What is the difference between accepting what is and resignation?

Resignation is giving up, quitting, stepping down, standing down, or otherwise conceding defeat.  Accepting what is means allowing what is to be and then working with what is.  Accepting what is does not mean you are giving up trying to change it.  Accepting what is does not mean quitting or conceding defeat. Continue reading What is the difference between accepting what is and resignation?

What advice would you give someone seeking the Self?

I would immediately ask, “where are you looking?”  And then follow that up with, “what is looking?”

Looking anywhere or anywhen else than here and now would be pointless.  The Self is here in this very moment.  The whole idea of seeking means to look somewhere else and find in the future.  When you seek your keys, you look for it everywhere but where you are.  You wouldn’t think to see if they are in your pocket.  When you seek your keys, you expect to find them in the future…but not now.  In this way, seeking is an egoic way of delaying finding…or more accurately, realizing what-is right here and right now. Continue reading What advice would you give someone seeking the Self?

Isn’t it enough to accept and not to identify with suffering?

To accept and not identify with suffering means just suffering and being OK with it.  While this might dull the hurting and make it bearable, why suffer at all?  This question comes from the standpoint of someone who still suffers.  My question is why suffer at all?  Suffering is optional…because we do it to ourselves.  It is mentally created and if we stop creating it, we cease suffering. Continue reading Isn’t it enough to accept and not to identify with suffering?

The Self has always been free. The Self is always awake. Right?

This is really a nasty question.  If I say “yes”, then you will think there is nothing to realize and remain stuck in suffering.  If I say “no”, that is not correct and limitations on the Self could be inferred.

You see…it is not as simple as saying “the Self has always been free.”  While true, the question is do you feel free?  Also, are you free from suffering?  If you do not feel free and are not free of suffering, then you are not awake and are not free.  However, it is a figment of your imagination.  An illusion of the mind.  You are hypnotized…and hence asleep…within a prison of your own thoughts.  As long as the illusion is attached to and believed…it is a delusion of being trapped and that delusion has effects. Continue reading The Self has always been free. The Self is always awake. Right?

Is delusion a thing trained into human minds? Could it be different?

Much of our delusion has been learned from others…some of it activity taught and trained.  That is why it is sometimes referred to as conditioning.  In the whole socialization process, we teach various illusions that then become our delusions.  Some illusions have some practical value (inches, lines of longitude, an hour, etc.)  Some of these delusions keep us in line and give the powers that be the means of controlling the masses.  It maintains social order. Continue reading Is delusion a thing trained into human minds? Could it be different?

Where is the responsibility in nondualism?

Nisargadatta Maharaj said, “love says ‘I am everything.’ Wisdom says ‘I am nothing.’ Between the two, my life flows.”  Likewise, for me, love says, “100% responsibility for everything” and wisdom says “0% responsibility for anything.”  Between the two, my life flows. Continue reading Where is the responsibility in nondualism?

Are you saying that I shouldn’t really care about how things work out?

Not at all.  It is not about should or shouldn’t.  However, if there was a realization and seeing through the illusory “I” and the delusion of attachment falls away, then “you” might not be attached to how things turn out.  If you understood how changeable “fortune” can be, then you may not be attached to how things work out or label it as good or bad.  It is not about should or shouldn’t, it is about understanding and realization. Continue reading Are you saying that I shouldn’t really care about how things work out?

Can you really speak about nondualism? Isn’t that duality?

In speaking about nonduality, you can only point at it using words.  Words are inherently dualistic.  Chair only has meaning because there are things that are not chairs.  But when I say “nonduality”, I mean that which does not have an other.

Now, you can logically and linguistically say there is duality and nonduality – as if they are opposed and that it is dualistic.  Quite right.  But that use of the term “nonduality” would not really be nonduality.  That would be pointing at something with an other or opposing view.  If you focus too much on the words and take them literally, then you will not understand what is being pointed to. Continue reading Can you really speak about nondualism? Isn’t that duality?

What is the importance of not being attached to things and people?

None.  No importance what so ever.  The ego is what is looking for “shoulds” and “should nots” and rank by importance and trying to do something (like – not being attached).

It is true that the enlightened are not attached to things and people.  When there is a seeing through the illusion of “me”, the illusion of attachment also falls away as it is founded upon an illusory “me”.  However, there is no such thing as “the importance of not being attached”.  There is no need to try to not be attached.  In fact, the enlightened don’t really think about attachment or detachment. Continue reading What is the importance of not being attached to things and people?

Should I try not to identify myself with any of the roles that I play?

Don’t “try” not to identify…it is not a matter of trying not to identify.  In asking this, you are admitting you are already identified…and so you must accept this – not resist it.  Instead you need to clearly see you are not what you are identifying with…then you automatically cease identifying with it.  Only through delving into the identification, seeing it thoroughly, and understanding it can you realize the error in identifying with it and ever believing it was who you are.

The focus is not on “trying not to identify” but to clearly see and understand.  Ignorance only continues when uninvestigated.  So I am saying investigate the identification thoroughly.  Do this and you will find you no longer identify with whatever it is and you know exactly why it was in error to believe you were it.  I don’t want to create a practice of “trying not to identify”, so I am attempting to be very clear that you need to cease trying to do anything about it and just look at it deeply.  With understanding, things change on their own.  We see through the illusion and we cease to be fooled by it any longer. Continue reading Should I try not to identify myself with any of the roles that I play?