18. The Teacher and the Student

We think that there is Teacher capable of teaching and a Student capable of learning.

Lets us start from here and see the reality of this statement.

To learn a language or whatever there is to learn, one must know a known language that is already in place and  is common to both the teacher and the student. Like one can learn French using English or vice versa. Or in the worst case, that a student is put into a new environment, like a child from India adopted in Japan, the child must have a sign language in place, that is common to himself and his foster parents.

How does a new born child ever learn without even a sign language in place when he is born. We say that we can condition a mind etc etc. But how does a new born learn, even when he doesn’t treat the world as separate from him, or doesnt even know that you are teaching and he is learning? Then we explain that he learns by instinct. So instinct is the source of learning and teaching, and not the capacity of a conditioned mind.

If at all a child could learn from the seeming sounds that parents make, it could also learn from the sounds that birds and animals make. But this does not happen. I am now over 50 and daily I spend 30 minutes with a crow that greets me morning and evening. We talk all the time. I tell him that you can crow away until death and I can ‘English’ away until death but we really can’t use our sounds to get across. This should have stopped our daily meetings. But it seems to continue and is very consistent. What we exchange are only feelings for one another and assume that we understand each other. Surprisingly it was a crow (not the same crow visiting me daily or even could be and I would not know) that taught me that I was not a body – mind based identity, which mankind only helped in unfolding further.

In case of humans, something happens and minds seem to communicate better than man and crows. Is has to be like in a dream or an illusion. Knowing one another verbally seems to happen all the time. Sometimes we understand and other times we misunderstand. In fact Knowledge happens to us rather than our ability to learn and teach. The best teachers still have a lot of worst students and the best students study without so called ‘not good teachers’ too. In fact google also can teach, even though not human. Then we say, self teaching and learning, as if an inner Guru and and outer disciple.  This should not have been the case if teaching and learning were our independent capacities as humans. 

Knowing a language or a subject is not a capacity of an individual because there are no individuals. If  it is true that one can learn a language, he must learn all languages. In fact there would be only one language. if it is true that one can learn a subject, he should be able to learn all subjects and facts like maths is difficult or science is difficult would not be valid. In fact all subjects are funny in a sense. We say 3 and 3 make 6. In fact 3 and 6 are only sounds. How it ever came about and how it came about to be believed to be true is, as mystifying, as its origin. Finally all would have been enlightened because so much of teaching seems to be all over the place about enlightenment.

So, knowledge happens to you and with knowledge, illusions take on reality, just like a sound 3, becomes a mathematical figure and the 'thingness' or 'objects' gets into names and forms.

So Knowledge based in dualistic language, is the basis of Ignorance of who we are and becomes the creator of reality to give rise to world of separate objects.

In the end, it is also true that this happens to you and is unavoidable so as to make an illusory world look really real. Realising this can help in de-conditioning the mind, out of the illusion of who we think we are.

17. Conciousness and Objects

I was just thinking for some concrete link between objects ( including sounds and thoughts) and consciousness. So it goes like this :

There is only the field of knowing, which feels like contents in the knowing are simply contents, as forms and objects, that includes presence and absence of content or part of content, to contrast one part from another and is merged with memory or knowledge, which also is more content in a non physical form, that is apparently superimposed on physical content, to give a sense of content, as separate  and real, rather than simply a 'kind' of knowing. Forms are 'explained' by knowledge as 'energy pattern. In a certain frequency it may appear as sound, as light, as objects etc. to put reality out there in a logical format, acceptable to mind. The intelligence knowing behaves as an energy that forms a field, as the consciousness, which is a source  that feels itself, as these energy movements or ‘senses’ or 'knows' these energy movements or changes.  

Behaviour of a pattern of ‘energy’ in space is 'known' as objects ( including sounds and thoughts). The essence of smallest material of objects which are protons and neutrons and electrons etc. are the same for all material and are not different for diamond, the hardest or for helium, the softest and such material that forms them, knows them also. In fact, when to get to the core of material, there is no material. So no material , or intelligence, behaves as 'energy and further energy behaves as material. Thus this intelligence has a 'being' capacity and also a 'knowing' and works magically such that the knowing of being appears as the being itself. Something like knowing of pain is itself pain. 

Even material of these protons neutrons etc ,are only energy patterns and there is not any matter as such inside a proton or an electron,  when we go fully deep.

So energy patterns appears to us as objects and the intelligence of energy known as 'consciousness' allows the pattern to be known i.e seen or heard or felt (like in a thought). So the question is whether material (or energy pattern ) is a perquisite for energy intelligence or are they independent of each other. 

The Field of Energy is always there and is all that there is. The only way it becomes known is by expressing itself as energy or vibration and getting known. However if energy vibration is not happening, then there is knowing of no energy or no content to this field. So nothing is actually happening accept that there is a knowing of patterns of energy movement that keeps changing to give a feel as if a animating man has stopped animating which is labeled as 'death'. it only means that now energy moves in another  pattern to show an object called 'man' as stagnated and next to show as ‘disintegrating man’ and then as worms and so on or as Co2 gas if cremated. So the gas and man are both energy patterns and the intelligence or consciousness can surely 'feel' this. The intelligence or consciousness as a field is non-matter by itself and expresses itself in the knowing as movement or matter.
So consciousness as knowing has a magical property that knowing of content can feel like there is content to knowing outside of such knowing and knowing as separate from knowing of content, knows such a content in separation. This hitch in understanding is the functional basis of the world of creation and a 'me' that can know it.

15. Glimpse of a seeking Mind

In the early days of my seeking, I was desperate to get to the bottom of spirituality. Intellectually I had to know what all these sages and guru’s had been taking about. They also said that the guru was always ‘in you’. I then made a model human who had a split mind.One that was personal and questioning ( which I called the Mind) and the other that was impersonal and answering that I called the GURU.  This was only for the purpose of analysis or for pondering. The result of this discussion in the head was fascinating and this happened all in 10 minutes from my house to office while I was driving the car. How I reached office unaware of the drive was another question. 

Discussion went on as follows :

Mind : What is it -that can remove -this sense of separateness- after I seem to have understood all the things that I have read about 

Guru : The Most genuine answer is - Whatever creates this separateness.  

Mind: This mind is always making a concept to understand things. The only last chance is -to make a concept that can transcend the mind.
Guru: What is your problem in ‘seeing’ or experiencing non- duality.

Mind : I don’t have any clear idea about what exactly it means. If I knew, I would have known it. The faintest idea that I have is that - We think the subject sees the object and the ''Realised' people ‘see’ this differently. ( I don’t know what they see).Guru : -Why do you see them separate in the first place. Where exactly do you see all these objects. Take a 'pen' for example. ( and replace it with objects, people or thoughts as required from time to time)Mind: At best, I can assume that I have a screen inside of me where this picture of the pen falls. I like to call it the mind screen.
Mind : Frankly speaking, posing this question has put me in confusion. However for sake of discussion or for practicality it may be assumed to be long screen covering head to heart.
Guru : That is not a bad idea. For a while we will work with this assumption. But do you have any faint idea of a particular spot in the body for this ‘mind –screen’-that sees the pen.Mind.: No idea of a particular spot. It could be in the head - like you say for data or the heart when attached with emotions or any other place. As long as I see it and know what I am seeing the purpose is served.Guru : Can we assume that this screen moves from head to heart automatically sensing some ‘thingness’ of the pen that can be linked to data or emotions?
Mind : It doesn’t matter, it is all the same. But Hold it a minute there. There is something fishy now. It's ok to sight the pen. But when I have to interpret this new point of view, - it seems now that the object which is the pen is simply the knowledge projected on the form and also a self projection as the subject or the  ‘see-er’. Actually ‘our’ knowledge which is the   mind screen is superimposed on the object and have become one. The mind is the object and its knowledge that is inseparable  Now wait a minute. Where is the place for a ‘me’ here? What is happening. What my role now?Guru; Analyse some moreMind : If the I assume that the mind- screen was ‘I’  and ‘I’ became superimposed onto the object and inseparable from it, 'I' and the pen becomes one because 'I' seems to be at the pen and not in the body. That means the mind is formless taking shapes of all forms which is a powerful GOD like quality. Mind is everywhere.Guru : Was it not that you were taught that GOD is everywhere and in all things that you see?Mind: Now there seems to be some clarity. Guru : 'I'  is a knowing mechanism, that is the essence of its own existence. It knows contents in the knowing, by being their knowing, and in a way that knowing is all there is, and knowing of being is the being just like knowing of pain is pain, and there cannot be a known apart from or separate from the knowing of it. So knowing of it is all there is. There are no contents, outside the knowing of the knowing of content. Mind: The last bit was easy to understand but difficult to experience. The knowing could not make into a content of knowing, because there are no contents 'as such' other than as a knowing of content. So knowing cannot be known. Its the unknown. lol

Guru : Is there is feeling of seeing this pen in your head or Is it being seen in your heart.

Mind : Now this is a new twist and funny question too.  Why is the question posed in this manner. What’s the logic behind this division at the neck.

Guru : When you see this pen with a lot of data, the screen seems to be in the head. If you  have to see this pen with a lot of emotions attached to it, the screen seems to be shifting close to the heart.

Mind: I can accept such a automated movement.

Guru : Since it seems to be a wireless screen that moves on its own, does it make any difference if the screen is shifted -a little -outside of the body -say -a little behind the body. If this be so, how would you analyse the new situation?

Mind: Makes sense because in this situation, other than the pen, my body parts also seem to be taken care on the screen as I am seeing them all. The shift in way of imagination is a seems a good and practical move.

Guru : What if the mind -screen is slowly shifted backward and around the body and put on to the pen itself so that the screen is ‘on the pen’.

14. Time and space

This post is very important and very tricky and the catch of any seeker. If one can actually ‘feel’ space and time correctly, then there is very little headway left to the ultimate goal. Goal, in the sense, to get a feeling of how stupidly we believe- in things that are’not’.

 
Time and space does not exist exist at all in its own capacity.  They are only concepts and totally unreal. However it is impossible for one to feel so. The day they feel so, it would be a great day.

Time:

Scientist invented time as a grasp for change. As a measure for change. Its a unit of change. What is - is change. How we may grasp it is in its translation into time. Assume that time exists and is divided into blocks and we are describing the present block by directly looking into it. This part can be seen to be real, as it not be from memory or imagination but direct seeing. We can call it ‘The present block of time’.

If time were passing as we assume it to be, then the present block of time should flow onwards to become the past and new block of time that was the future has to present itself now.  You can wait for eternity to wait and see when the present block ends. This will never happen, however long the wait would be.

Now try and comprehend a block of time that we think already happened yesterday. Attempting this itself is a process that would have to be done in the ‘present block’ of time. Also what we will ‘now’ be doing is extracting the events we earlier experienced ‘now’ as events from memory, or as a thought. All this has to arise only in the present block of time and that too about ‘yesterday’.

This means, we are squeezing some memories of yesterday through this present block of time. This means, we are trying to move time in the present block instead of the present block moving and becoming the past.

Is time moving in the present block or present block of appearances moving in time? The present block never moved.

Same with future. You can only imagine the future events that may happen and this imagination of the future has to take place in the present block of time and not in any future block of time.

So past and presnt are mental frames. If the present frame should join it seemlessly, it should also have a mental essence or a psychic essence. So there is no physical time. It is a ‘made up’ concept to explain a situation or an event. We try to squeeze the contents of appearances from memory for the past and imagination for the future to make them as contents of the present block and make meaning of them as if the present block of time is being unsqueezed out and made broader. The present moment or presence is beyond time. Time is not applicable here.

Space is another context that never was. Look at space. ' Here'  is reality.

You are sitting in a room. All that appears there is - all that is there.

Now the mind is squeezing office, America, Africa etc into the here and gives it a bigger feel of space. This makes us believe that ‘here’ is so big and the universe with all the ‘bigness’ is ‘here’.

There nothing like near and far or here and there. They exist only with respect to the other and not in an absolute sense. When we talk about the body parts for example, we do not say that my hand is closer or my brain is further away from ‘me’. We say that such sentence is invalid because all body parts are contained in me. For contents ‘inside’ this reference is invalid. We then see that the “I” is not a reference point or a spot inside the body. When we try and see where this feel if ‘I” is concentrated, we fail to pinpoint any spot because there no spot anywhere that ‘I’ feels concentrated about. When we say I feel pain in my foot, there is only a feel of pain in the foot and has no logistics with the feel of ‘I’ness at some other point. There just seems to be a ‘presence’ in which experiencing seem to go on.

There are only appearances appearing here in the presence and disappearing. Rest is mind game.

Presence is here and now. It is beyond time and space meaning that presence cannot be bound by time and space or that time and space cannot be applied to Presence. Mathematics ( WHICH IS TIME AND SPACE) cannot be applied to life or ‘Being’.

Time and space are only extensions given to make meaning of appearances. However, space and time itself are appearances in time. Space and time are giving context to contents but there are only contents and context is the mind. There are only thoughts which are the contents and they seem to appear in a space called ‘The Mind’. There is no  ‘mind’ other than thoughts. The thought that there is a mind is also only a thought and cannot be thought off as a separately existing mind.

What is a thought, sound or colours or shapes . They are just appearances to presence. They are energy movements in presence which is recognised as thoughts, sounds, shapes and hardness.. All appearances of energy movements and are equally ‘near or far’ to presence. The appearance of moon out there is an experience just as that of a chair nearby. Both are here in the ‘presence’ right now. It is like - a thought of yesterday is as near as a thought of ‘30 years’ before. Both are taken out of memory instantaneously.

None are near or far. It is simply there or not there - which is the same as -here or not here. It seems that all thoughts are within our reach but we cannot locate the space where they arise.

.

When we see, there is just seeing or knowing. The mind is only useful for storage of the contents of experience. It finds it simple to store them in a sequence for ease of use whenever required. The present block doesn’t move. Only the contents of memory or imagination move giving an illusion of time. This happens because, we take that our body is not an experience but the whole for what we call ’I’. When this knowledge is corrected and the ‘I’is not seen as ‘body’, there is a feel is lightness.

There is just knowing. When there is desire to save the experience, there is a requirement to evaluate and save the experience by a ‘known as”. This can only happen with a reference point like known as w.r.t someone. So a someone or a reference is to be generated first and then only evaluation can be done.

Like in a computer, when writing is over and saving is required, there is question ‘ save as?’ and the reference decides to choose the title. I would choose one title and some other person may just say don’t save.

So memory has to have a reference called space time which is the temporary ‘me’. The real me is the space time that is here and now.

13. The Road Roller

I had a funny incident that happened as an insee-ing that was responsible to pull me out of space – time for at least a short while. This is how it happened.

The incident took place when I was casually gazing at a road roller that was standing in an open ground outside my house. In India there are what we called flats housed in a building and some open space is available for making it into a garden that can be used by the surrounding buildings as ‘their’ garden. This plot was still under development.

The following dialogs started in my mind as if there was someone else talking with me from far away.

Someone : Do you see a road roller there?

Me: Yes I see a road roller here.

What else do you see there?

Buildings, ground, road roller etc etc.

Are they all 'there'?

Yes, they all 'here'.

Are they there or are they here!

Even the 'there' is 'here'. There is no there and here. There is only here or not here or there or 'not there', seen or unseen.

Is ‘here’ is term of time or space?

It only means they are. But in terms of time they are ‘now’.

Here is basically falling into a category of space when used as here vs. there. However ‘here’ also means 'present' as compared to ‘not here’ or absent which is falling into the category of time.

So here is common for ‘space’ when used here vs there and for ‘time’ when used here vs. not here. In fact space and time could be the same - split into two - depending on usage or language. When in duality, they are two. In nonduality they are one. Space and time together could be the presence and this presence could be what we are as consciousness.

Your presence is required to see and hear. So the world appears to your presence or 'in' your presence. Your presence is all over wherever seeing or hearing is happening.Presence is the essence of 'is-ness' or being-ness or 'knowing'.

So what we are ‘factually’ is 'as presence'. But what we feel we are -is as an entity in this body mind object and this entity seems to be noticed by only its presence. This presence is in the immediacy of things and sounds and is 'what we are'. Recognising that we are this 'presence' or consciousness is itself awakening from the dream. This presence is not any one body-mind’s or individual’s presence, but it is just presence and not applicable to a body. It is a knowing that is just present ‘now and here as a knowing of this ‘moment’. It is this 'moment' that is unfolding events one after another and this ‘moment’ is what we are. If the feeling in you is as if you are a trapped entity, then seeking happens and when the feeling changes to pure knowing which is seeming the present ‘moment’, seeking stops. Along with this the thingness or characters of all objects disappear as a concept as if rolled over by the road roller.