    i watched Wayne’s satsangs in Russia… some time ago… and translation breaks seemed to provide beneficial pauses… for pondering Wayne’s profound words… i enjoyed his clarity then and now… and appreciate his honesty… and mainly descriptive words of where ‘he’ is now…

    IMV… nothing wrong with teachers who do both descriptive and prescriptive… or teach by example… or in silence… or combination of all…according to the teacher’s capacity… and appropriateness…

    i think Wayne’s adding a ‘separate drop’ to the ocean & wave analogy is clever and worthwhile pondering…
    also his insistence that awakening is actually realising that one is an “ocean wave” and not a separate drop…
    and not “ocean only” which cannot be defined… if i understood correctly…

    however… i don’t quit get how it can be said… others also have said it… that there is no connection between enlightenment & behaviour…
    didn’t Wayne say that in enlightenment there is no hate only love…
    well… love behaves quite differently than hate… in my observations…

    so from this perspective … why wouldn’t every one who awakens … matures to enlightenment… and swimming in love… behave saintly for the benefit of mankind… even in ignorance, there is encouragement to develop ones talents fully… rather than waste them…

    overall a very good presentation… adding some clarity… and some further inquiry…

    ps ~ after listening to so many different teachers… cannot help but notice… that different life circumstances… do flavor the expressions of “awakening” and/or “enlightenment” differently… to take quite a different example… of Swami Lakshmana & his disciple whose meditations included withdrawal of senses inward… and absorption into silence … obviously would give a different flavour to the awakening process… happening in meditation… than walking down a street… or listening to a satsang talk…

  44. “however… i don’t quit get how it can be said… others also have said it… that there is no connection between enlightenment & behaviour… didn’t Wayne say that in enlightenment there is no hate only love… well… love behaves quite differently than hate… in my observations” – anantol

    I don’t recall Wayne saying “in enlightenment there is no hate only love”. What I do recall, however, is Wayne saying that enlightenment is “absence” and without qualities or attributes.

    Love is a quality/attribute; so is unconditional love. And I don’t think that Wayne would agree that they are qualities of enlightenment.

    Wayne, if you are reading this thread, feel free clarify your words on this issue.

  45. Peter… i posted it in general comments by mistake… should have been here…
    in the general comments… Peter has an objection to my interpretation of Wayne’s words:
    Anatol: “however… i don’t quit get how it can be said… others also have said it… that there is no connection between enlightenment & behaviour…
    didn’t Wayne say that in enlightenment there is no hate only love…
    well… love behaves quite differently than hate… in my observations…”

    instead of :
    “didn’t Wayne say that in enlightenment there is no hate only love…”
    i should have said… to be more accurate:
    “Wayne said that in a sage[ i assume enlightened ] hatred cannot arise… ”

    also concerning “behaviour & enlightenment not linked”…
    Wayne first used the qualifier… “totally”… then “essentially”… then in an unlikely example “theoretically” … all this makes it quite fuzzy… not really descriptive anymore… but somewhat “hypothetical” … so for me… it’s still a valid query…

  46. Thank you as well, chuckee. For planting seeds that I enjoy watering so much. You are a noteworthy seedsower.

    “Non dual is a direct experience for me often, and yet I pay more attention to the objects of thought. And I know for an experiential fact, thoughts are literally non existent. I’m blown away by the whole thing.”

    Regarding how much you attention you give to X in comparison to how much attention you give to Y… try giving this comparison a break, chuckee. Instead, re-cognize that sometimes you pay attention to X and sometimes you pay attention to Y. It-is-what-it-is, and that is perfectly acceptable to you. It-is-what-it-is… and that is all that there is to pay attention to. Comparison is what we add to it-is-what-it-is to keep the appearance of duality in place, and to delay its natural dis-appearance.

    “For me, it seems more like I don’t believe the words I speak here.”

    And that, my friend, is evidence to me that you have, in fact, tasted the appearance of duality for what it is.

  47. Quote Anatol:
    – ¨however… i don’t quit get how it can be said… others also have said it… that there is no connection between enlightenment & behaviour…
    didn’t Wayne say that in enlightenment there is no hate only love…
    well… love behaves quite differently than hate… in my observations…

    so from this perspective … why wouldn’t every one who awakens … matures to enlightenment… and swimming in love… behave saintly for the benefit of mankind… even in ignorance, there is encouragement to develop ones talents fully… rather than waste them…¨ –

    Wayne did indeed say something along the lines that it´s not possible to be enlightened and hate at the same time. You can get angry and so forth, but not hate. Perhaps because at the root of hate lies suffering. I don´t remember him specifically stating that there is only love in enlightenment, although he may imply this, ( perhaps in the sense that love can express itself in many different ways. )

    Wayne stated (and I´m paraphrasing) that essentially there is no connection between enlightenment and behavior. The key-word here is of course ´essentially.´
    He made it quite clear that it´s highly, highly unlikely that some sort of Hitler would be enlightened.
    And after this ´highly unlikely-part´ he said that that in enlightenment there is no place for hate. For me this added a Huge layer of precaution. Because not only is it very, very unlikely that a Hitler-type will be enlightened, also this Hitler-type should be free of hate. Well, I don´t think that in our life-time we have witnessed a Hitler-type who was free of hate. But from this does not follow that there is an essential link between behavior and enlightenment (essential still being the key-word.)

    And like Wayne said, what´s saintly in one culture doesn´t have to be saintly in another culture. Some saints are enlightened and some enlightened people are saints. In our western world Ramana for sure wouldn´t be a saint: just sitting there all day, not getting his hands dirty.

    I guess I start appreciating people like Florian Schlosser and Benthino Massaro more and more because they (in my view at least) recognize that we are humans with all kinds of emotions and temperaments. And by acknowledging this fully without clinging to some idealized sainthood naturalnesses starts to blossom. Negative behavior patterns are also welcome, in the sense that they are fully recognized, and paradoxically in doing so goodness get´s the upper hand. Well, perhaps I´m getting a bit off-topic here.

  48. Regarding Wayne’s teaching that behaviour and enlightenment aren’t linked, remember that he now differentiates between awakening and enlightenment whereas he once didn’t (or so I recall him saying that to Rick).

    Awakening, to use a metaphor that he enjoys, is an aspect of the wave. And it certainly affects the movement (AKA behaviour) of the wave.

    Enlightenment, on the other hand and according to Wayne, is aspect-free. Both the wave and the ocean are absent in enlightenment, as are all aspects such as love (and its glorified version of unconditional) and behaviour.

    That is what I heard when I carefully listened to Wayne’s teachings.

    Not offering any opinions, here, of his teachings. Just reflecting what I heard.

  49. “I’ve never been taught or learned any specific meditation practice. But for whatever reason, it seems I’ve always had an innate ability to hit the mind’s mute button, and to rest easily in a meditative state.” – snowleopard

    Thank you for sharing that, snowleopard.

    I will tell you, also, that insight meditation invites you to:

    1) have no desire of affecting the quality and quantity of thoughts that appear for your to observe, and;

    2) observe the “meditative state” that you describe as just another appearance… yes, you guessed it… for you to observe for the sole purpose of observing it.

    Thanks again.

  50. “Love allows for the full range of one’s emotional polarities to come and go. However, it seems that none of those emotions can really take hold for long, as there is no attachment to them … ‘unconditional’ Love remains unaffected.” – snowleopard

    I don’t own stock in any particular set of labels, so I don’t have a vested interest in seeing one rise above the other.

    I do recognize, however, that the descriptor “unconditional love” does come with some baggage that some of us have been conditioned to accept as part and parcel of its meaning. All meanings being relative, of course.

    If one uses unconditional love to mean unequivocal acceptance of whatever is appearing here and now, then the shoe fits for me. It doesn’t if it includes any additional aspect.

    Love, however, is often a self-centered and -driven notion. Including its variation of an unconditional one.

  51. *offers a potentially heretical view*

    Love is one of many ingredients that holds the appearance of separation intact. That’s neither good or bad, mind you; just is what it is.

    I have never met a love, in all of its manifestations, that didn’t include a subject and object (the main construct of the appearance of separation), snowleopard. To include the manifestation of unconditional love.

    In the absence of the appearance of separation between you and me, where is love if there is no subject and object?

  52. Hey, chuckee.

    If you ever feel so inclined, here is a simple meditational exercise for you.

    1) listen to this Dharma talk with the fullest attention that is available to you at the moment;

    http://dharmaseed.org/talks/audio_player/79/13543.html

    2) as you are listening to Guy’s talk, observe the thoughts that appear in your mind in response to Guy’s comments;

    3) you will be listening for the purpose of dis-covering the thoughts that appear in your mind in response to Guy’s comments;

    4) regardless of the nature of the thoughts (agreeing, dis-agreeing, critical, approving, etc.), just observe them as they appear and dis-appear (I have no doubt that many of Guy’s comments will trigger them for you); and,

    5) that’s it. Nothing more, and nothing less.

    Our responses to another person’s comments, on the subjects that are near and dear to us, have more to teach us then the comments themselves.

    Enjoy, should you choose to have a taste of this meditational entree.

  53. seems that LIFE has two aspects… never-changing( enlightenment ) & ever-changing( behavior )…

    sounds like duality doesn’t it… especially if we say that there is no link between the two…

    and in the process of awakening… before enlightenment… what actually happens first, it seems…

    is that the “unity of ignorance”… is broken by awareness separating from its almost total absorption in the objects…

    perhaps separation of awareness from absorption in objects is aided in meditation by being absorbed into silence instead…
    or it can just happen out of the blue intensely enough for no rational reason…
    OR… last hug from Amma seems to have lifted another small veil… (i’m a slow student)… now all words seem like “lies”… including mine… yet those “lies” are part of life… and for whatever reason.. fun to share here… at least for NOW…

    and awareness being aware of awareness alone feels like unity… oneness… not-two… until you begin to act( behave )… and it’s lost again…

    in the maturing process of awakening… eventually the never-changing aspect is not lost even while behaving…
    so… the “unity of awareness & objects”… is now back again … not in ignorance… but in the light of awareness… enlightenment…

    so… inherent in the ocean and wave analogy… seems to me… there is the strongest link possible between ocean( enlightenment ) and wave( behavior ) … and it seems obvious what that link is…

    LOVE ! unconditioned love

    [ perhaps “unconditioned” will sit better with Peter than “unconditional” ]

  54. If we were to say that that the happening of ´all that is the case´ is a total mystery, a mystery in which even sheer Existence ultimately might just be a fleeting soap bubble, then I would say that we could call this Total Openness. And I personally wouldn´t have a problem to equate this incomprehensible Openness with Unconditional Love. But this has to to be so pure that no human could even bear
    0,1 %.

    Well, enough metaphysics for today. And, btw: the notion that even Existence ultimately might just be a concept doesn´t mean that it can be denied within this human realm (that´s asking for trouble.) As long as there is existence appearing, then there is existence (no matter how contingent.) No man can go beyond that. Ha ha, my ´disclaimer´ is almost longer then my initial post.

  55. I have no desire to spoil anyone’s love affair with unconditional or unconditioned love, lest anyone be tempted to suspect that I do.

    Love whatever it is you are inclined to love, at the moment. You are exactly where you need to be. Love affairs included.

    As for…

    “so… inherent in the ocean and wave analogy… seems to me… there is the strongest link possible between ocean( enlightenment ) and wave( behavior ) … and it seems obvious what that link is… LOVE ! unconditioned love” – anatol

    Wayne would say, I believe, that waves and the ocean are absent in enlightenment. As is any and every aspect that is definable by a wave.

    I presently resonate with Wayne’s perspective. Remembering, however, that all of my resonances are subject to change.

  56. Peter: “4) regardless of the nature of the thoughts (agreeing, dis-agreeing, critical, approving, etc.), just observe them as they appear and dis-appear”

    I find this kind of instruction very very confusing. I am told to observe thoughts, but what does that mean? How can I NOT observe a thought? The fact that it exists means that it is already observed, right? What more should be done? Everybody is observing their thoughts, otherwise they couldn’t have them. Can you explain it in more detail, Peter?

  57. Peter: “Wayne would say, I believe, that waves and the ocean are absent in enlightenment. As is any and every aspect that is definable by a wave.” …

    i say… ok… call it “absence”… enlightenment or whatever… “ocean-wave” is just another pointer to that… IMV… and notice that all pointers are dualistic…

    my point is that it is also called by many … as pure un-manifest un-conditioned love…

    “love” is not just your understanding of “relational dualistic love” with all its baggage as you say…

    it is said… the un-manifest… staying as the un-manifest… by its “movement” manifests as the ever changing relative…

    the “first impulse” of that “manifestation” is “love” … which still looks pure and un-conditioned… which some experience at their heart center… like i related in some post …

    however… as it proceeds into grosser manifestations it gets distorted… by various dualistic expressions …. and becomes the many various relational loves… and in the extreme… is distorted even into hate…

    this “unconditioned love” that SL & me are talking about has been also mentioned by some of the interviewees here… to name a few… Burt Harding… Jan Esmann… Swami Radhanath… Timothy Conway… maybe Joel… Joi… and several others… if i remember correctly…

    this brings up the question… why teachers are expressing so differently… well it appears that “awakening” happens in different ways…

    Adyashanti supposedly says that full awakening has to include… head-awakening… heart-awakening… and gut-awakening… ref: https://batgap.com/sandra-glickman/comment-page-1/#comment-83 … maybe Rick can ask Adya when he interviews him…

    Jan Esmann… explained clearly the TM stages of awakening… CC, GC, UC… and how duality/unity interplay… and views change…

    awakening of the kundalini shakti serpent rising as energy to crown chakra & uniting there… did Jan explain this also … maybe Swami G & Sarojini…

    Swami Lakshmana & Mata SaradAmma… explained the “i”-ego-thought dissolving in the “heart” … Sarojini also touched on this partially…

    the lady who almost got murdered… her first “awakening” was via a powerful love-energy filling her body… which no doubt kept her alive somehow… through a horrendous ordeal… we cannot just sweep all these experiences under the carpet because they don’t fit the “current non-duality talk”

    perhaps the reason many avoid opening of the heart is because… opening of the heart can be very painful… this was said by Amma, Karunamayi and others…

    “You are Love” ~ Amma

  58. “I find this kind of instruction very very confusing. I am told to observe thoughts, but what does that mean? How can I NOT observe a thought? The fact that it exists means that it is already observed, right? What more should be done? Everybody is observing their thoughts, otherwise they couldn’t have them. Can you explain it in more detail, Peter?’ – Brian

    Your contention, Brian, that “everyone is observing their thoughts” is revealing of what observing means to you.

    Everyone may, in fact, not be observing their thoughts.

    Observing a thought that appears to you is not the same as identifying with it.

    In point of fact, most people are identifying with their thoughts, which is not the same as observing them.

    And unless you observe this process of thought identification for what it is, it is perfectly understandable to confuse thought observation with thought identification.

    The two are not the same.

    Which is why certain forms of meditation are particularly helpful.

    To observe thought identification that may be appearing… in response to that thought appearing.

    Thought observation is simply noting the appearance and dis-appearance of a thought.

    Without the response of identifying with it.

    And if there is an identifying response that appears too…

    then that just be-comes something else to note/observe.

    The best answer to your question, however, still lies in the practice of mediation.

    Where you are able to observe both the appearance of a thought… and any commensurate identifying responses that it may trigger.

  59. P.S. I forgot to include some good news, Brian.

    The observation of the thought identification process also happens to diminish its frequency of re-occurence.

    Just being aware of it (not conceptually, but actually observing it), reduces its proclivity to automatically respond to certain thoughts.

    Thought ownership isn’t just a concept. You can actually observe the claiming process of a thought… to be “my” thought… in certain meditational practices.

    Thanks again.

  60. I am no expert on the true self or realization, first off. I do have reservations about what Mr. Liquorman said about earnestness. If one has not the free will to choose to be earnest and sincere, which is a big if, then the only option I can think of is to wait for such to come along the pike, or to pray, if you accept you cannot be earnest or become so by your own devices. Is this what is recommended with regard to earnestness, that we can but wait for it to occur? I took another gander at the classic by Nisargadatta, I AM THAT, and I see that he gives directives often, to be earnest and sincere. And I quote, “Experiment with any theory you like–if you are earnest and honest, the attainment of reality will be yours…But they are all of some value, only if you are in dead earnest. It is the earnestness that liberates and not the theory.” “Your sincerity will guide you. Devotion to the goal of freedom will make you abandon…” In this and numerous other passages, Niz is not talking descriptively; he is clearly urging one to be earnest. His own Guru told him the same thing, and I can’t find the passage now, sadly, but he says that he believed him and followed his word, not that he helplessly waited until he happened to be earnest. He put the teachings to use right away, with earnestness; I don’t see how it is possible to argue against this. Yes, he also argues against agency and doership all over the place. So, there seems to be a tension here, perhaps we may say a paradox, which I think Liquorman is missing. In order to make Niz consistent we would agree with Liquorman’s view that he could not have been prescriptive (substituting Niz for Ramesh here). If anyone can shed any light on this, feel free. Do you really think you can’t be earnest? Have you looked earnestly at it? One may try to be earnest and fail, I do not dispute that at all, but the fact is that one can try and try again. it seems asinine to doubt that. Maybe the reconciliation is that L. would agree that one can try, but the success of it, whether you would succeed in being earnest is ultimately not up to you and I would agree with that. But, does that mean one should not try to be earnest since it is ultimately not under one’s control? Why give up before you know anyhow?

    I am impressed and intrigued with this inversion which he articulates between the normative view that one has to die to the self and become one with the ocean, realize that one’s self is false and identify with the ocean itself, which always implied a sense of vastness to me, that I would no longer be the little me, but identify with the immensity while still being in the body somehow. Not sure how one would not be fried by it though, what with the body and the immensity. It is difficult to tease out his argument for me on this crucial point. He says you are not the space in which events occur, which is what my understanding is, I think. He argues that the ocean IS the movement of the waves, not the usual view that, this is hard to get at, the true essence of the wave is the ocean. If I get this, it is the reverse, that the movement of the waves, without a separate sense of self, is the Self; there is not a noumenon behind the phenomenon of which the phenomenon is hiding. I definitely think there is something key there.

    On his point that enlightenment has nothing to do with behavior, I think he himself does qualify this, saying that naturally the enlightened one would not feel like harming others or hating others, so it seems to contradict his position. It is interesting to note that no less a one than Amritanandamayi speaks similarly about the non-relationship between morality and enlightenment, saying that nevertheless the enlightened ought to act morally for the sake of others; I would have to dig further to be sure, but I recall this idea that would agree with Liquorman, that the avadhutas are free from morality, but I always took that as relative, in the sense that they would, I assume, act from a higher morality, might throw excrement in your face, if they thought you needed that. In that sense they would be the most truly moral, not the least, but I am not clear on this.

    Rick, a very impressive interview, one of your best! Exactly the right questions in the right places. Kudos.

  61. Bentinho Massaro … “When I don’t define you, I automatically love you. Where did we get the notion love needs to be cultivated? All attempts to create love are rooted in ignorance. Love is your natural state. Relax all definitions and desires for 2 seconds and experience the love of Being that remains. This Love is not limited to one direction, it shines in all directions equally, like the sun.”

  62. “Everyone may, in fact, not be observing their thoughts.”

    Are you talking about taking some kind of mental notes, or do you mean just being nonconceptually aware of thought? Because nonconceptual awareness is automatic, so in that sense everyone is always observing…

  63. @Avram: When listening to Liquorman for me the keyword is: ´essentially.´ Wayne has this manner of keeping things as clear cut as possible. All his answers are boiled down to the most essential core. Perhaps he does this because he knows that he is usually speaking to people who were seekers for quite some time now, people who tried just about anything in the new-age marketplace but without success.

    So, essentially, there is no one to be earnest. But I´m pretty sure he doesn´t say that this means that on the personal level of the seeker drinking beer all day is just as fruitful as meditation.

    And again, essentially, there is no link between behavior and enlightenment. Perhaps we would have a nicer world if everyone were enlightened, as there is no longer room for hate. But this doesn´t mean people won´t have arguments anymore and do things they will regret. That´s part of the humanness. And like Wayne said, what´s good behavior in one culture can be seen as bad in another.
    I think Wayne doesn´t deny that enlightenment leads to a more natural behavior. But he is not stating: Enlightenment=Sainthood
    Are there actually people who disagree with this?

    I think we really have to give kudo´s to Rick for his way of prying, to get things a bit more clearer. If it weren’t for these questions perhaps Wayne would have come across as someone who disregards any process of maturing.

  64. Ha ha, actually a nice thought. Got my calculator out. After 10 years you would have 488281250 awakened peeps. After 11 years: 2441406250. After 12 years *drum roll*: 1.2207031250!! 🙂 Over ten billion, and counting!

    But of course for this everyone has to become some sort of teacher. What if only one out of twenty get in some sort of teaching mode. Really have to use my brain for that one, unless there is some sort of simple formula to calculate a thing like this.

  65. “Are you talking about taking some kind of mental notes, or do you mean just being nonconceptually aware of thought? Because nonconceptual awareness is automatic, so in that sense everyone is always observing” – Brian

    The latter, of course.

    And non-conceptual awareness is not automatic for most folks. Thought identification is. And, as I mentioned earlier, thought identification is not thought observation.

    When you are under the spell of a hypnotic induction, you are not aware of it.

    Once you become aware of it, you are no longer under its spell.

    Most people’s thoughts and actions are hypnotically induced and aren’t aware of it.

  66. Peter: “When you are under the spell of a hypnotic induction, you are not aware of it.”

    Oh, come on. If you are not aware of it, then how do you even know it? Somebody told you or you read it in a book? Of course you have to be aware of it.

  67. Being aware of a thought… and how you respond to it, if at all… is not the same as “knowing” it.

    Your conflation of the two is not uncommon as well. It’s familiar conflation to many.

    A dedicated meditation practice will help you to see the difference.

  68. Peter: “Being aware of a thought… and how you respond to it, if at all… is not the same as “knowing” it. A dedicated meditation practice will help you to see the difference.”

    So are you able to explain the difference or do I have to meditate? Because as you know, I am too lazy to do that.

  69. SL: “One wonders also what Wayne means by “vast forces” … very mysterious these forces :]]”

    just received email from a friend… who attended his mother’s funeral… and several days later… his nephew’s funeral … whose car ran into a tree…

    he spoke at both funerals in a Catholics church… and was moved to sing a Vedic chant… during which he felt the Presence of many beings… very mysterious … indeed… but simply due to our lack of expanded awareness…

    BTW… i am not implying that this is what Wayne L meant…

  70. No, I am not, Brian. Able to explain it, that is.

    Thoughts have a FEEL to them. As does every form.

    I cannot explain the FEEL of a thought.

    “Knowing” a thought, from my personal experience, is an aspect of identifying with it.

    Or “I know (fill in the thought)”.

    Observing it is a whole different matter.

    In fact, observing it opens the door to being able to FEEL it.

    That’s the best I can do, at the moment.

    As to being ‘lazy” about anything, baby steps always precede more mature ones.

    And we all take baby steps in a venture that is new to us.

    Here’s to you enjoying your baby steps in meditation.

  71. Peter, are you open to the possibility that thoughts do not have FEEL to them, because the connection is just another thought? Something like this:

    1. thought A

    2. feeling B

    3. thought C with message “A has B”

    Thought is not sufficient to prove the connection of thought and feeling and there really is nothing more than a subsequent thought to connect the previous two…

  72. “Peter, are you open to the possibility that thoughts do not have FEEL to them, because the connection is just another thought?” – Brian

    Yep. Been there, done it. Had that very view once. So I’m very familiar with it.

    Have a totally different view now, however.

    You can’t FEEL a thought via a thought.

    Can’t FEEL it if you identify with it.

    For obvious reasons.

  73. ~ awareness & witnessing ~

    Amma ~ “Many came to enjoy Amma’s bhajans and were moved deeply by their darshan, experiencing the peace and bliss found in Her presence. The venue was filled to capacity for the Atma Puja which was lead by Amma on the final night, followed by Satsang in which Amma said: “A house or car needs maintenance throughout its lifetime; only then can we use it properly. The mind is our most valuable inner equipment. Does it not need constant maintenance? Only if it is maintained well can we use it whenever we need it. How can we maintain our mind well? We should always observe our thoughts and expectations. If we do this we will be able to nourish good thoughts and reject negative ones. Most houses have fire-alarms fitted in them; when the temperature level soars, the alarms ring, the fire engine arrives and does its best to rescue people. Awareness is the fire alarm of the mind. Now we have knowledge but no awareness. We should bring awareness into our minds.”

    please note that Amma uses plain language… not PC non-duality talk… so that plain people can “understand” …

    my comment using a little bit of non-duality talk ~ addressing awareness & witnessing ~

    in ignorance… awareness is self-absorbed into objects, thoughts, feelings… of perception…
    the degree of awareness is very very little… and we could say not at all… when a person is in a rage of anger…

    Amma uses this most simple example as a starting point for understanding how to “practice” witnessing of thoughts/feeling/behavior… (in my words ) … when we watch out neighbors in an argument… our awareness will not be as self-absorbed as it would be if we were the ones arguing… so watching our neighbors arguing without attachment… we can see with some clarity the silly-ness of their argument… however as soon as we start taking sides… our awareness is being self-absorbed/hypnotized … and our clarity diminishes…

    of course, from a practical POV, discrimination may be necessary to restrain one or both of them… even call the police if appropriate… the appropriateness of our response will be due to amount of clarity-awareness present … on the other hand as Tolle points out and i have experienced this… in the calmness of [our] Presence, the argument might diminish and dissolve…

    so witnessing is something we can do… and do do to some extent… throughout the day… “noticing” it would enhance it…

    of course… many spiritual practices can be a great aid… because most spiritual practices help to slow down the mind… allow it to relax and become more silent… increasing the gaps between thoughts… and that’s when clearer witnessing can happen… IMV “noticing” is the key… whether in meditation or activity… or watching a breath-taking snow leopard in the beautiful mountains…

    “noticing” is sort of like “attentive-relaxed-listening”… because of “earnestness”…

    Mooji ~ “don’t make tattoos out of any utterances” … which are merely pointers which may or may not help you be more aware of… awareness… silence/peace… love… light…

  74. there is a wonderful book “The Game of God” which proposes the following… God the unlimited-infinite-perfection… had a limitation… being unable to experience “limitation” … God came up with a plan… “amnesia” … http://www.gameofgod.com/

    “In order to have a realistic experience of limitation, God must forget that She-He-It is God. The universe is, in fact, God in a self-induced state of amnesia… The universe is a game in which God forgets His-Her-Its identity and in the process of playing remembers who She-He-It is… Evolution is the process of God awakening from self-induced amnesia into the remembrance of His-Her-Its true identity. ”

    this book is quite practical… and chapter 11 includes the 12 steps of AA program …

  75. Peter: “You can’t FEEL a thought via a thought.”

    Yes, that is exactly right. “I feel thought” is only another thought. Without it, there would be only thought and feeling, unconnected. How do you know that the thought and feeling are connected with each other? That is just a belief, a thought, innit? All we have are perceptions, thoughts and feelings appearing to us moment to moment one after another and any story about connections between them is just another thought appearing and disappearing…

  76. anatol: “awareness is self-absorbed into objects, thoughts, feelings…”

    The fact that there is a knowledge of absorbtion indicates that the knower is not absorbed. The knowledge of “bad/good thought” indicates that the knower is neither good nor bad. The awareness has no objective qualities, because it is that which knows these qualities. The knower is not the known. That which is seen cannot see…

  77. Isn’t there a duality between the waves, “what is,” and what cannot be experienced, the ocean itself? He says “the ocean IS the motion of the waves.” Equating them. but, he also says that the ocean is beyond quality and cannot be experienced. Can he have it both ways?

  78. to Aj/
    the world is complex full of complex numbers but they teach kids 1+1 =2 1+2=3
    simple addition but we have in nature complex expontial multiplication-
    by division and to add there is no steght lines.
    all these false assumption destroy the genious of the children because they
    were created with beautiful mind that wants to know eveything( by false assumption i mean the simple addition and lines go to infinit- there is no such thing) and no sun rise ( it is rather sun take or sun view)( these ideas
    need time to correc-/
    any way i thought i add this not realted to the first comment-

    who knows if the calculation even close to this idea of 5 /may be each
    teacher have only 1 awake in each year-

    if you like numbers may be you would like the book / super crunchers-

  79. “Yes, that is exactly right. “I feel thought” is only another thought. Without it, there would be only thought and feeling, unconnected. How do you know that the thought and feeling are connected with each other? That is just a belief, a thought, innit?” – Brian

    Where did the “I feel thought” come from? I said that you can FEEL thought… as it appears and dis-appears… from observing it, as opposed to identifying with it.

    You’re assuming, I suspect, that there is a thought, i.e. “I feel thought” which accompanies the FEEL of the thought.

    Very rarely is there.

    If you ever observed any form thought-lessly for an extended period of time, you might dis-cover that that form has a FEEL to it. A FEEL that is not necessarily accompanied by a thought.

    Out of curiosity, Brian, what is the longest period of time that you experienced thought-lessness? It might help me to understand why you see thoughts in the spaces between thoughts.

  80. Peter: “Where did the “I feel thought” come from? I said that you can FEEL thought…”

    That’s just getting silly.
    Peter, let’s reduce the complexity of the world for a while and accept a simple model of a stream of perceptions, thoughts and feelings (PTF) appearing to awareness moment after moment (if you look closely, everything can be broken down to a combination of PTF). I am saying that connections between any of the PTF are nothing but thoughts, that’s all.

  81. Consider the reply “I have yet to experience that, Peter” instead of “that’s just getting silly”, Brian.

    Why close the door on an experience you have yet to have by dismissing it as silly?

    Your certainty is impressive. Uncertainty, however, encompasses a lot more possibilities.

  82. Peter, sometimes you get to a point where experience isn’t a valid source of information to you anymore, because it is fleeting and illusory. But it points to something beyond, which is not temporary or in any way limited – you, the experiencer. And you can’t experience that.

  83. in order to observe thought you need intensity according to K/
    in the early days 1975 I was able to do it one day or night and it
    was particularly clear o – the thought was chasing itself-
    it is there or somwhere near the movment of beauty arrives
    oh such being if it could stay it leads to the death of the me-
    of course being young it comes back in another form and the
    exploration has to start agian – the subtility of thought takes
    over-
    who knows the effort spent in those few years might bring
    results even in the slumps of long lived life and degneration.
    how about that for an explantion/
    thought is all the past including feelings and emotions stored-
    as Nasrdin would possibly say : the old stuff i did might bring
    some results- you know his joke about the banquete- the imaginary
    one.

  84. “There is no ‘thing’ beyond experiencing.”

    Sure, to see the experiencer beyond, you would have to experience it, there is no other way to know it. But then it would become just another experience. So you cannot ever know yourself directly, only in negation (timeless, unlimited…). Yet your own existence is doubtless, because you cannot say “I am not”.

  85. Well, some of us are not content with 24/7 experiencing and seek to know the Truth beyond. The need and urge to know ourselves is simply there and we are driven to seek until the thirst is fully quenched… At least that’s how it’s with me. Seek and you shall find.

  86. “Peter, sometimes you get to a point where experience isn’t a valid source of information to you anymore, because it is fleeting and illusory. But it points to something beyond, which is not temporary or in any way limited….” – Brian

    And the practice of mediation might reveal that, behind the above temporary observation that is being strongly grasped by an impermanent mind, lurks the desire for permanency. Or that which is not temporary or impermanent.

    If there’s any truth to the age-old adage that “what you are looking for determines what you see”, then it may be helpful to dis-cover the desire for permanency that is driving the temporary observation of a permanent thingamjig (call it Self or Whatever).

    Mediation can be a helpful tool to dis-cover what is motivating the temporary observations that one is grasping with the fist of belief.

    BTW, what would you suspect you might observe if the desire for permanency was absent?

    Perhaps nothing more and nothing less than… a temporary and impermanent appearance (me, you, etc.)… (ap)perceiving other temporary and impermanent appearances (thoughts, feelings, material objects, etc.) for what they are: temporary and impermanent appearances.

  87. Well, it goes without saying that for something temporary and impermanent to be known there has to be a timeless and permanent screen against which it is perceived. The desire to know it can come to its fulfillment once you realize your identity with the screen.

  88. Now that’s an interesting notion, Brian.

    The impermanent wanting to know the permanent.

    Is that similar to hot wanting to know cold? Or sadness wanting to know happiness? Or untruth wanting to know truth? Or even presence wanting to know absence?

    That desire would certainly be an interesting temporary appearance to observe. Especially outside the confines of being identified with that desire.

    But as long as we identify ourselves with a particular desire (i.e. the impermanent wanting to know the permanent), we’ll only see what we’ll see within the confines of that identified desire.

    Thanks.

  89. “True wisdom may be ‘knowing’ how much one doesn’t know. True freedom may be just experiencing and being at peace with that … Who knows?”

    I am here to find out, that’s the only thing that matters to me. Ending the search with “Who knows?” is by far not enough. I can’t understand how one can be ok with just that 😀

  90. Peter, how could a temporary desire confine That which is unlimited and permanent?

  91. “Peter, how could a temporary desire confine That which is unlimited and permanent?” Brian

    Peter didn’t say that a temporary desire confines, Brian. Peter said “as long as we identify ourselves with a particular desire….”.

    The key ingredient in what Peter said what the identification process, that is afoot, with our thoughts feelings, desires, etc…. that form the boundaries for our experiences.

    Have you observed that identification process with either a thought, feeling, or belief within you?

  92. Since I enjoy being open to all possibilities, Brian, whenever I can, I am open to the possibility that I may be meeting someone, for the first time in my life, who doesn’t experience any identification with any beliefs of his.

    If that’s the case, this would be a very special moment indeed.

  93. “Have you observed that identification process with either a thought, feeling, or belief within you?”

    Yeah, of course. But the Witness that we ultimately are is never confined by anything, identification included. Only when we imagine ourselves to be something what we are not do we feel being confined by identification. Even then, the constraint is still just imaginary.

  94. The sense of a separate and independent self is nothing by the by-product of identifying with our thoughts and beliefs, Brian.

    It’s what appears… when the appearance of identifying with a thought… appears.

    When the latter appears, the former appears as well. They are joined at the hip. Siamese twins, so-to-speak.

    Absent the latter, the former is absent.

    Which is why the observation of thought identification is such as a helpful exercise… in dis-covering the appearance/dis-appearance nature of a separate and independent self.

    And to be perfectly honest with you, Brain, the identification with the belief that “there is no one to be identifying with a thought”… may still be:

    1) a thought identification in itself, and;

    2) a neat veil to hide the thought identification from observation.

  95. And to be perfectly honest with you, Brain, the identification with the belief that “there is no one to be identifying with a thought”…

    Of course, that’s why you have to honestly investigate and really see for yourself whether it is true. It cannot stay on the level of belief. I wish you a happy investigation, Peter. 🙂

  96. Thank you, Brian. You as well.

    Consider, however, that it may be more helpful to discern HOW you are believing what you are believing, than it is to discern the content of your belief.

    The content of the belief is inconsequential [i.e. “no one is there to (fill in the blank)]. The claiming of it as “my belief”, on the other hand, is what creates the sense of a separate and individual self.

    Happy trails!

  97. “Consider, however, that it may be more helpful to discern HOW you are believing what you are believing, than it is to discern the content of your belief.”

    Have you read my last post, Peter? I am not talking about belief, I am talking about direct investigation based on actual evidence. You can play with the HOW of beliefs, but until you get your hands dirty and actually look for yourself, it will all remain only a nice useless theory.

  98. You used the term “honestly investigate”, Brian. That can mean many things to many people. And I’m unclear what an honest investigation means to you.

    I tried to be clear re. what my own personal experience has revealed to me.

    And that is…

    the sense of a separate and independent self arises when thought identification arises.

    Observe thought identification in the works, and you’ll observe the arising of the sense of a separate and individual self.

    I am unclear, however, re. what you mean by “honestly investigate”.

    I’ll check by later for that clarification.

  99. “Observe thought identification in the works, and you’ll observe the arising of the sense of a separate and individual self.”

    OK, but can you actually find that self, or is there only a sense of it? If it is only a sense, then the statement “there is no one to be identifying with a thought” is indeed true, right? And that’s how we investigate 😉

  100. “Listening’ to the conversation with Wayne … what was noticeable from this ‘listening’ is that Wayne began many of his replies to Rick with the use of the word “WELL” … and within our description of the Architectural of the Mind (Architectural Redirection) our research has proven over and over that the idiomatic use of the word “WELL” generally points to the absence of any duplication of the previous communication … hence, we would SAY that the answers were originating from a field of … I ALREADY KNOW … the sign of some authority … and to arrive at what we might describe as ENLIGHTENMENT or WITNESS CONSCIOUSNESS or KNOWING … one must travel from the inauthentic expression and time based reply from the realm of … I ALREADY KNOW to I DON’T KNOW to arrive at KNOWING or WITNESSING what’s happening or not happening … in order words to BE present without any story irrespective of how enlightening that story might sound. In our models of Triangulation and The Absolute Abstraction we embrace the universal nature of how the mind is structured beginning at around two years of age … and in that sense … we agree to what Wayne described in his conversation. We describe that birth as the beginning of The Little Man or The Little Woman on our shoulder and we have laid out the vocabulary of The Little Man … even though Wayne says that he pays no attention to pronouns. While Rick’s questions were intended to get to the source of Wayne’s ABSENCE … we would SAY that Wayne was very much THERE by his reactive replies beginning with the word “WELL”.

    You are invited to DIS-BELIEVE everything stated herein and perhaps this message will resonate to Rick and several others.

    Love,

    Robert Warren

  101. Previous comment erroneously described ARCHITECTURE of the MIND … as ARCHITECTURAL of the MIND. This model allows users to identify the compartment of the mind by witnessing the idiomatic use of language.

  102. Thanks for your response Snowleopard. Just wondering what the letters “IMO” are intended to communicate. I’ll take a look at the general comments except what I’d SAY is that accidents are the result of BEING out of sequence. And by that … all I’m pointing to is the difference between THINKING and KNOWING which is the bottom line to all of our writings/coaching. I don’t know the protocol, yet … about writing into your response and if you find I’m coloring outside the lines of this website, please don’t hesitate to ‘coach’ me. I’m a self ordained Business, Sports, Health and Life Architectect and innovator of Architectural Redirection … a science for the 21st Century and Beyond. I’d be more than happy to talk to you on SKYPE … if you have it … with a FREE consultation which I promise will clear up any mystery or misunderstandings as to the source of accidents. I’ve watched thousands of tennis balls … golf shots … and business transactions during our research and coaching to arrive at Architectural Redirection. During this SKYPE call I’ll provide you with a diagram of your mind which will be similar to all other minds and show you how to defragment the structure that seemingly is causing UNFORCED errors in your life. Thanks again for your inquiry and I’ll take a look at the general comments and I promise you that my response will be about noticing the difference between THINKING and WITNESSING/KNOWING. Robert

  103. Snowleopard … If the point of your accident prone still doesn’t resonate to the last comment I posted please don’t hesitate to clarify … even though you may recognize that I would prefer to demonstrate what a fragmented mind looks like compared to a defragged mind. A fragmented mind can claim ANYTHING whereas a mind that is clear will not engage in whether practices work or don’t work. For me … it works to keep organic food in the house … it simply works to practice ‘conscious’ breathing … ‘conscious’ speaking/listening … it works to honor my promises … it doesn’t work to attempt to manage the promises of others … it works to notice what took place before hitting the tennis ball in the net and what followed. If what follows an accident is a rational thought then the thinking/behavior is reenforced instead of being cleared from the unconscious. If this is getting to be a mind bending exercise please don’t think it needs to be continued. Thanks, Robert.

  104. Robert you sound like other nondualist who think they know
    how to get out of your problem- dont be so confident.

  105. Thanks Tim … and the only way to KNOW the difference between the words in writing and a HIGHLY INTERACTIVE CONVERSATION with one’s mind would be to ENGAGE in such a transformational conversation. Perhaps I only SOUND like a non-dualist due to your thinking … yes? Inside the realm of ANYTHING’S POSSIBLE which might be another way to describe non-duality it’s possible for me to sound like a non-dualist to you and to sound like a dualistic person to one addicted to the idea of non-dualism. I appreciate your point of view about the words you’ve managed to limit by your understanding … and even though it’s a perfect interpretation I don’t for a moment claim to be a non-dualist or anything other than a possibility to engage in communications intended to degragment the mind. We’re the innovators of Architectural Redirection … have diagrammed the mind repeatedly through our essays … show how to get beyond the meaning of words, etc., etc., and maybe it would be worth further inquiry instead of making what appears to be a flip comment. Flip comments by the way are perfect and I don’t have any issue with your intent to contribute to the conversation. I’m not a student or disciple of any of the well known non-duality teachers and only recently wondered what they were talking about when they said there is no ME, for example. Of course there is ME as just typed and other than that word on this page it’s not an argument that is of interest to this writer. Thank you … Robert

  106. Robert;
    So, what are saying; are you saying that you have a unique
    method to help someone to go beyond themselves.
    I have many time believed quite few people who were connfident
    of their system.
    Sillo from argintina- he strted the humanistic movment-
    Rajhnish
    Mahrishi
    Fredric perles- gestualt psycology
    NLP – too much propaganda there
    Masaro
    Kiloby- some what
    colin drake
    richard moss
    scientology
    Moon
    mind expansion Michigan
    alkholic anonymous
    and more

  107. Robert;
    So, what are saying; are you saying that you have a unique
    method to help someone to go beyond themselves.
    I have many time believed quite few people who were connfident
    of their system.
    Sillo from argintina- he strted the humanistic movment-
    Rajhnish
    Mahrishi
    Fredric perles- gestualt psycology
    NLP – too much propaganda there
    Masaro
    Kiloby- some what
    colin drake
    richard moss
    scientology
    Moon
    mind expansion Michigan
    alkholic anonymous
    and more
    sorry, I know i write badly because i try to finish quickly.
    what i meant is that you think you can help one to go
    beyond themselves- by your new ideas.
    you call it artitecutre of the mind-
    well have we not been there befor.
    we are in the game very very long time.

  108. Hello again Tim. Yes … we do have a unique system for understanding the structure of the mind and how to transition from belief to possibility and the ability to arrive at what we might call the Still Point … or the absence of psychogical, emotional, physical and even spiritual identification. Architectural Redirection is described on the books page of our website: http://www.inthezonetech.net. We have applied Architectural Redirection to the teachings of J. Krishnamurti in an essay which very few people have read. We have also applied Architectural Redirection to Macrobiotics which was accepted by an accredited Nutritional Certification Institute. A.R., has been applied unfailingly to tennis, golf, business, health and life in general … and this model is our innovation. We have a coaching session available on our website which you can test FREE of charge and have the opportunity to WITNESS what it’s like to ‘get’ the difference between thinking from past knowledge and inventing a conversation from the present moment … and of course in our coaching sessions we even get beyond the illusion of past, present, future. You already have the innate ability to Triangulate your thoughts; i.e., to meet those thoughts with a Byron Katie application of the question … “is it true?”. We just take the conversation to the next level and ask … “where can you find it right now?”

    If I asked you the question “what time is it right now” … by the time you looked at a watch or clock it would be too late … and if that sounds too simplistic … it’s really what our coaching is designed to uncover; i.e., that time is a product of thinking.

    Another example of TIME would be what has taken place between our messages and during a coaching conversation we destroy that illusion with a highly interactive ‘way’ to reflect which compartment of the person’s Architecture is operating based on the language expressed … and how to practice Redirection; hence, the name Architectural Redirection was coined to describe this process.

    Of course we’re certain of a model that has been unfailing … even though more often than not … the mind wants to take control again with another story. Would it work for you? Depends on your willingness to make the call … depends on how serious you are to engage authentically … depends upon your ability to notice any inauthtenticity that is not willing to be surrendered. There’s a movie I’ve watched several times during the past few years and I’d suggest it to anyone interested in learning how unconscious decisions impact the future. The movie is ALL THE PRETTY HORSES and there’s a scene in the movie where the two riders are thinking about including a third rider on their journey. Even if you’ve watched the movie I’d like to continue on since I consider this scene loaded with brillance when Matt Damon’s buddy says something like … “Every dumb thing I ever done in my life there was a decision I made before that got me into it. It was never the dumb thing. It was always some choice I’d made before it.” This quote exemplifies what we’ve learned thousands of times … especially in business transactions, golf, tennis and all other relationships; i.e., UNFORCED errors generally are caused by BEING out of sequence. On the tennis court, for example, a player will THINK at where he/she would like to hit the ball and then ACTUALLY hit the shot … so the shot is hit twice (once mentally and then physically). Since the player got away with several shots the unconscious thinking goes unnoticed until there’s an unforced error and then it’s covered up with rational or irrational thinking. When we work with the MIND on the tennis court for example we’re breaking down the ACTION in very small units of TIME so as to allow unconscious thinking to surface and be dissolved. The FEAR of losing keeps one from being available for winning. That’s the long answer to you question and to repeat … YES … we do have a unique way and there’s no reason to BE confident or lack confidence when there’s a WILLING player to BE coached. If you are interested in a FREE skype coaching call just let me know. Otherwise I trust you’ll SEE what it is I’m pointing to with these words. Be well, One other thought … it’s a lot different to write and talk about any interaction as compared to my being RIGHT THERE before, during, and after a tennis shot, golf swing, business transaction or an accident because the person THOUGHT it was safe to drive through the intersection because the light was green. When a person makes that type of decision as described in All The Pretty Horses then the stupid thing of getting in a car accident is really not an accident … it’s simply based on an unconscious/habitual way of thinking. Robert

  109. Welcome to this discussion forum, Robert.

    I perused your website and was immediately attracted to the section on Breathwork. I’ll read it with more attention later this evening.

    The one constant experience of my life… in all of its changes and transformations, both ideologically and physically… has been the placement of my attention on my breathing.

    It’s a practice that I started when I was a teenager in high school, and it has accompanied me throughout every stage of my life and in the course of almost every activity.

    And I hope that I will have the where-with-all to be able to place my attention on the last few inhalations and exhalations, when it’s time to release my time-space suit.

    Again, welcome.

  110. P.S. to Brian:

    “Of course, that’s why you have to honestly investigate and really see for yourself whether it is true”

    I am still interested in a clarification of your use of the term “honestly investigate”.

    Just how does one go about honestly investigating if something is true?

  111. hi robert; yes i will be intrested in skype talk/ i have not used it
    for a while, so i have to check.
    i am intrested in new ideas; I am extremely influenced by
    Bucky Fuller and find learning comprhenisvlely(including
    everything of significance addictive and like to know)
    otherwise i feel ignorant and have built ideas and stratagey
    of how to accumulate information.
    i did it for a long time and proabably because of difficluties
    finding how to do it
    added to my messeness.
    child hood stuff also made my life horrible.
    i was into krishnmurt for many years and i dont like
    the stuff but i could get caught being obserbed by it.
    like when an opening happend doing massaro method
    5 days high- i began using observation- i probably
    should have stuck with the defocousing-
    well/
    Krishnmurti content intesive-

  112. hi micheal/
    i think it worked one time for me and then i tried nothing
    happen- with your encour gment i try it for 2 months-
    i have nothing consistnely that i do; i forget and
    become distracted. when i rmember i try few things
    like asking who am I question.
    or the do nothing meditation-
    20 continious breaths ( by l orr)
    or being aware behind the thought and sensation-
    drake adviced me to do.

    today i did nothing/ may be tommorrow.
    check Mr ash toast –
    he have few ideas- i am not sure of
    it works at all-

  113. is not the emotionalism of bentinho a bit exagerated;
    could it be some kind of nurotic- never seen anyone
    going that far except that laughing guru from California.
    he is a bit walko.
    I guess when you are librated you can go extrem-
    nothing against that just some of it is a bit extravganza.

  114. To Snowl/
    This is is not a discussion fourm; is it.
    Anyway you probably discuss because you have nothing else
    to do whe you are home or may be you need to air your view
    just like me.
    If you say somthing like the interpatation is the problem rather
    than the thought- what does that real valuebal for.
    It is just addition of ideas.
    and I dont see defending the awakend is of any value either.
    they dont need anybody they are on the top of the mounatain..
    it is obvious that all of these teachings are helping only the few;
    some talk as if the teahcers have the perfect technique and
    we should just follow one and we will be just oky.
    just because I dont speak the norm doesnt mean it
    is not comrhendable.
    I should though cut my writing down and not do it from
    an impulse of mild recklesness.
    may be make ite short- i am not gaining anything from it.
    I wonder how the artitecture of the mind analys this reply.
    cheers – wither it is just intelectualI i should read the response carefully and give my views-
    probably my never study english prt obably
    due to circumstance i wouldnt talk about now-
    i think we are forced by circumatance to follow
    a direction- I took english course in Lusiana
    in it was speed course / i was young then
    had no idea of my consious state and
    living is constant prblematic state but not
    knowing it or consious of it-
    oppression has different levels-
    also probably later english teachers are
    boring( anyway the reasons and the time were
    convuluted to anextreme – nightmare covered up
    by culture conditioning- I was extreme victim)-
    anyway what the fuck am i explaining this for-

  115. I have a few favorite torns that I like to place in my mental shoe, from time to time. This is one of then.

    “What is the source of my experience of the past?

    Is it my identification with a memory in the present moment?

    When I am recollecting a familiar and consistent past about myself, am I just identifying with a familiar and consistent string of memories in the present moment?

    And what happens to my experience of the past if I no longer identify with the memories which appear and dis-appear in the present moment?

    This is where the practice of anapanasati (AKA vipassana/insight) meditation has helped me. To see the appearance/dis-appearance of a memory (which is essentially a thought), in the present moment, and how I identify or not with it.

  116. Snowl/
    I know what you mean; i developed this way.
    i been in nonduality meeting and i should go to
    london to see Kilby i think this month-
    it is costy and i am not sure i will get anything
    out of it- guy i resonate with is Roger Linden-
    i think-
    anyway i see people who are like me there
    who can fall into it but once i while somone getsi
    it and everybody irs julouse and surprised-
    so i am not sure your advice can help-
    no problem- been in intrnet for a while – not
    looking for clashes really-

    what happen to the other robert – who
    was asking for dialogue about the artitecture of
    the mind-
    Michel-
    if i have somtin g of intrest to tell i wil
    write-

  117. to snowl
    you are right-
    not going to post them here-
    their place may be will be somewhere else.
    i am thinking of building general thinking material-
    any way that arrmy thing is for sure is propaganda by
    china – bluff- showing off-
    they shoutd have the genrousity to join
    together rathar than prepare for war-

Leave a Reply