Road maps for the awakening process can be helpful in a few different ways.

They can help us see that what happens here is shared, common, nothing unusual about it.

They can give us pointers for how to work with what is happening, if anything besides our usual practice can be helpful.

They can give teachers and people researching these things pointers for how to teach and practices to suggest.

But that is about it. They are sometimes helpful, in a practical and quite limited way. And there are of course many of these road maps, each one helpful in some circumstances and not in other.

And if either of these road maps is made into an expectation - by either students or teachers - it gets pretty weird, as usual. It ends up as yet another struggle with what is.

As they say, if 6.7 billion people awaken, there will be 6.7 billion different awakenings.

(more…)

It seems that an awakening goes from special to ordinary in a few different ways.

In the beginning, it may be special in one’s own experience. Partly because it is unfamiliar, and partly because there may still be a trace of I-Other, or residue patterns of wanting to be special.

It may also be special in other’s experience, because the awakening may bring about a marked shift in behavior, and it may be expressed in flashy ways.

Later on, it becomes ordinary in one’s own experience. Partly because there is more familiarity with it, partly because we know that whatever happened is a common and shared pattern, and partly because all - no matter what it is - so clearly is the play of awareness itself.

The content of the play - including awakening and delusion - is secondary to it all being a play of awareness. The human self has also had more time to reorganize and mature within this new context, including a full and heartfelt embrace of all that it is.

And it also becomes ordinary in other’s views, because they see someone who appears quite ordinary, living an ordinary life, and taking themselves as quite ordinary too.

The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.

But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!

No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

Matthew 6:22-24

This whole passage is interesting. From a conventional point of view, the two first paragraphs don’t make much sense, and the third is taken literally and maybe seen as overly harsh.

Yet when there is a shift into headlessness or Big Mind/Heart, it becomes clear and is revealed as a beautiful and true passage.

The single eye is awareness itself, that which all happens within, to and as. When it notices itself, all is revealed as luminous both metaphorically (clear insight into what we are) and literally (sense of luminosity in all there is).

If it doesn’t notice itself, there is darkness. We are confused about who and what we are, and also don’t notice the luminosity inherent in all form and experience. This confusion is the root of all that is conventionally seen as evil, including all suffering and unease.

We cannot serve two masters. We cannot be confused and identify with content of awareness, and at the same time notice what we are.

Or more accurately, we can - and inevitably do - for a large stretch of the awakening process. Both may be present simultaneously to some degree, with one shifting into the foreground and then the other. But there comes a time when we have to make a clear decision.

Am I going to continue to indulge in whatever comes out of this mistaken identity, even as I know it is a mistaken identity, or am I going to wholehearted give myself to what I already am?

And this shift may involve strong resolve which is reflected in the somewhat harsh language of the passage above.

The eye with which I see God is the same eye with which God sees me.
- Meister Eckhart, Qui audit me

And which eye is that? This squishy eyeball?

No, it is the eye of awareness. The single eye…

The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.
- Matthew 6:22

… that never sleeps.

If the eye never sleeps, all dreams will naturally cease.
- Seng Ts’an, Hsin Hsin Ming

Awareness is the eye that sees God - as awareness itself and all that happens within, to and as it. And it is the eye that sees our human self - happening within, to and as awareness as all other form.

It is the single eye and when it notices itself, all becomes luminous… and not only metaphorically. There is an immediate sense of luminosity of this body and all form. A luminosity of Ground, awareness and whatever happens within, to and as awareness.

It is the eye that, when it notices itself, never sleeps. Never gets lost in its own content. Dreams of an I with an Other, and belief in any other story, cease.

Buddhism and Christianity both use a “pointing beyond itself” analogy.

In Buddhism, it is the finger pointing to the moon. The teacher, teachings and practices point beyond themselves to what we really are, this awakeness with a content which is awakeness itself. Don’t mistake the finger for the moon.

In Christianity, it is the humility to realize that it is all from God. Nothing happens here which is not from God.

This also shows where the traditional teachings sometimes don’t go quite as far as they can.

In Buddhism, it is not only the teacher/teachings that are the finger pointing to the moon. It is also this human self. When it points to itself as the final truth of what it really is, it is deluded. When it notices that it is already and always pointing to awakeness as what it really is, it is awakened.

In Christianity, it is not only that I as a human being give all credit to God. It is also that God is all there is. It may appear that there is a human being here, with a separate I, but there is nothing but God. There is no separate I here, only God.

In both cases, this human self becomes a finger pointing beyond itself.

And this shift has to be thorough for it to be real. For this human self to really notice what is already and always is.

(Leonardo’s beautiful painting of St. John the Baptist shows him pointing up. He has to point somewhere, so it may as well be up. But it is really in all and no directions.)

One of the things that impacts me the most is the suffering of animals at the hands of humans. Like the cow I saw a picture of the other day, neglected, standing up to her belly in shit, looking back towards the photographer with big innocent eyes. Quiet, wordless, suffering. Not understanding what is happening to her. Complete innocence.

I see myself in those animals, and children and humans suffering in a similar way. I see all of us.

At times, we are all in that situation.

Vulnerable animals, without a clue about what is going on. That is what it all boils down to.

In our daily lives, we are - to a certain extent - in control and do understand. But if we look a little closer, we find that behind that thin surface is complete vulnerability and lack of knowing.

When we find this for ourselves, there is a great deal of liberation. We don’t need to hold onto stories anymore as an ultimate truth or answer. We don’t need to deny our complete vulnerability.

Instead, there can be a more receptive mind and heart. A mind receptive to the limited truth in any story. And a heart receptive to ourselves and others.

(If we have worked with our hara, our belly, we also find our hara more receptive, in this case to a felt trust in existence and life.)

As with other forms of investigation, it is a process of seeing and feeling what is more true for us. It invites in an embrace of (more of) the fullness of who we are, as human beings. And releasing struggle - in this case against seeing that we don’t know, and the vulnerability of our human self - makes it easier for us to notice what we are.

(more…)

I am not qualified. (To help, give advice, teach, contribute.)

(more…)

Sorry for this slightly dizzying stream…

It is not important for awakeness whether it notices itself or not. That too happens as content of awakeness, and is no other than awakeness itself.

Getting caught up in the content of awakeness, being identified with it, or noticing all of it as awakeness itself, it is all happening within, to and as awakeness.

But it is, sometimes, important for who we take ourselves to be. When there is identification with content of awakeness, it can, in some situations, seem important. There is a feeling, a thought, of wanting awakeness to notice itself, or at least a curiosity about it, and this too happens within, to and as awakeness.

It is awakeness as confusion, desire, discomfort, blind to itself, noticing itself, releasing identification out of its own content, recognizing its own content as itself. It is all awakeness, and is never anything else than awakeness.

So what is the big deal? There isn’t really.

Only the draw for awakeness to notice itself, sometimes, when it is temporarily identified with its own content.

And the compassion that naturally arises when it is noticing itself, and also sees itself suffer over there, through identification with other living beings.

When awakeness is awake to itself and functions through this human self, and sees itself over there identified with its own content, with another living being, and experiencing discomfort because of it, there is naturally compassion and actions out of kindness and whatever wisdom is available.

There is naturally actions to help alleviate the suffering, in whatever ways the other asks for and is receptive to. In conventional and temporary ways, and sometimes also in helping awakeness notice itself also over there, through the other human self.

Awakening to what we are seems independent of content in one way, yet very much dependent on it in another way.

It is dependent on a shift in content of awareness from beliefs in stories, identification with content, and a sense of I and Other, to a release from all of those. This all happens very much within the realm of form and content of awareness.

At the same time, an awakening to what we are is pretty much independent of any other content of awareness. Thoughts, sensations and so on, all of it can stay the same.

The only shift is from a sense of I with an Other, to awakeness noticing itself and its own content as itself, already and always inherently absent of an I with an Other.

There are many ways to invite in a form of buffering at energetic or soul levels, being held energetically or within the alive presence in ways that helps us get less caught up in reactiveness.

We can fill up the hara through Breema and other practices. We can receive different forms of energy transmissions, such as the bands of power munai-ki rite, that serves as a buffer, filter and protection. (I am noticing the effects of that one right now, which is what prompted this post.) We can invite in the soul level, the alive presence, through prayer and other practices. And more.

The benefits are pretty obvious. Our lives at a human level typically becomes far easier. Fewer things bug us. There is a sense of not being touched by what we previously got caught up in. It makes it much easier to be who we take ourselves to be if we are identified with stories, and it makes it easier for this human self even if we are not. We get a sense of how it is to live released from being in the grips of stories and identifications. We see that something else is possible.

Our human self may also reorganize and stabilize within this new context, releasing identification more and more over time. It may even lead into what we are noticing itself, finding itself as awakeness, and this field of awakeness and form inherently and always free from an I and an Other.

But there are also some possible drawbacks. We can get complacent, happy with being protected by the buffer, not taking up the invitation to explore more in depth the hooks and rings of identification and beliefs in stories. And that is exactly why any buffer is only temporary. It is within the realm of form, it is content of awareness, and as any form and any content, it will change. When it fills, it only does so to empty. And when it empties, it does so only so it can in turn fill.

It is cyclical, as anything else, and throughout it all is the invitation for us to investigate the hooks and rings more closely. An invitation for what we are to notice itself.

Any buffer is a buffer or protection for who we are, for this human self. And the invitation for what we are to awaken to itself is there independent of buffers or not.

I am appreciating more and more the play at the edge of a sense of separate self, and shifting into the field, absent of an I and Other.

As where any two ecosystems meet, it has three zones.

There is the sense of a separate self, and anything that goes with that, including the drama. I get to explore that, experience it, live it. There is a great deal of juiciness here. And I also get to explore it through various practices, such as labeling of the sense fields, journeying, the Big Mind process, The Work, Process Work, and more. (Any of these can be used when there is a sense of separate self, at the edge, or even when awakeness is noticing itself more fully, and each one offers  a different flavor to it.)

There is the edge itself, where I get to explore the mechanisms of samsara more in detail. I have a foot in both world, which allows me to live the dynamics of samsara, yet within the context (intuition, glimpses or direct awareness) of headlessness or Big mind, or awakeness noticing itself and all of its content as itself.

Then there are the shifts into awakeness noticing itself, which includes exploring the dynamics of the shift itself. Noticing how an exclusive or enhanced identification with certain sensations (for me in the throat/mouth/neck area) is released. How these sensations now are just content of awareness as anything else, an object rather than an (imagined) subject. How the field of awakeness and its content notices itself as a field. How the sense of a separate I, a center and periphery, and so on comes just from a thought, and that those thoughts may still be there but are now seen as just a thought, not filtering perception anymore (the sense of inside and outside went a long time ago).

In some ways, it is so enjoyable that there is no desire to move on. Exploring these three are more than sufficiently rewarding and interesting. But most likely, after a while, when the mechanisms of samsara has been seen through enough, the hooks for a sense of a separate self falls away on its own time. Leaving just awakeness to itself, in its great aloneness and infinite diversity.

A good post from Vince:

A friend of mine recently posed the question, “Is it just me, or are there a lot of people waking up these days?” It’s a really interesting question, one that I’ve thought about from time to time. And so talking it over with my partner I came up with at least six different possibilities (I’m sure there are more) that one might consider with regards to the question:

1. It is possible that with the dawn of the information age we are simply much more aware of that then we were before of how many people are waking up.
2. On the journey toward awakening and with a more realistic model of awakening, the amount of people we see who are awake or waking up increases due to our not having far-fetched models and because we’ve simply had more time to meet them.
3. It’s difficult to compare how many people are awake today versus in the past because we don’t have much reliable empirical data.
4. From the purely statistical perspective, the steady rise in the world’s population would mean there are more awakened people, if we assume a similar awakening per capita.
5. One argument is that as the speed of the world increases the ability to wake up to what is always already there, simply via the higher contrast, becomes easier.
6. Humans may be evolving in mental, emotional, and spiritual complexity over time (Ken Wilber’s evolutionary spirituality perspective), with one major outcome being that more people are waking up.

And some additional points that comes to mind:

1. Longer lifespan, as Duff mentions in a comment to the original post.
2. The filter of time. Most of us know only a handful of painters from the renaissance, but people at the time knew about many more. Just as time filters who among painters are remembered by later generations, the same happens with mystics.
3. Increased access & opportunity
   • Easier access to simple, effective practices from a range of traditions, and new variations such as headlessness, the Big Mind process and The Work. Also, a quicker and wider dissemination of simple/effective practices through old and new media.
   • Easier access to teachers, in person and through books, audio, video, internet.
   • For some, more leisure time so more time for practice.
4. There are more people today who get to taste most or all of their material desires. This means that more get to see, through own experience, that it doesn’t quite do it, and some of these (a small fraction) will then shift onto a path of spiritual practices. (On the other hand, we live in a global culture that promotes the idea of happiness through getting what we want in the material world, and this idea may have been less prominent - and tempered by other views - in previous times and other cultures.)
5. More inclusive definitions of awakening. If we take a broad (or vague) definition to awakening, as many do, then many has indeed awakened… but this may include people who have a soul level awakening (alive presence), a oneness awakening (a self here one with God and everything else), receptivity to or glimpses/intuitions of soul/oneness/nondual awakenings, and also a more stable nondual awakening (free from an I with an Other). Even among many so called “awakened” teachers today, we see people who express these different forms of awakening. If we lump it all together, it includes quite a lot of people. The Translucent Revolution by Arjuna Ardagh is one of many examples of this lumping together, where he mostly seems to talk about people who have a receptivity to and intuition/glimpses of soul/oneness/nondual awakenings.

The most simple and down-to-earth explanations seem sufficient to explain why it seems that more people are waking up today.

We hear about it more. We often use a very broad and vague definition of awakening which by necessity includes a lot of people.

More and more people have a sense, taste and glimpse of different forms of awakening through different practices such as the Big Mind process, so they and others may see that as an awakening. (It is an awakening, in that it awakens them to what is beyond a perception filtered through I and Other. But it is not an awakening in terms of - for instance - a stable nondual awakening where the whole sense of I and Other falls away.) We hear about awakenings more readily through modern communication.

And finally, more people may indeed awaken because there are more of us, and easier access to practices and teachers.

Initial draft… 

We often experience previews of what can be, a dropping into a future way of being, which then invites a reorganization of our human self to both reflect it and also prepare for a more stable way of living it.

These previews are wonderful gifts, although they are not always taken that way after they are gone. They come, show us what can be - in a more stable way - in the future, and then go away again. If we don’t recognize them as previews and their function of inviting our human self to reorganize, we can easily go into a sense of loss and of something being wrong, while it is just a normal and expected part of the process.

I learned this the hard way, as I assume is how it is for many of us, and I am still in the process of really getting it.

So say there is an awakening into a nondual awakening, of all as the unmanifest manifesting as what is here now, inherently absent of I and Other. It seems stable when it is there, but there may also be a recognition that this human self is not quite able to fully and maturely live from it and express it in the world. The gap is actually pretty big. Then the awakening fades or goes away, but it has initiated a pretty radical reorganizing of our human self.

This reorganizing reflects, to some extent at least, Big Mind awake to itself, and it also prepares the ground for Big Mind awakening to itself in a more stable way, and expressing itself through this human self in a more full and mature way.

These previews may not only happen once. They can happen many times, each time triggering a further and different reorganization of our human self. And the previews may not be of a nondual awakening, they can equally well be of a soul level awakening (oneness, an I here one with all as God), or even a centaur awakening to the wholeness beyond and embracing this human body and psyche.

So although all of this is a natural process, and a wonderful gift, it can be taken in a very different way. It can be taken as a loss, as having something and then losing it, and we can get absorbed into whatever comes up when we tell ourselves we have lost it. And as usual, the more resistance to what is - in this case reorganization and loss of the preview - the more drama, stress and suffering. But that too, if it happens, is part of the process. After a while, when we learn to recognize the patterns of previews and reorganization, we learn to relax and trust the process a little more.

Although this is a pretty typical pattern, it seems that it doesn’t have to happen this way. For some, there is one awakening which stays and the human self reorganize within the awakening. But for others, including me, there are several previews followed by reorganization.

And why not? If something is possible within the habits of the manifest, then God is going to go there. God awakens to itself stably, and the human self it is functionally connected with reorganize within that. And God glimpses itself several times, and the human self reorganize following each glimpse.

It is all part of the overall richness of how God explore and manifest itself.

To continue the exploration of the difference between allowing and actively embrace…

When there is a disidentification with stories and identities, there is also an allowing of what is, as it is. So if there is a disidentification with all stories and identities, there is also a full allowing of anything happening here and now, including this human self and the wider world. It is all recognized as awakeness manifesting as form. And this is the traditional awakening, it is Big Mind awakening to itself.

Beyond this, it is possible for this human self to actively explore itself and embrace itself in its evolving fullness. It can actively explore and own its different voices and subpersonalities, become familiar with and live from a wider repertoire of qualities and ways of being in the world, and find a new fluidity among a wide and unlimited range of identities and roles in the world. All of this allows this human self to heal, mature and develop in a more active way, beyond what it would do (or not) if there was not this active exploration and familiarization.

It is a different way of participating in the development of this human self, and through this and in a small way to actively participate in the evolution of our culture and the even wider whole.

And it is also a way to develop skillful means. If Big Mind is awake to itself, then the human self it functions through is its main - and really only - skillful means. So actively engage in its healing, maturing and development only makes sense.

Awakened is not inherently better than not awakened. Not at all. It is only when there is no awakening that it can appear so.

The unmanifest is always the unmanifest, whether it is awake to itself or not, and no matter how the manifest is manifesting. It is always there, as that which space and time and the whole world of form unfolds within, to, and as.

But the manifest is manifesting as a human only rarely. It is a rare occasion, so why not embrace it, live it, appreciate it, as it is? Why even seek awakening, unless you can’t help it?

There is a large number of reasons for practice and seeking awakening, and for each of us, which ones are in the foreground change over time, including over the very short and the longer time scales.

The typical ones are probably to escape the suffering of knots and exclusive identification with this human self, and the one on other side of the coin, which is to find a sense of coming home and quiet bliss.

And there are many other ones, such as getting another badge (sense of achievement, impressing someone, status), living up to shoulds (being a good person, doing what the traditions and teachers tells us to do), fears (escape from suffering, now and in the future), hopes (finding release, finding home), and also curiosity (what is really true, how is it all put together, who am I really), and finally, to be more fully who and what we (already) are.

At any stage in our process, it is probably helpful to explore what our current motivations are, and be honest with ourselves about it. Whatever they are is OK. Being familiar with what is here now is an important part of the process, so noticing our motivations is just a part of that.

For me, I find each of these motivations surfacing at different times, and probably many I can’t think of right now.

Sometimes, I practice to escape something. There is suffering or stress, and I know it comes from holding onto fixed views (beliefs) and resistance to experience, so I may do inquiry or be with what I am experiencing in a more heartfelt way.

More often, it is curiosity. What is really here? Who or what am I really? What is going on, how is this body-mind put together, how does it function, how does it relate to the wider world?

And if I am honest, it is even more about becoming more fully human. I have often felt like an outsider, so spiritual practice helps me allow and embrace my humanity more fully and more wholeheartedly, with all its quirks and oddities.

Practice for me is about inviting knots to untie themselves (belief-emotion-behavior conglomerates), examining beliefs to see what is already more true for me, allowing exclusive identifications to fall away, and being with experience as it is, even if it would never change.

And each of these allows me to more fully be who I am, as this human being, allowing it all, as it is. It helps me to own disowned parts. It is a way to become more familiar with more of the terrain of being a human being, alive today.

And these practices also invites what I really am to notice itself more clearly, it prepares the ground for Big Mind to notice itself, on its own time.

Embracing and discovering who I am, as this human being, and what I am, as the unmanifest inseparable from the manifest, are two sides of the same coin. Each allows for the other, and each allows a deepening into the other.

What happens to emotions after awakening? Do they go away? Is there ecstatic bliss all the time?

When there is a Ground awakening, when awakeness awakens to itself, and to its content as no other than itself, its content does not have to change. There is one exception: the belief in stories fall away, and they are seen as just stories, arising as anything else - the clouds, sounds of cars, breeze over the skin, thoughts - all arising as that which is left when there is no I and Other. Apart from that, nothing needs to change. Thoughts are still there. Sensations. Behaviors. Interactions with others. Emotions. None of those need to change. They frequently do, of course, but don’t need to for awakeness to recognize itself and its content as awakeness, inherently absent of I and Other.

When emotions change following an awakening, it has to do with an absence of belief in stories, and also an absence in resistance. (Which are two sides of the same coin.)

With no resistance, emotions are experienced quite differently from how they are experienced when they are resisted. And they are always resisted, so some extent, as long as there is a sense of I and Other. Without resistance, or rather, without identification with resistance, there is also no emotional reactivity in behavior. Emotions arise, within and as clarity, as awakeness itself.

And with no beliefs, stories are recognized as awakeness itself, so they do not trigger emotions. This means that all the emotions triggered by stories when they are belied in, fall away.

Of course, there are often long standing habitual patterns around emotions and behavior, so these can still come up for a while after awakening, almost as an after image or reminder of how it used to be. But over time, these tend to erode.

What is left are just emotions arising as anything else, as awakeness itself, living their own lives, on their own schedule.

And that is exactly how it was before awakening, although not noticed in that way.

In talking with someone local who has done Buddhist meditation for a couple of decades, and is also a diksha giver, I was reminded of the energy/consciousness and self/other grid, and also how much I appreciate being free to move among and include each of the quadrants.

In the awakening process, we can work from the energy side or consciousness side, each supporting and in mutual influence with the other. And we can also do our own work, or have it done for us (shocking, for many in a Buddhist world view.)

Diksha, and any other form of shaktipat, is an example of work on the energy side influencing the consciousness side, and also an example of the “other” quadrant. It is something that is given to us from outside of this human self, without much or any effort on our own part.

Regular meditation and inquiry is an example of self-initiated work on the consciousness side, which inevitably influences the energy side.

Different forms of yoga is an example of self-initiated work on the energy side.

And in terms of other-initiated work on the consciousness side, I am not sure. Maybe different forms of pointing-out instructions, such as the Big Mind process, could fall into this quadrant, although these are more of a other-self partnership.

We can of course also include other levels here, such as the physical. Self-initiated work here include exercise and yoga, and other-initiated work includes massage and other forms of bodywork.

The benefit of limiting oneself to one quadrant or side of the grid is that we get to explore that one in depth. We get intimately familiar with that part of the terrain. The drawback may be slight one-sidedness, both in view and practice. We may end up discounting the other side of the grid. And we may end up being overly self-reliant, reinforcing a sense of a separate self and a “doer” that way. Or we may end up being overly other-reliant, not trusting what can be initiated from this - the human self - side.

So with all of this available to us, why limit ourselves to any one quadrant, or even any one side of the grid? In my experience, it all goes hand in hand, seamlessly, with activities in each quadrant shedding some light on the other quadrants. Each one contributing to exploring the terrain in slightly new ways.

As with any map, this grid is false and also potentially useful in a practical way.

Even if we focus on one quadrant, each of the other ones are included. I may focus on self-initiated meditation and inquiry, which in turn influences the energy, and also invites Ground as “other” to notice itself. I initiate prayer, and “other” comes in and shifts both energy and consciousness. I receive diksha, and lots of old patterns come up to be seen, and I actively stay with it and may even work with beliefs around it. Or I receive diksha, and go into samadhi, which helps me inquire into what is here now in more detail.

And without the boundaries created by this map, we see that it is all a seamless whole of awake void and form, only with appearances of I and Other, consciousness and energy. It is all the play of God, it is all Lila.

Another revisited theme: attention going to knots.

Knots are made up of beliefs and their corresponding emotions and habitual patterns, including behavioral ones. There is a belief in a story, a friction between the story of what is (or was, or may be) and this story, corresponding emotions, and certain behaviors.

And attention tends to go to these knots, which makes it more difficult for awareness to notice itself, and its content as awareness too. We notice it in everyday life, and also during sitting practice.

Why does attention go to knots?

There may be several ways of talking about it…

First, there is discomfort in several ways.

• Whenever there is a belief, there is a discrepancy between what we are (awake void and form) and what we take ourselves to be (as defined by the belief and its corresponding identity), which brings a sense of uneasiness.
• Whenever there is friction between our stories of what is and what should be, there is discomfort.
• Whenever there is a belief, there is resistance to experience, which gives discomfort.

Then, an impulse to change the situation to relieve the discomfort.

• We can narrow the gap between the story of what is and what should be, by changing what is or what should be.
• We can change our relationship to the stories themselves, for instance by inquiring into them allowing a release of identification from them.
• Or we can ignore the discomfort and the impulse to change one or both of the above, in which case the misery is likely to deepen. Also, if we only work on the first one, we are caught in the ongoing drama of what is and what should be, which is fine but also somewhat stressful.

And to change it, attention needs to go there.

Right here now, I can see these patterns play themselves out.

In one sense, it is all an invitation for awakening, for beliefs to be examined and unravel and Ground to notice itself. It is how Big Mind first “loses itself” by identifying with just an aspect of itself, how it gives itself an impulse and motivation for awakening, and also guides itself to awakening - back to noticing itself as Big Mind. These dynamics are three in one: forgetting, motivation for change, and a guide for awakening.

And in anther sense, it is an evolutionary mechanism which increases the chances of survival for the individual and the species. There is a discrepancy between what is (circumstances) and what should be (health and well-being of this individual and its group, so then an impulse to reduce this discrepancy, which in many cases - and appropriately so - means to change things in the world to create more favorable circumstances for this human self and its group.

So this simple dynamic has a beautiful complexity to it all around. Here and now, there is an infinite number of aspects and processes to explore. And in the bigger picture, we see how it is Big Mind forgetting about itself, seeking itself, and guiding itself to notice itself again. And also how it is a mechanism that increases the chances of survival for the individual and the species.

And exploring the two last ones, we also see that the survival aspect has (mostly) to do with changing circumstances, and the awakening aspect has to do with examining these dynamics themselves and also beliefs.

Both are essential in their own way, also in our own life.

I am still reading Bernadette Robert’s Path to No Self. She writes about the path better than almost anyone I can think of, especially in a Christian context.

At the same time, although what she writes about are elements in many paths to awakening, the sequence is clearly a reflection of her own. As they say, if there are 7 billion awakenings, then there are 7 billion different awakenings. Not everyone go through each phase, and not in the same sequence, and there are elements in other paths to awakening that is outside what she describes. When she writes, she gives the impression that there is one main pattern in the awakening process, and she does not seem to fully acknowledge the variability in her writings. Which is fine. Something has to be left to the reader to wrestle with and clarify for themselves, beyond what the writer explicitly mentions.

I can also see that my initial take on the dark nights was, as I suspected, a little off in terms of the Christian tradition.

In general, a dark night is any time beliefs and identifications wear off. It is a letting go of who we thought we were. And this can be gentle and easy if we didn’t quite believe it in the first place, or we use a process that is effective and gentle such as The Work. Or it can be a struggle if the attachment is stronger, and we resist the wearing off. As usual, resistance=suffering (resistance to experience, that is).

Then there are the specific dark nights of the senses and the soul, as St. John of the Cross writes about.

As I understand it, the dark night of the senses puts us on the path. It is a disillusionment with the world as being able to provide us with what we are looking for (essentially, lasting happiness, and freedom from suffering). We realize that being dependent on circumstances for our happiness is a precarious situation, and look for something else. It is a wearing off of beliefs of the world being able to provide lasting happiness, and identities related to that. (Not a full wearing off, just enough to put us on the path, and the wearing off continues on the path.)

The dark night of the soul leads us into the unitive life. It is a wearing off of beliefs and identities of being separate. There is still a sense of a separate self here, an I with an Other, but now an I that is one with the larger whole and God. It is an awakening at the soul level, to the alive presence, to all as God and consciousness. It is a relatively stable awakening.

For Bernadette Roberts, the transition into realized selflessness from here was more of a slipping into it. She didn’t need another (dramatic) dark night for it to happen.

As she points out, it is the torments inherent in the unitive life that wears off the last beliefs in and identification as a separate self. In the unitive life, there can be a great deal of bliss and joy, yet also torments in terms of (a) not being able to fully share it with anyone, (b) others not being interested in it, and (c) seeing how every experience and insight is still filtered through, and tainted by, this sense of a separate self.

These torments are, in a sense, a dark night happening within the unitive life.

(more…)

There are many stories of obsessiveness, apparent disasters and waking up, mirroring (one version of) the awakening process.

Moby Dick is about one man’s obsessiveness with the white whale (God) which eventually drags him and his ship under (the death of a sense of separate I along with any other belief and identity), leaving only the ocean, the nondual awakening.

The Truman Show is about a man gradually intuiting that his life is a fabrication, the apparent disasters that happens when he attempts to break out (loss of identities and beliefs), and his final breaking out.

The Matrix trilogy is about a man first waking out of the conventional dream, and then through a great deal of struggle finding an awakening that goes beyond and embraces all polarities… Neo and Agent Smith (good and evil, persona and shadow), the machine world and Zion (mind and matter, also in its version of empty luminosity and form), the Matrix and the real world (deluded and awake).

When I refer to deepening into who and what we are, what does that really mean?

Simply put, it is the individual at the human and soul levels that deepens into itself, as who it is. And it is Ground noticing itself, as what it is. And then, the individual reorganizing within the context of Ground awakening to itself.

And within that simplicity, there is a lot of wrinkles and complexity…

(more…)

When Ground awakens to itself, and is still functionally connected with a particular human being, its expression is flavored by that human being… its personality, its likes and dislikes, its inclinations, its history.

So when Ground awakened through U. G. Krishnamurti, it came to be expressed in a very clear and uncompromising way. So uncompromising that, as far as I know, he didn’t really give people many pointers for how to invite that awakening for themselves, or how to notice that Ground is always and already there. He stayed close to the absolute in how he expressed it, and didn’t exactly go out of his way to meet people where they are.

Byron Katie has the same uncompromising quality, never straying far from the absolute when she talks, but she also knows how to meet people where they are, and she has a very simple practice to offer, one that also meets people exactly where they are.

And then at the other end of the scale is, for instance, Tibetan Buddhism with its wealth of approaches and practices, all within one consistent and comprehensive framework. It always has the absolute as its ground and framework, yet also has developed a plethora of practices and ways of talking that meets people where they are, in terms of their understanding and familiarity with the terrain, almost no matter where that may be. If you want a taste of Ground, they have ways to invite that in. If you want to ease your suffering, they have tools for that. If you want a second person worship more than meeting the Buddha as first person, yes, that is also OK (that is also valid and helpful in its own way).

Each of these are helpful in different ways, and each one meets different people right where they are. For some, U. G. Krishnamurti is the guy, for others The Work, and for some, a selection of the practices within Tibetan Buddhism.

Awakening is a process of constantly pulling the rug out from under one’s own feet.

Any belief is stuckness in a particular story, and this prevents Ground from noticing itself as Ground.

Noticing these beliefs, and inviting them to unravel, is similar to pulling the rug out from under one’s own feet. Any belief gives a sense of a platform, a ground, a fixed view and position, it gives a place to stand, an identity. Unraveling beliefs allows that to fall away, until there is no ground there anymore… no fixed positions or identities… no place to stand. Noticing oneself as the groundless Ground of void, and everything arising within, to and as this awake void.

The same is also true for a healing of and deepening into who we are, as individuals (at the relative level, and after the basics are taken care of).

Here, the stuckness of beliefs prevents a wide embrace of who we are as individuals on the human and soul levels. It prevents an exploration of the evolving fullness of who we are, and a lived familiarity with it.

And here too, healing and familiarity with who we are involves pulling the rug out from under one’s own feet, allowing old beliefs to fall away revealing the wide open field that was already there.

Life will do it for us to some extent. But we can also actively participate in the process, and find it to be quite interesting and even enjoyable, for instance by using The Work to explore what is already more true for us than the surface beliefs.

I am enjoying reading through David’s articles at justperception. It is the real thing, and quite uncompromising as well. (Similar to U. G. Krishnamurti in that way). In a world where many teachers couch their words, it is refreshing and much needed.

But I am also reminded that awakenings come in different flavors. The awakening itself, to realized selflessness, Ground awakening to itself, is of course the same. But the flavors of the leadup and the fallout are many and different.

The flavors of the leadup can range from very dramatic and painful (strong beliefs and clashes with what is, and little awareness of what is going on) to gentle (more fluidity, and transparency of beliefs), and can progress quickly or slowly, as Vince Horn mentioned in a recent comment of his.

(To me, it seems that the more dramatic and painful version comes from a basic sense of insecurity, which leads to a holding onto beliefs with particular vigor. There is a vigorous war with reality which creates a good deal of drama. A basic and deep sense of safety and security, of trust in life and existence, often leads to more fluidity, receptivity and more gently held beliefs.)

The flavor of the fallout of the awakening also comes in different flavors, and it seems that it depends, at least partly, on the degree of pre-alignment with Big Mind, and also the amount of pressure built up beforehand.

With a more thorough and finely tuned pre-alignment, through inquiry (Big Mind process, headless experiments, The Work, etc.) or other practices, the shift can be more gentle. The pre and post shift terrains are closer together.

When there is not much of a pre-alignment with Big Mind, when there is a good deal of caught-upness in coarse delusions, the shift and its fallout is more dramatic. The gap is greater, so the shift is also greater.

Similarly, pressure builds up through the strength and level of attachment to beliefs (stories). The stronger beliefs, and the more these beliefs are at odds with life, the more pressure. A great deal of pressure leads to a dramatic shift, and less pressure to a more gentle shift.

(My initial awakening, although not complete, was very dramatic due to a combination of absolutely no preparation and a great deal of built up pressure. The fallout, the reorganization needed, was also quite dramatic, long lasting and very painful at times. When it recently slipped into Ground awakening (which lasted for a couple of months and then subsided because more work is needed) it was very gentle, just a simple shift into finding “myself” as awake emptiness and form, without any “I” there at all. This time there was much more familiarity with the terrain, and there was not much pressure built up, so the shift was correspondingly gentle.)

Of course, these are all stories, as I am sure David would be quick to point out. And although it is possible to pre-align to a certain extent, it is also equally (or more) true that no real preparation is possible. When it happens, it comes as a shock, a complete surprise, turning everything upside down - independent of finely-tuned preparations.

There are two main forms of awakening…

Into what we are, as awake emptiness and form, absent of separate self, seeing stories as just stories. This seems to be an on/off switch, either there or not, although when it is not there, it is, funny enough, possible to be closer to it or further away from it.

This is a Ground awakening, awake emptiness awake to itself, and to form as not other than awake emptiness itself.

And into who we are, as a developing individual human self and soul. As a holon in an infinitely larger and evolving holarchy in the world of form, and as a vehicle for Big Mind either awake to itself or not. This is an ongoing process with no end point.

This is an exploration of the always changing and evolving world of form.

Anything happening at the human and soul levels… projection/shadow work, deepening into our shared humanity, relationship work, changes in experiences of senses, and awakening into/as alive presence, luminous blackness, indwelling God, and much more… is all a part of the exploration of who we are.

It is valuable in itself, as part of life exploring itself in all its many forms. And it is valuable as stepping stones into an awakening of what we are.

At the same time, it is helpful to see that it is just a play of form… transient, fleeting… content.. not what we are.

If an awakening into what we are is our main focus, then it is appropriate to not put much emphasis on it.

If an awakening into who we are is our main focus, then it is appropriate to delve more into it for its own sake.

And if an awakening into what and who we are is our focus (as it is for me), it is important to differentiate the two, seeing clearly what belongs to which.

A part of the process of eroding beliefs and identities is how we compare ourselves to others, or rather how we compare our stories about our selves with our stories about others. For me, having always placed a great deal of value on being active in the world, and of service in different ways, it is difficult to now go through a phase of fatigue, rest and not doing much at all (apart from “inner” work, which seems to happen mostly on its own.)

There isn’t much sense of a choice here, even in a relative and conventional sense. At the same time, it may be helpful to explore how this is important and not, compared with other outward manifestations.

It is not more or less important, in an absolute sense. It is all the play of God. And it is all happening on its own, living its own life. It is not as if there is much of a choice locally…

It is less important, in a conventional sense, than many other activities… I can see that. Some folks help on a large scale in the world, either by relieving suffering, or by nudging people to awakening. I do neither, and that is OK.

It is more important, in a different sense, in that it is what is happening for me now. It is what life brings up for me right now to explore, experience, investigate, live. And also, it is an exploration of an awakening process, which is the final release from suffering, so in that sense also more important.

Again, in seeing all the different stories together, they tend to cancel each other out. What is left is just what is happening, here now, inherently neutral… prior to any story about it, and free to allow (and see the grain of truth) in any story.

Vince Horn has a good comment at Buddhist Geeks, under an interview about the Brad Warner vs. Big Mind controversy.

[…] Even the Buddha recognized that people could progress through the path in at least 4 different ways:
1) slow progress that is very difficult (probably what Brad is describing)
2) slow progress that is pleasant
3) fast progress that is very difficult
4) fast progress that is easy

Fast progress, and I’m talking extraordinarily fast, does happen. I’ve seen it happen for others, have heard of it happening, and have at times experienced it happening. My opinion is that as practitioners, no matter what point in the path we are, we need to hold this open as a possibility and respect and appreciate it when it happens. I suspect that not doing so only creates a disempowering air around enlightenment, and may actually prevent people (if they buy that one-sided perspective) from deepening in insight. […]

It also seems that however it happens, it evens out in the end… in two ways.

When Ground awakens to itself, that’s it… and there is also the realization that it all, the whole human drama and drama of awakening, was no other than emptiness dancing… an appearance of a drama unfolding over time, all happening as no other than this awake emptiness, this timeless now.

And also, the long and/or difficult process has its own rewards. It gives a different depth and richness of experience for this human self, which can be very valuable in aiding others through the process.

(more…)

It seems that lots of folks on the spiritual circuit wonder why they haven’t awakened yet. There is a resistance to what is (which happens to be what holds it, the appearance of non-awakening, in place.)

So why haven’t we awakened yet?

The immediate and technical reason is the resistance itself, which creates a sense of I and Other, splitting the seamless field of awakeness down the middle. This comes from a belief in a separate self, which in turn is propped up by innumerable other beliefs. The initial sense of I and Other is elaborated through lots of different identities which define exactly how this I is different from the rest of what is.

Another reason is that it is all the play of emptiness. It is all the spontaneous expression and manifestation of God in the form realm. It is lila, the dance of God. God manifesting, experiencing and exploring itself as and in form, including taking itself to be just a segment of this form.

Any experience, independent of its content, is God experiencing itself. Awakened or not, it is still God exploring and experiencing itself in its vastness and immense richness.

Specifically, there is a tremendous richness in the exploration and experiencing of being a separate self. Why would God let that go right away? There is so much more to explore and experience there, so it makes sense to allow the exploration to continue a little longer.

It may not always be what our human self wants, but that too is part of the game.

So if we take ourselves as this human self, and have stories about why we haven’t awakened, then exploring the genuine gifts of not having awakened may help.

It takes some of the charge out of our initial stories, allowing us to see that they are only stories, and revealing the inherent neutrality of the situation.

It also helps reduce resistance to what is, or rather identification with and fueling of this resistance. This in turn eases a sense of something being off. And it also allows for an easier noticing of what already and always is. A field of awake emptiness and form, seamless, with no center, sometimes with a sense of a separate self and sometimes not.

(Thanks to Tom for suggesting fractals as another example)

In ecosystems, and most other systems, the edges are often the most rich and fertile.

We have the land ecosystem, and then the ocean ecosystem, and at the edge between the two there are representatives for both, and for the edge as well. Instead of characteristics from only one system, there are three: one, the other, and whatever emerges uniquely in the intersection of the two.

And so it is with awakening as well.

We have one system which is the awakened one. Another, which is the deluded one (taking oneself as a separate self). And at the edge of the two, there are characteristics of one, the other, and the uniqueness of the edge.

We get to explore a rich landscape, spanning all three ecosystems.

(In systems language, the awakened and deluded situations are attractor states, habitual states the system falls into… but in in this ecosystem analogy, it fits better to think of them as different landscapes or systems.)