This is a parallel to the previous post on what everyone and nobody wants, and clarifying intention.

When I look, I find that everything that comes up in me - every desire, story, emotion, behavior - is love. And most of the time, it is love filtered through stories taken as true, so it doesn’t always appear as love in its expression.

It is love filtered through a sense of a separate I, since a sense of I-Other is the first that happens when a story is taken as true. (There is an I here associated with the true story, and Other over there associated with its reversals which I need to defend against.) This filtered love appears as love for this separate I and its circle of us.

And this love for a separate I and its circle of us is expressed through whatever other beliefs are around. It shows up as any emotion, including fear (which is there to keep this separate I safe), as any story (again there to protect and take care of this separate I), and any action in the world. And the stronger the beliefs, the less it tends to look like love when it comes out.

So here too, it can be very helpful to clarify what is behind emotions, stories and behaviors. When I peel back the layers, what do I find? (The Big Mind process is an excellent tool for this, revealing how each voice at the personal level is there to take care of the human self, and are really expressions of love.)

When I have not clarified this, I am at war with myself. There is struggle, drama and a sense of split. I am caught up in the midst of it. I work and struggle against what is.

And when I clarify it, I am not split against myself anymore. The drama goes out of it and there is more clarity, sense of ease, and of a workable situation.

Just to summarize the previous post…

To me, right now at least, it seems helpful to differentiate practice aimed at growing up (healing/maturing) and waking up (to what we are).

If my motivation and intention is to reduce suffering and find happiness - to get/compensate for/escape from something - it seems appropriate to emphasize a practice aimed at healing and maturing, finding my wholeness as who I am, this human self.

And if my motivation is truth and love -  a quiet curiosity or love of existence - it makes more sense to aim at waking up, inviting what I am to notice itself. (And also working at maturing which aids awakening, and helps it be expressed in a more fluid way.)

It can be helpful to sincerely investigate and clarify our real motivation. Although in real life, it doesn’t necessarily make that much difference, especially if we use tools that work simultaneously at both levels. The ones that help us grow up, and invite in a waking up as well.

(more…)

Somewhat convoluted…

I find different reasons for practice at the levels of who I am (this human self) and what I am (that which experience happens within, to and as).

At the level of who I am, the reasons for practice are healing and maturing. And at the level of what I am, inviting what I am to notice itself, the motivations are truth and love.

Right now, it seems helpful to differentiate the two.

At the level of who I am, I practice to heal and mature, and this reduces suffering and sets the stage for happiness. It invites in both, in a genuine way and to an extent that is sufficient for most of us.

The world is a mirror for me, so I find in my own human self what I see in the wider world. There is a sense of wholeness, embracing the (evolving) fullness of who I am, of self-reliance. I am not looking for people or situations for happiness, but carry it with me in my own wholeness.

So this alone is a pretty good reason for practice, and - as mentioned - quite enough for many of us.

But for some of us, finding this approximate wholeness as who we are, is still not quite enough. We see that it is an approximate wholeness, no matter how much we work on it, and there is still a sense of I-Other, of a subtle separation, of something not quite right, of something missing, of not quite being home yet.

So then there is the practice at the level of what we are, inviting what we are to notice itself more clearly. The motivation here is truth and love, finding the truth of what we are, and acting on our inherent love for existence itself. (Said in a glib way, there is the love of truth, and also the truth of love.)

I am not practicing to get, compensate for, attain, or escape from anything. I am just practicing to find what is really true, and to act on and deepen my love for existence itself. (Aka God, Brahman, Tao, etc.)

The good news here is of course that the practices - the tools - we use in either case often are the same.

The Work, the Big Mind process, allowing/being with experience, exploring the sense fields, choiceless awareness practice, and many more practices, all work on the levels of who we are (inviting in healing and maturing) and what we are (inviting what we are to notice itself more clearly). The relative emphasis of the two depends somewhat on how we do the practice and our intention.

And even if we start with motivations at the who level (healing, maturing, release from suffering, fining happiness), it may shift (or not) into the motivations at the what level (truth and love).

So for myself, when I see motivations relating to healing and maturing - and reducing suffering and finding happiness, I know they are motivations at the who level. And when I find motivations of truth and love, I see that they belong to the what level.

This is quite different from what I see in most spiritual groups and traditions I am familiar with, and I am not sure if it is just a matter of preference or if I am missing something here.

For me, if I saw someone wanting healing/maturing, I would recommend finding increasing wholeness as who they are. That in itself gives a quite deep release from suffering, and invites in a stable happiness. It may not be “complete” but it is really quite good.

And if I saw someone with truth and love as their main motivation, I would point them in the direction of inviting what they are to notice itself. Of course also including the who level, since working on that level makes it easier for what we are to notice itself, it makes it easier for our human self to function in the world, and when what we are notices itself, it makes it easier for it to express itself more fluidly through our human self.

I would not promote a practice with the intention of what we are to notice itself, if what the person seeks is release from suffering, and happiness. It wouldn’t be honest, since a practice aimed at wholeness at the who level is more than sufficient for this.

Come to think about it, that may be why most Buddhist groups - although their “mission statement” is at what level awakening - often emphasize healing/maturing at the who level. Most people come from the motivation of seeking healing/maturing, and that is exactly what most groups and teachers emphasize.

For the few suckers (like me, it seems) who can’t help it and really want to find the truth and act on their love, there is always the additional teachings, and the additional work that invites what we are into noticing itself.

There are the few more steps beyond the healing/maturing at the who level.

What are some of the benefits of following the chains back to their initial segments?

For myself, I notice that it helps me get more familiar with and befriend who I am, as a human being. It helps me discover what is going on at my human level.

Said another way, it helps me find and embrace my wholeness as a human being, to find peace with it, to work with rather than against what is there.

It helps me see that it is all pure innocence. No need to fight it, resist it, want it to go away. Just seeing it clearly is enough.

It helps me see what is already more true for me, in who and what I am.

I find that when there is a sense of being a separate I, there is fear behind just about any emotion, motivation, desire and action. I find that behind that fear is love, filtered through my circle of us. I find that behind the sense of a separate I, and everything that comes with it, is a belief in the story of a separate I, and stories that flesh this identity out.

It can be very helpful to explore the chains leading up to reactive emotions, rigid views, and desires.

One at a time, asking the question and waiting for an answer to come up.

When I do this, I find that whatever beliefs are there, whatever stories I am identified with, go back to the central belief, or sense of, a separate I, an I with an Other.

I find that whatever reactive emotions are there lead back to fear. Fear for the survival of this human self. Fear for pain and suffering.

I find that whatever surface desire is there leads back to a desire for happiness, and freedom from suffering.

And I find that all of this goes back to love. Love for this human self and whatever is within its circle of us.

And I see that all of this is pure innocence. An innocence in adopting beliefs from my surroundings. An innocence in the fear that is there naturally when there is a sense of a separate I. An innocence in the desire for happiness and freedom from suffering. An innocence in the love we already are, filtered through the boundary of us. And an innocence in where this boundary of us is placed, coming from culture and maturity.

The risk in writing this is that this too becomes another belief. Another place we go in our stories to create a sense of security, of having figured it all out.

And one remedy is in taking the time for the questions to sink in and the answers to surface. Going through one at a time, not knowing where it will lead. Trusting what comes up.

Sincerely exploring this for ourselves, inviting in curiosity and receptivity. Inviting in an open heart. Inviting in a bodily felt sense of the questions and the answers that surface. Allowing experience in a wholehearted way.

Seeing that any answer is really a question, even if the question mark initially seemed to be left out.

And also investigating our beliefs around all this, including the belief of I know, through The Work or another form of inquiry.

I was fortunate enough to see the new Milarepa movie tonight, made by Neten Chokling who was one of the actors in The Cup and assisted with Travelers and Magicians.

Since I have been exploring the early part of the chain behind “deluded” actions lately, that was one of the things that came up for me.

Especially, how, when we unravel what is behind motivations, the ones stemming from a sense of an I with an Other, we find first fear, and then love.

In his case, fear of losing his mother (she threatened with committing suicide if he didn’t take revenge on the village), fear of what may become of him (they had lost their family fortune), fear of not getting his girl (he was poor, she more affluent). When I look for myself, I find that these types of fears are often behind ill considered actions, and also reactivity and reactive emotions. (Anger, frustration, despair.)

And going behind that fear, there is love. In his case, love for his mother, his father, his sister, himself. Love for those he included in his circle of us, which probably shrank due to how his family was treated by most others in the village.

And of course, behind the fear and reactivity, we find beliefs. A sense of being a separate self, beliefs in justice, in wanting a good life, and so on.

And mixed in with it all, pure innocence. Pure innocence in believing certain thoughts, just because most people around do it. Pure innocence in acting from fear, because this fear is inevitable when we take ourselves to be an I with an Other. Pure innocence in this fear taking the form of anger, hate, despair and wanting revenge, because that is inevitable when we resist the experience of fear, and also when it gets mixed up in typical beliefs. Pure innocence in the love that is behind it all, because that love is what we are. Pure innocence in filtering that love through a boundary of us and them, because that is inevitable when there is a sense of a separate I. Pure innocence in where that boundary falls, because that comes from culture, family and where we are in terms of maturity.

The story, as any other story, is a mirror for myself. Can I find what I see in Milarepa, his path, and in the people around him, in myself?

Where do I find the confusion? Being caught up in a sense of a separate self, and everything that comes from that? Where do I find the turning point? The situation or situations where I went far enough in acting from confusion, reactivity and beliefs that it stunned me, invited me to see if there is another way.

And in the sequel, which is about his training and awakening process, where do I build up stone towers just to have to dismantle them again, or having them dismantled for me?

A slightly different take on attachments…

Attachment to anything - situations, people, things, roles - is what causes suffering. Our stories about what should be and what is clash. Which is fine. It is just part of the human condition. But after a while, and if we act from kindness towards ourselves, we may want to explore this further. What is really going on? Is there another way?

One of the first things we may notice is that any attachment is really an attachment to a story. The story of I with an Other, and then all the other stories that flesh out the identity of this separate I.

I am an object in the world, so want what supports this object and do not want what does not support it. I am alive, so don’t want to be dead. I believe in fairness, so want to see fairness in how I and others are treated.

We may also notice that an attachment to a story is really an identification with this story. We have a story of an I with an Other, and take ourselves to be this separate I. We have a story of being a particular gender, age, of a particular ethnicity, having certain values, and take ourselves to be all of that.

Another thing we may notice is that it is all completely innocent. We are all dealing with this life as best as we can, and often from lack of clarity.

And then, that behind all of it is fear. Fear for what may happen to this human self. We attach to stories to deal with this fear, and try to avoid what we are afraid may happen to it.

And that behind this fear is love. A love for this human self and whatever is within its circle of concern. All attachments to stories come from love. From wanting the best for what we take as I and us.

So how do we explore attachments, or identifications with stories?

A simple and direct way is to investigate the beliefs themselves, and find what is already more true for us. I can use a sense of discomfort as a guide to discover when my stories of what is and should be clash, and then investigate one or both of these. Is it true? What happens when I believe that thought? Who would I be without it? What is the truth in its turnarounds?

Another is to investigate impermanence in the five sense fields, to see impermanence directly here and now. This helps us reorganize and find stories more aligned with this impermanence. And it also helps us see that no story is absolutely true, which invites a release of identification with these stories.

We can also include each of the three centers: head, heart and belly.

We can find ourselves as that which is already free from identification with stories, for instance through the headless experiments, the Big Mind process, and finding ourselves as what does not change in the midst of the constantly changing content of awareness.

We can invite our heart to open through various heart centered practices, or just a focus on the heart and its qualities.

And we can invite in a deep body sense of trust and nurturing fullness through various body and hara centered practices, such as Breema.

Each of these tends to invite in an opening in the two other centers, especially if we bring attention to it. An open heart invites in an open mind and a nurturing fullness. An open mind invites in an open heart and a felt-sense of trust. A body feeling of trust and nurturing fullness invites in an open heart and mind.

We may also discover that resisting experience tends to close each of the centers. That this happens only when there is an identification with this resistance.

And that fully allowing experience, independent of what it is, tends to invite in a receptivity and opening of each center. And that this is also an allowing of the resistance, which is a release of identification with it and the content of experience in general.

(more…)

I don’t often use the word ego, and when I do, it is mostly to show that it is not very useful.

Or it could be to differentiate the two meanings of the word: In a western, psychological sense, where we want a healthy and strong ego. Here, it refers to the “operating system” for our human self, that which helps it orient and function in the world, and we want it in as good operating order as possible. And in an eastern philosophical sense, where it just refers to a sense of a separate I and whatever comes along with that.

In the second sense of the word, as a description of a sense of an I with an Other, and whatever goes with it, it sometimes has a sinister tone to it. “The ego” as some evil entity lurking somewhere, with no good intentions. (Which is why I don’t like using the word.)

But really, the ego in that sense is just from innocence, an innocent belief in stories, taking them as real and substantial, and temporarily overlooking what we already are.

And beyond that, the ego is pure love. A love for this human self and whatever is within its circle of care and compassion. It is pure kindness, pure compassion behind it. No matter how it may look on the surface.

Ego, in both meanings of the word, is pure innocence, pure love.

And, in the second sense of the word, pure - temporary - confusion.

It is always risky to generalize, but in some areas - when experience and insights find the same - it can also be helpful. In any case, whatever we come up with is always a question. Is it true?

So in terms of our motivations, it seems that whatever is behind them is first fear, and behind that, love.

As soon as we sense ourselves as an I with an Other, there is always fear. We are an object in the world, at the mercy of the larger world. We have needs, wants, desires. We get what we don’t want, don’t get what we want, lose what we don’t want to lose, don’t lose what we want to lose, or at least, we know it may - and will - happen. It is a drama of life and death, which flavors even the little things in our lives.

Whatever we do and experience in this situation is tinged with fear. Our likes and dislikes, our goals and motivations, they are all mixed in with at least some fear. Or, we can say that fear is behind it all. Fear of not getting what we want, getting what we don’t want, losing what we have and want, not losing what we have and don’t want. However innocent, however much it looks like love or joy or just enjoyment, there is always fear lurking in the background.

But there is something even behind that. Behind the fear that comes from a sense of a separate I is love.

And that is especially noticeable when we do practices such as the Big Mind process. Each voice at the human level, whatever it may be, is always there to help and protect our human self. It operates from love. Its whole reason for being is love.

So behind anything in our human life, behind any motivation, any emotion, any action in the world, is fear - coming from a sense of being a separate I, and then love.

And as with any statement, it is really a question. Is it true? Can I find it in my own experience? What do I find when I investigate it in my own experience, maybe even starting with that which seems the furthest removed from this on the surface? Is something else more true for me? Do I want this to be true? Or not true? What if I find something different?

OK. So I just got something to eat. What was behind that action? A sense of hunger. I wanted to satisfy that hunger. Ultimately, I wanted to keep this human self alive. If the hunger went far enough, there would be fear there about it dying. So I can find fear in the background, not at the surface in this situation, but I can easily see it surfacing if the situation was more extreme. And behind that is love. A love for this human self, a love for life, a love for being alive. Compassion. Kindness.

Earlier today, I went somewhat out of my way to do a favor for my partner. It just seemed the thing to do, not much going on at the surface of it. But there too, I can see that if I take the situation to an extreme, there is fear mixed in with it. A fear of not being liked, of losing her, of being alone. And there is also a love there. A love for her, wanting the best for her, wanting to help her. And a love for myself, doing what seems best for me as well.

One way to look at our lives is that it is all love filtered in different ways.

Mainly, it can be filtered through a sense of a separate self, in which case it takes the form of love for self with some glimpses of a more selfless love coming through now and then. The love for self is expressed as attraction & aversion and all their flavors such as possessive love, anger, sadness, grief, joy, happiness, and so on.

Also, it is filtered through widening circles of us, of the ones included in our circle of care, concern and compassion.

When these circles leave just about nothing out, there is a more clear expression of Big Heart, of a natural love for all there is, recognizing that it is not separate from this separate self, or that there is no separate self here in the first place.

So we can say that everything expressed through our human life is really Big Heart filtered in different ways. If there is a sense of a separate self, Big Heart is filtered through aversion and attraction. As our circle of us expands, more beings and situations are included in our circle of care even as there is still a sense of a separate self. And as this sense of a separate self thins, Big Heart notices itself more easily and is expressed in a more clear and direct way.

A quick exploration of forms of love, which can be put into three general categories: the love of existence, selfless love, and possessive love.

Possessive love it the easy one. This is the one where we believe in a thought such as “I need her”, which comes out in all sorts of (often subtly) possessive ways, including despair and drama. Whenever there is any belief in any thought, possessiveness is included (I want this, not that).

This is the form of love we see in movies, read about in the magazines, hear about in the news, and what most of us know a lot about from our own lives.

Then there is selfless love, which is what is expressed through a human being when Ground is awake to itself, yet still functionally connected with this particular human being. It is Big Mind awake to itself, as a field of awakeness and form, inherently absent of any I with an Other, lived through a human self.

It can take a yin (gentle, receptive, empathic) or yang (forceful, cutting through) form, and it can focus on temporary or more thorough relief (making it easier for people to be who they take themselves to be, or aiding the Ground to wake up to itself in other humans beings).

Selfless love is also expressed in more or less skillful ways, depending on the maturity, development and training of the human self. Even here, strategies may, at a conventional level, backfire if there is a lack of maturity, development, skills, and understanding of the situation.

And finally, the love inherent in existence itself. This one takes many forms.

First, that anything exists at all is love. It arises within, to and as consciousness, as love.

Then, that all the awful things happening to living beings, from a conventional view, are not really that awful from the view of consciousness, or Big Mind. It is all temporary, ephemeral, a play within and for God. There is no separate self in any of these beings, only the one seamless consciousness as both the experiencing and experienced.

And that anything happening, any situation, is an invitation for Ground to wake up to itself. Even within this one there are many forms. For instance, whenever there is a belief in a story (so Ground does not notice itself) there is discomfort, and this is an encouragement to change and, eventually, to see what is more true for us than the story.

And also one that is a little less general: that there are more explicit invitations for Ground to wake up in our world, in human cultures. Forms of invitations we recognize even when we are absorbed in stories.

Sometimes the guests that come through are pretty ragged… (Guests here meaning any content of experience, including emotions, reactivity, wounds, etc.) And if we try to push them away, ignore them, call the police, pretend they are not there, or end up wailing or running frantically around with them, they stay ragged.

The other option is to be with them in an heartfelt way, to allow whatever comes up from them, listen to it, feel into it, and even love it. That is how people in our life often can heal, and that is often how these guests can heal as well.

Again, nothing new here. We know it from our own life… seeing it in the world of humans and other beings, and the inner world of emotions, reactivity, wounds, and so on. At our human level, the outer and the inner mirror each other.

We can explore it quite simply in this way… just being with what comes up, in an heartfelt way. And we can also explore it more in detail through for instance voice dialog or the Big Mind process. Listening to disowned voices, the ones that are hurt in different ways, allowing them as they are, not needing them to change, not using them as something to manipulate or as a gateway into something else. Being interested in who they are, their history, being receptive to them, respecting them as they are, seeing and allowing them, feeling into what they say, and even loving them as they are. Even shifting into Big Heart and embracing them from Big Heart.

In terms of the three centers, there is receptivity at the head center (seeing), belly center (feeling, felt-sense), and heart center (love)… in short, a heartfelt seeing.

When we resist them (identify with the resistance), we not only rehearse the (apparent) split between I and Other but the guests also stay as they are, in misery, coming back later wanting to be let in.

Compassion includes guests in any form and shape, whether they show up in flesh and blood or in the form of emotions, reactivity, frustration, grief, sadness, anger, irritability, restlessness, wanting to be somewhere else.

I have been exploring how the heart center combines with head and/or belly centers for different flavors.

When the head center is included, there is the usual empty luminosity and clarity of the head center there. A very yang brilliance (compared with the smooth fullness of Spirit filtered through the belly center, it is stark, almost a desert quality).

And when the belly center is included, there is the smooth, round fullness of the belly center, which allows a felt-sense of the heart qualities.

And together, there is even more sense of fullness and richness… the love of the heart center, the empty luminosity of the head center, and the velvety smooth round fullness of the belly center. The loving, seeing and feeling of all as Spirit.

I also notice, as I did early on with the belly center awakening, that bringing in the head and belly centers together invites the heart in as well. Although it is certainly possible to start with any one, and bring either or both of the others in.

Of course, there is not really any “bringing in” of anything… all three are there, but it is possible to invite one or more into the foreground of awareness… shifting each one more into the foreground or background.

Somebody sent me a question about love, pointing out (accurately) that I don’t use that word much here.

Here are some of the things that came up for me…

Jnana and bhakti

There are two main approaches to spirituality: jnana (inquiry, insight, wisdom) and bhakti (love, compassion, devotion).

Over the last few years, jnana has been more in the foreground for me, in the form of various ways to do inquiry. Before this, there were several (pre-blog) years where bhakti was in the foreground as a practice and lived experience.

Both are fine of course. And at different times in our lives, one may be in the foreground for a while, and then the other, and then maybe neither, and then both.

Filters

Another thing about love is that it is used in many different meanings, and also can be filtered in different ways.

It can be filtered through a generally egocentric or ethnocentric or widening worldcentric way of being. Being exposed to people living from the two first of these, it is fine if I am inside of their circle of concern, but not so nice if I am outside of it. (Ku Klux Klan really do love whites, and I am sure it is a genuine love, but I if I am black and on the outside of that love, I may not appreciate it so much.)

Love, even world-centric love, is also filtered through beliefs. For instance, I may love somebody, but also think they should appreciate me, or be with me, or give me money, or generally behave the way I want. Love is then mixed up with much else that may not be so comfortable for those at the receiving end.

The view and emotion of love

There is also the view and emotion of love.

The view of love is Big Mind, or any views that approach Big Mind such as deepening and widening worldcentric circles of concern, a sense of no separation, of oneness, of recognition, and so on.

If I act from these views, my actions may be interpreted by others as coming from love. In reality, I am just acting from a sense or view of no separation, or recognition, or Big Mind, but it certainly looks like love, and I may even experience it as love - or not.

Which brings us to the emotion or experience of love. As with any content, the emotion or experience of love comes and goes. It is sometimes strong, sometimes, less strong, sometimes absent, sometimes mixed up with all sorts of other emotions. It is maybe not the most reliable basis for action.

But the view can be more stable. Unravelling beliefs, or finding myself as witness, the world of form is a seamless field and there is no absolute separation of I and Other anymore. From here, I will naturally live in ways that looks like love. And when the emotion is there to create a fuller and richer experience, that is the icing on the cake.

Impersonal and personal

A final thing that comes up for me is that love can be experienced as impersonal or personal, by either the giver or the receiver.

On the one hand, love in its essence is completely impersonal - embracing everyone and everything.

On the other hand, if my whole being is participating (present, engaged, wholehearted), and I am transparent and receptive, and interested in the other person as a human being, it tends to be experienced - by both, as more personal, more alive, more rich and full.