102. Real and the Imaginary.

Can you imagine what is real and unreal?. If so, the both are just mental constructs or imagination. Both, meaning, the so called 'Real' and the 'Unreal'.
Its difficult to pin the ‘Real’ using normal meanings to words. Words have a tendency to mean whatever the mind is expecting it to be, outside of any factual reasoning. Reasoning is a term for pleasing the mind. When the mind wants to conclude an activity on a subject, it feels that it has reasoned it out. Reasoning is simply a joke. Its meant for mechanical items created out of reasoning and not for natural items that was not your creation. In fact to have separate meanings mechanical and natural, as if they could be understood becomes a complexity.
At times, real means what we all agree to and at times it means- the ‘unchanging’ -and such other different interpretations. In the best effort that we can 'imagine' reality or meaning to 'real', it would still be in the realm of 'imagination'. So reality is just an imagined conclusion or meaning and so are all meanings of all things, words and the rest.

Reality with words makes sense only before one ‘merges’ with the Real, after which words are not required. Until then, the claim of reality is done at the level of mind. But mind itself has no features of reality. The mind is simply a gaming instrument. Mental gaming instrument. The realness of imagined reality is so only until proved false by the same mind that imagined reality to be so. We live on a sphere called earth etc. seems real. Even to say something is unreal, there must be some affirmation of reality to such saying. So unreal-ness also is subject to change sooner or later. So we are left with a feel of reality or unreality of things, only for the moment that it seems so.

Images are objectification or imagined meanings of events of what arises in the knowing, wherein factual meanings are simply not. They are only imagined imprints of contents of knowing, as if knowing could have separate contents. They take up the place of realness to shapes as if they are objects. In fact images of past and future always take up most of the mental 'time' as if past and future can exist as reality, independent of each other.
Mind has a way to take on images as real and express the same feel as reality of objects. It does so by having reality encoded in thought as if real. Thoughts are images or imagined reality. You always find mental communication happening between oneself and others on a non-stop level, in our own mind, until asleep. It keeps the thinking ‘on’ continuously. The ‘you’ that talks to ‘others’ in the mind, are both, mental images. At times we see that a ‘mad’ guy walking and talking aloud. The mental images in his mind of 'himself' and also that of the 'others' that he is talking to, are so real that the guy keeps shouting as if he really dealt with all these guys on the level of reality. We feel uneasy at his ways, because he seems to be flouting the decency of living a ‘human’ life. The difference between him and the rest of us, is that, we intuitively know that all our thoughts are really unreal and there is no need to regard them as real and ‘shout’. We allow the mental play of argument on a transient level, as a play, and forget it after a while. In case these thoughts are capable of generating ‘tension’ and ‘depression’, as if these thoughts could be real people and events, then,  we are no different from the ‘mad’ guy. We are worse, because it requires more effort to hide our state of madness from others, in case we get depressed or tensed. But we sulk, cry, laugh, and even go to the extent of ending one’s life because the thoughts are capable of taking the place of reality, which they are simply ‘not’.

In realising that thoughts are plain mental images, as if of real persons, created on the level of mind, there is a realisation that thoughts cannot harm you as they do not have any reality whatsoever in themselves. The fear that we have is generated at the level of thought itself and this realisation that thoughts are just thoughts, can go a long way to wipe out the root of fear. It is the fear which gives realness to thoughts and thoughts which give realness to fear, as if each is holding hand with the other. Once the mind is put in place, being only mental, fear is simply absent. This is the state of a realised mind, which we all posses but do not accept in our day to day walk of life. In fact life would be laughing at us, like we laugh at mad men, due to our priority given to thoughts.

Extending this logic a little further, Mind makes thoughts as soon as we see, hear, sense etc. The thoughts starts interpreting things after a while. Thoughts become representation of things that we sense. This also means, without thoughts, things would be void of their thingness or meanings, concepts and reality. Its the thought that makes real objectification of forms. We experience the thought about things. So when we deal with ourselves and others and things, we are dealing with our thoughts about ourselves and others and things. Its all a mental exercise devoid of any reality, because thoughts are unreal in the first place. This is our reality. Similarly, thoughts of time other than 'now'makes 'Time' and thoughts of space other than 'here' make up for Space or Universe and Cosmos. Unreal time and space become Real, making meanings to forms and events, simply using thought profiles.It is quite stupid but it seems to be a way of life and it works. Once upon a time, intuition was available to ‘feel’ what realness was and now intelligence seems to be deteriorated by offering such intuition to the level of reason, knowledge, belief, intention, determination etc or simply the capacity of mind to evaluate reality of the world. One day we may go to the 'Guru' and ask him, are we in love?, as if it is beyond our 'feel' to know love on the level of reason. So thoughts seem to manage our life, as if the intruder starts ruling the household after a while.

Forms have no thingness to them, like person to a body, and thingness to shapes. But the mind is a pro at the game of projecting thingness to shapes and persons to bodies, as if reality, and thus lives in deluded ‘world’. As the mind is in no-one's control, this delusion becomes normal at some plane of activity. Further delusion is regarded madness within the madness, like the guy talking to himself.

How do we come out this hypnotic delusion? Is life after coming out of hypnosis better or delusion was the right place for us to stay put? This is a tricky question and mind will always project fear to keep its activity of being in charge active and alive. So it plays games, to think you can awaken, for as long as it can take and maintain the delusion. But in the end, it embraces its own insignificance and makes way for realising the absurdity of thoughts, and pay way for 'direct' living. Thoughts need not be despised. Nevertheless, they should not be given power of manifesting objective reality.

The mind really doesn’t deal at the root of problems. It uses a fantasy as a method of analysing the problem from all directions which can cause fear and allows a method of postpone total eradication, so that its activity is maintained. All our problems are in the thinking of it. If the thought of the problem does not occur, we are free from the problem for that much of a while. So instead of pushing the thinking mechanism to the background, we use it in the foreground, for offering solutions to problems. We have to get rid of the problems and not find solutions which are mostly temporary and generally worsen the problem. For example, we want to be happy. So we buy something that can make us happy for a day or two. We don’t like our boss, we complain, but we don’t change our jobs etc. Problems cannot end, unless the creator of problems is known and put in place. It seems impossible but at some level, we intuitively know that it is possible, though we seek confirmation from mind, and again lose the grip on reality. So we seek, which is another mental game to keep the game going on, as if seeking can end in permanent happiness. It is stopping the mental game than can pull us out of mental activity.

Reasoning is to bring about realness or authenticity to thought with more thought. It works in the plane of building houses and bridges, but fails in human relationships, including finding solutions to one’s own happiness. The very human image as ‘persons’ to bodies is an hallucination or is an imagination and hence doesn’t work well. We explain our failures and success ‘only’ to maintain that feel of being a  ‘person’ to body is ‘real’. But all ‘personalities’ are mental images and our reality cannot be reduced to simple and unreal mental images in mind.

In intuitively realising that all mental structures like thoughts and belief’s are just images about imagined reality, such activity can be ‘killed’ or given no significance. This practice can go a long way to remove self made fear or mind made fear and enable direct living as a way of life, rather than ‘you’ living a life, ruled by mind. In doing so, You will discover the lost Paradise as such direct living, happening moment to moment, without the pressure of thoughts that bring in pain of past and future to mentally spoil the present. Intuitively, mental images must be seen for what they are as images and must be given up instantly. Objectification only increases the spirit of mind game provided we can see the game that is being played by mind. When the game gets real, and affects our life, then we are no less than the mad man on the street, as its time ti kill the mind.

Subjective living is simple, more colorful and full of life, when images of things do not rule in place of things and images of people, do not disturb in place of people. So don’t think real. Be real. Know that mind is like an intruder that has come home and takes over command and even threatens to sleep with your wife, and that too, without your permission. It must be killed before it becomes too dangerous. Deal with reality rather than with concepts of reality. Its 'really' simple. Hahaha.

101. Mind, Heart, Reasoning and Knowledge.

Life is very funny. It mostly unfolds the next moment as if 'we' are the subject watching the unfolding of life or as a ‘me’ that is negotiating the world of objects, separate from 'me' in the unfolding.
Within the activities of the play of life, our 'personal' life can be played out in two versions. One as if with a 'me' sense to the body and another, as if 'no' me -sense to the body. In version 1, one feels like a 'person' to the body, like all of us generally feel and in version 2,  there is no such a feel of being a person to the body. Nothing can be said about the 'person' that does feels or does not feel in version 2, because such a 'personal' sense itself is not felt and life seems to be just happening there, moment to moment, without a sense of fear, that normally helps in maintaining the status of the person. The action in version 2, is more happening from intuition than from reason or judgement. The action here is not provoked by thoughts as to a ‘person’. Their act is spontaneous and are not backed by a 'why' to such action. Here mind or reasoning did not have a chance to intrude on the action or mind was too late to come into that act. We say the act came out of sheer intuition or from the heart.
So life plays out ‘us’ with reason or with 'mind' i.e, as if a ‘me’ was acting via a choice centre or spontaneously from the heart, as if without a doer or a doing that is impersonal. The play of life intuitively, is usually more successful, not in terms of the feedback from the world, but from the prospect of feeling good about the act or not being guilty about such acts, in all future. Its a peaceful in life to act without doubts or without ‘mind’ or let's say 'from the heart'.

The Mind, when acting 'personal', is very polluted with opinions or judgements or points of view. It behaves like an entity that can handle problems. In fact Mind is the one that makes up these problems and then reasons itself to act on a problem, which has been its own creation.The only basis that a personal mind can act is - of seeking pleasure and avoiding pain.This is its format of functioning in broader terms. Very rarely can one act without judgemental thoughts and that would be only for basic survival. Hence all outcome of actions that are happening associated with a personal sense, would be on the premise that the subject is right and the world is wrong or to move away from pains to the personal self. The judgement based on reason having a premise that there is a solid living separate entity of freewill and choice, creates a mental notional entity as if solid and living. Its a mind game and its 'Life's Leela.
All dualistic knowledge is based on subject -object approach of the mind and every word and action interpreted in subject- object format strengthens the belief of an individual man, separate from the objective world.  There is no knowledge other than in dualistic terms. All knowledge therefore, including nondual knowledge lies in the realm, of dualistic format, simply because language and words are a design of dualistic thinking.
Life plays out the sensory world in a dualistic manner. Its a light play.The Mind picks up this trick of converting one object in perception to be conceived as a subject and rest conceived as 'its' objects.  It is a crazy game and life enjoys its play with all the variety. There is no other than life to deal with life and its crazyness. So all is well.
At times, life plays out human forms as impersonal or direct living. This appears to be more entertaining, natural and satisfying to the soul, as if life is tasting itself in its own play. It just cognises what arises rather than recognise the objective world as separate from itself. Every sound, visual and action  is pleasing to the soul rather than to the mind or reasoning. Its more like the person is functioning from the level of the heart rather than from level of personal thinking, that has selfishness to the core. This games appears selfless. There is no fear of losing, as there is no desire of acquiring. Its a more peaceful way of living a life, until dying the death.

Mind is a conceptual space that deals with reason. Reason or logic is not only in the sphere of knowledge of opposites or cause and effect, but also in the sphere of desire and fear. Mind always functions  in the belief of its own survival and even more, with seeking of more pleasure and avoid pain.  To conclude through mind, is to conclude with a desire for less pain. It is a programmed conclusion rather than a logical conclusion. In fact logic is based on such desire to seek pleasure and avoid pain. So all logic is biased logic, as far as functioning of a mind is concerned through reason. Reason can only support mechanical structures and falls down under its own weight when dealing with mental structures. Knowledge of gravity, loading, strengths etc, could be the basis when applied to build a stronger house that could last for a while. Adding more reason of earthquake, fire and tsunami hazards, can make the house stronger and better to cater to eventuality. It seems to work. However when dealing with 'people' or oneself on a mental level, knowledge has a high rate of failure. One cant have knowledge of mind. Mind is the source of all knowledge other than of itself. One cannot treat a mind because there are no mind. Its just life playing itself out as 'split minds'. It is like treating oneself to be happy. It is bound to fail. Either you are happy and or unhappy and just cant find what it is that makes one so. 

Reasoning works well on the level of objects.  Mind, that has a personal interest,  is not a pure reasoning tool. In fact all reason, when applied to 'people' is based on 'personal' interest. On the other hand, there is no other reasoning tool other than personal mind. There is nothing like a pure mind or an impersonal mind unless you become a ‘sage’, where in the mind sees all as one source and not separate form one another. Applying ‘personal’ mind or reasoning to subject or ‘life itself’ is not a good idea. One mind reasoning the reasoning of another mind, is quite complex. Mind reasoning the actions of one’s own mind is also bound to fail. The biased tool that is used to analyse objects cannot be used to analyse the analyser. The analyser is the mind. The mind cannot be used to know the mind, because it cant find such a mind that can be made into its own object for self study. There is no mind per say. This becomes worst.  We are still attempting to use it here, but just to show the paradox or failure rate in using the wrong tool for this operation. Analysing the mind to show that its a reasoning tool, meant to succeed only for mindless objects is a good result of such analysis. However its wise to know that one has to go beyond the mind to deal with the mind. Going beyond the mind means to simply discarding this tool to ‘know’ or even more, to act. You cant think of a better tool, because it is still in the level of the mind. You cant use thoughts to know the thinker. You can get to a point that a thinker of thoughts is a myth and leave it at that. So the burden of a thinker, dealing with life situations becomes a myth. Once the habit falls away, its like keeping the luggage on the floor rather than on the head, when not moving. While moving, better to still find a floor that moves with you, like a train or any other vehicle. When burdened, use a vehicle, it will carry your luggage and you also.
How does one go beyond the mind? Simply by discarding the notion of a 'me' to be real. This allows for direct action, without interpretation of logic. Its like applying brakes, when there is danger in front of you, or killing a spider that wants to hurt you. Its done without any thinking or 'doer'. Its natural.
Life is a magical vehicle. When you give up your ideas of mental burden, trying to sort your problems using personal mind or reasoning, life will absorb you and your mind, to make the rest of the journey, light and unmindful of all the beliefs that went into making one’s knowledge. It is then seen how beliefs resting with gain and fear, were the structure, that held down the weight of knowledge, forming the basis of reasoning. It had the power to create a real world with you as a subject, that was negotiating a real objective world out there. There pressures of life were just for the pleasures of life and gave endless challenges to be overcome. You even seemed to manage all challenges the last minute, by tolerating or overcoming  these hurdles of life to make your ‘personal’ life seem successful.

In the absence of belief systems, the ‘you’ that seemed so real and was only the biased mind, becoming your ‘Boss’ or decision maker, even without your permission, goes out of window -as a another belief also. The ‘you’ is then seen as a ‘mental object’ being burdened by its own mental beliefs of reality, suffocating life to seek pleasure and avoid pain. Life then on becomes more and more subjective, with the world like a dream that can’t be touched. This extensive intelligence called life or consciousness is capable of being alive, living itself, as this apparent world, unfolding each moment as if new, young and fresh. It seems to ‘live you’ without a you or without a ‘me-sense’ or without a doer-ship. Life then becomes infinitely valuable rather than a infinite burden, that was being made to feel ‘real’ with use of logic.

Intuition is day to day living from the ‘heart’ or from the origin of Love. It’s happening all the time, presently too, being camouflaged or filtered into ‘actions’ provoked by a personalised mind or by an illusory independent ‘me-sense’. End of the using such personalised logic, presents pure thoughts or intuitive knowing to take over one’s life, making a living, uncovering the paradise that ‘life’ is, as was always, but was ignorantly blurred with reason to make believe a lot of belief’s, including the belief that a ‘me’ and ‘other’ had objective reality.

So abide in the heart of intuitive knowing rather than the reasoning intellectual mind that can cause the paradise to slip away into this horror waking state, which we think as a real world, weighing us down heavily through mind. The only way to abide in the heart, is to realise that 'our images' of forms are unreal and all reality is 'life' pretending to be multiplicity. So life appears as a beggar and you give him something to survive without thinking too much or sharing what you have. When you have nothing to give, give him a Hugh at least. You know, its is also you, 'pretending' to be the other. Lol.

100. Word is the Thing.

Evolution of our conceptual universe is all about the dynamics of psychic activity. Psyche or the source of thought, is life’s power of realising sensational appearance as reality.  

To the ear, word is but a sound. To the psyche or ‘soul’, word is an objective experience. To life, word is 'itself' being the power that is able to create a subject-object world. So the world of objects originates in conceptualisation based on knowledge, which have their roots in sound or language. How is this possible? That’s what life is all about.
You know about Samsara or this objective world, feeling exclusively real, only as long as life makes a 'feel' of an objective mental entity, as a centre, from which we operate. In Nirvana, such a make feel entity is thrown out of this psychic conceptual activity, maintaining no centre at all for such a 'me-sense' to occur. The absence of 'me-sense' culminates in absence of all objective sense of this subjective appearance and there is no objective concern of the world at all to any objective 'me' that is now 'not'.

A simple case, is to take a J.K.Rowling’s Harry Potter work. There is a Harry Potter world that is imagined, this is converted to text or word file in 4 to 5 volumes. The film ‘Harry Potter’ is carved out of the words from these books, to remake the experience that J.K.Rowling has, as originally mentally imagined. So the entire text of only words or sounds, is made into a possibility to an entire experience of Harry Potter, by the filming unit. Its not only the visual, but the audio that makes it a powerful experience. You become the movie itself for a while, until you leave the theatre. The words in the book can also have the power of a virtual experience.

A new born child is an example of pure potential of life. Life as a child is made to experience sounds, to seem as objectified experiences. Repeated attempts my its mother creates the practice to form 'meanings' or concepts or objectivity, to sounds that are uttered.  It is fondled for a while and given the experience of a Mother to a Child. Then it is bombarded with sound to mean ‘Mom’ as that experience. So it learns to accept the sound ‘Mom’ for all the meaning made out to be that of ‘mother’as an experience. As the child gathers more meanings and experiences to the word ‘mother’, the new meanings as recorded as memories of new experiences or modifications to the word 'mother' and stored. The power of the word ‘Mom’ gets greater day by day. It grows like a child to an adult. It becomes synonymous with Mother India, Goddess, and what not. So power gets injected as its meanings, into that single word and becomes a motherful experience day by day, to denote whatever life wants, in unfolding of any event from time to time. It also grows to the extent that when used out of context or in a wrong context, it has the power to destroy such a ‘mis-user’ of that word and may lead to fights between two people, two sections of people or even two nations, when the word 'mother' is apparently abused.

Making meaning to a word or its sound, is to add its experiencing capacity. This is called conceptualisation. Its free floating after a while, when the word becomes its concept or meaning or experience. The word becomes the thing and the thing becomes the experiencing of it. This becomes useful in communicating your experience of the world or part there of, to make it the ‘others’ experience, so that, the understanding of the experience as maintained on the level of the communicator. At times, communication in words, tends to distort the original experience depending on the urge of the communicator to distort the experience or even on the part of the listener to absorb the communication is a distorted version. How all this has to unfold is decided by Life that operates itself as 'people'.

The mind, which plays the game of creating words out of experiences and re-creating experiences out of words keeps the two, floating at level with each other, to create this universe full of objective experiences.

In the absence of one communication to another, thoughts fills up time, communicating with oneself, as if 'people' even while being alone, doing nothing. So life is filled with experiences. It makes meanings out of all sensations that are visual, audible etc etc, finds individual meanings to parts there off and makes an experiences out of these ‘objects’ wound in ‘words’ around a pseudo ‘me’ which is an assumed experience-er that there should be, to whom such experiences are applicable, as if the subject experience-er experiences an objective world.

Memory plays a big part in storing all experiences as ‘meaningful’ events in time and space, adding past and future as if ‘time’, and here and there as if ‘space’ and this and that as if ‘objects’, have validity of their own, in creating experiences as if independent realities that makes up a real objective world.

So sounds, became words, powered to mean objective realities, including the word  ‘me’ as if a real entity, existing in a real ‘world’ full of objects, living a life and dying a death. It helps create stories about such experiences to be taken as realities and re-lived as memories, from time to time. Meanings or concepts to words even include emotions and sentiments that happen around them, that it can create such huge psychic powers, that when used to defend or attack in religious ways, can use human species to blow up the human species itself to a large extent.The whole universe then becomes a huge reality in space and time.  

In absence of this psychic mechanism called mind, keeping itself busy, working to make a world of reality out of perceived sensations, the valid reality of all objectivity, which is just conceptualisation that was happening, is laid thread bare its original appearance as just an appearing world of forms, whirling in its fullest beauty, creating and recreating itself, as if time and events, only for the purpose of enjoying its own game. A sense of ‘me’ within such formation of wholeness is lost to the background. The ‘you’ that  seemed to be there, all this while, is just lost to this new format of not having to need this ‘me-sense’. Everything seems full and perfectly in place, as now a sense of me and other has lost its relevance and life is just seen in its naked aliveness, in its fullest beautiful form, like a naked dance of life living itself fully. The feeling of an objective ‘me’ that is negotiating a ‘objective’ world simply goes missing from then on. This is a shift in perception that happens, fortunately or unfortunately not relating back to any ‘me’ that can feel this for ‘oneself’ as the ‘oneself’ of new experience, is lost for ever. Coming out of time has merged you into ‘life’ that was the only thing that always was.

99. Truth.

What is meant by Truth.  It’s just to know the truth of what you really are and a 'me' cannot know what 'I' am simply because this 'I' business is playing out the 'me' and also the 'world' as content of knowing with a 'me' feeling as if a subject to the rest of me, to be felt by the me, as if its object. But such division is just a feel being played by life with itself.  

Upto now, we think we are this body mind. We can never think of anything else that we can be, other than this body mind.For a moment, we take away the aspect that we could be this body mind. Now what is left?. Since we can never think of any think else that we could be, other than this body mind entity, then, we cant be anything at all. Thats what Neti Neti is. You are not anything at all ( objectively).

Experientially, we know that we are. This cannot be negated. We exist. So if not the body mind, how else could be our existence taking place?  What else could we be ?.

Intellectually, we know that under any circumstance, there is awareness of contents of creation. Perceptions are automatically happening and effortlessly too. There is 100 % knowing, of what is known. If you cant read without spectacles, then that knowing is 100% that seeing is blurred. A blurred knowing cannot know the blurr seeing.If we are drunk, there is 100% knowing. A drunk knowing cannot know a drunk feeling, This means knowing is 100% clarity of degenerated contents in the knowing from 100% to zero. Even when blind, the knowing, that contents in the seeing are devoid of seeing, is happening with 100% clarity. The knowing is always at 100% clarity, as to whatever is perceived. May be contents seem unclear, but even this sense about deformed contents are very clear.

So we can say, intellectually that ‘knowing faculty’ is what we can be, that has body and mind, as its content. So this perceiving faculty is what we are. That is the TRUTH of what we really are.

However, knowing of pain is pain. So since knowing is what we are, which is also pain, then the isness of pain is what we are. So all knowing again is all creation, like pain, and that is what we are, the isness of content of creation. So we are nothing objectively and  isness of everything objectively,

So we are both knowing and isness of content of creation simultaneously. The only way it can happen is only and only if knowing is all there is, knowing of content is the content, making feel that there are contents to knowing, as if to a knower as known items, outside of such knowing. THAT is the TRUTH.

Whichever way you analyse it, we can get to the bottom of what TRUTH is, experientially for oneself.. Now comes the question of 'being' the truth, rather than an intellectual knowledge of the truth. When the notion of 'me-sense' to the body drops, Being is all there is. Knowing is the being of it and being is the knowing of it.

98. Personhood.

What is this ‘person’ to the body? What makes it exist in the first place and also what makes it feel real ‘or’ what is truth about such a ‘person’ really existing as if an individual inside a body.

Everybody ‘feels’ that ‘oneself’  is a person. But what is a ‘person’ factually is not actually dealt upon. Actually nobody argues if personhood should be doubted. It works like a belief, like that of God, as a higher power exist and Man can seek God is difficult times.

The feel of a person is a just a ‘feel’. More so, it is a ‘make feel’ arrangement in mind. It’s a sense of freewill, choice and control over thoughts and actions of this body and also to a large extent a control over situations. ‘ I know how to take care of myself ( to seek pleasure and avoid pain)’.

How does this activity work?

Imagine a Chess software put into a computer. You can play what you want, and it will play back, even with a time lag, as if thinking is happening inside somewhere. Is it clever? Does any part of that computer ‘’know’ at all, that it is playing a game of ‘chess’. Is there a person there?. As far as the computer is concerned, playing is just happening and it just doesn't  how the hell, It had no role in the making of it, (hard ware) nor the programming of it, (software), nor that it operates on electricity. It doesn't even know that it exists as a computer. Only ‘we’ or our mind ‘feels’ that  ‘it’ is a computer. As far as it is concerned, there  is only what is happening, as if ‘it’ as something ‘real with freewill and choice’ were never a fact.

Similarly, this mind (thoughts) seems to control actions of the body and its very difficult to ‘know’ mind, using mind to know itself. Mind, while trying to know itself draws a blank. It is a factually a blank, being only a potential intelligence, and so it draws a blank.

There is software called Linux that anyone can contribute to and upgrade. So is ‘split mind’. It is a self perpetuating software. It has the capacity to condition itself or programme itself, based on any and all input that it comes across. The seeming outside world programmes it initially as to its ‘basis’ of functioning, which is basically ‘to seek pleasure and avoid pain’ and after a while, such programmed mind ‘becomes’ the part of the so called outside world, busy, trying to programme other minds. However the whole game is on a ‘mental plane’.

The programming consists of belief systems. First belief is that, I am separate and next is that, pain has to be avoided and pleasure has to be sought’. The feel of separateness is ‘called’ personhood. As soon as this sense is sucked in as a ‘reality’, a sense of ‘other’ persons and separate ‘things’ happen simultaneously  as a side effect, which then perpetuates, as a feed back or external conditioning. Since ‘all persons’ or conditioned minds, have the same mechanism, personhood becomes a agreeable case and all agreeable cases are termed ‘reality’.

So personhood is a set of belief systems, as effect of self sustained programming. So all believe that they are persons and all agree that this is true, which is the basis to form the core. The next is a sense of right and wrong. This purely comes out of seeking pleasure and avoiding pain. Whatever contributes to this is right and that which is not -is wrong. The build up of belief is ir-reversible, It can only change to new belief systems. That is the way ‘mind’ is programmed to function. When belief systems seem to make reality, further beliefs are added about a world of separate ‘things’, human domination in creation, money matters, family behavior, religion, caste, and other patterns. So all reality is nothing but  ‘firm belief’s. One cant shake off belief’s, as it seems the theme of human existence in creation and so it prevails.

How could that be?, Stop trying to believe what you believe and the reverse will be new belief, once you believe that the original beliefs do not hold water. Belief is mind’s mechanism. Its not about what is right or wrong.

Basically personhood, being the theme of human existence to creation, is purely a set of belief’s.  Once you start doubting your belief’s, which happens as another conditioning form external/internal  ‘impacts’ to the mind, old beliefs pave way to new beliefs. The mental activity the controls bodily expressions now thrive on such new beliefs. So what was a householder now become a monk.

What are you without a belief? How  can mental conditioning be ‘lowered’ to a set of minimum beliefs necessary?. Who can do this. These question have no answers. The mind doesnt function as per answers, only answers are assumed based on its functioning.

The space wherein intelligence seems to work itself out is ‘Mind’.  Mind is a ‘symbol’ for the ‘functioning’ of intelligence. Intelligence is a ‘capacity’ to perceive creation and also to conceive creation as seen through a set of beliefs or memory.

Creation is only a perception. And such a capacity that can perceive is “MIND”. Its not one that feels personal, but that which is responsible for making feel the world in space and time. So the world is the objective nature of mind and the ‘person’ can be assumed to be the conceiving aspect or a ‘Split Mind’, within ‘Whole Mind’ or perceiving capacity, as such conceiving is also perceived.

Take a human being verses perception. We believe that we have five different abilities to sense and something more that is assembling these information through a set of belief systems, making a real world out there of such perceptions, in short, conceiving the world of objects. As we cut off each sensation, the perceived creation or world is actually short of that perception. So, if all 5 sensations were withdrawn one by one, creation would still perceived as ‘nothing’ or collapsed.

So creation is nothing but a set of sensations. So there is world of ‘sensations’ rather than a real objective world, outside of such sensing. A sensation is a ‘make feel’  arrangement, by  ‘life’ as intelligence. There is nothing objective anywhere. So if we take a pain killer to morph a ‘pain’ sensation, then there is ‘no pain’. So, pain had no objective existence other than as a sensation that could be morphed. Similarly, this world is purely sensory and doesn’t exist, outside of its sensing so. This is a purely sensory world. The sensation is the world. Sensation of the world and the world are ‘not’ two. There isn’t something here and something there and a sensation to link the two. There is only sensation and a make believe system using belief structure, that sensation links a ‘sensator’ to a ‘sense object’ .

‘Knowing’ is a better word for sensing. Knowing a pain is pain, knowing  a dream is dream, knowing a world is world. Such knowing mechanism is MIND. It also has a faculty to make such sensing ‘seem’ as external reality to an ‘internal person’. But its all one activity. The make feel of sensation of a ‘real world’ to a real person is one single mechanism, called MIND.

So, all ‘objectivity’ or thingness to perception is mental activity. Personhood is the ‘thingness’ to this self sustaining, sensory  bodymind mechanism, based on a programme of belief systems. The only way it can get ‘de-conditioned’ is when the programme ‘fails’ on the conceiving aspect, to process perceiving ‘into memory’, wherein it transforms perception into a ‘save as subject-object’ file. In absence of such a conceiving activity, exposing only pure  knowing to itself, there is  no-subject, no-object feel to the ‘knowing’, that seems ‘liberating’ without a sense of a personal ‘me’. So the ‘me- sense’ is a make feel sensation in conceiving activity.

Who you are, is that intelligence which is also pure knowing and conceiving mechanism and the  ‘me’ sense that you think you actually are, has nothing to do with what you are, except as a content of knowing. It is only a ‘make feel’ arrangement to make ‘seem such an illusory entity is real’ by the same intelligence, that is playing out creation as subject/ object world only by a ‘mechanism of knowing’ without there being an objective world at all. Its funny, unbelievable but, cant be otherwise from our own daily experiences of how life is living itself as existence. The objective quality of MIND, whose subjective quality is this ‘knowing’ capacity ‘feels’ as the world of objects. So who you really really are, is just ‘knowing’, no matter how it feels like or how it looks like or how it taste like etc, because it is all made up of pure ‘knowing’ material as its core and nothing more than that.  

97. Mechanism of relativity.

Excerpts from Wei Wu Wei.

Relativity or reasoning by means of comparison of opposing concepts, is necessarily a psychological process which is only applicable to the description of objects.

Its operation psychically creates such objects as images in mind, in order to compare them with other objects, and it likewise imagines qualities  to be compared with opposing qualities that are to be attributed to the object being described.

Since the objects so conceived require a subject in order that they may appear as objects, the process of conceiving is then itself conceived as the conceiver.

This is a brief indication of how duality arises and of the emergence of an I-concept or ‘ego’ to a ‘me-sense’.

In this process, what is conceiving could never be any means to be conceived, since what is conceiving could never be an object and so cannot be conceived by ‘itself’.  The process of conceiving cannot conceive the process of conceiving, by conceiving ‘conceiving’ into an object.

It follows that whatever may be the degree of efficacy of relative thought in the accurate description of objects, it can have no degree whatever of efficacy in describing whatever in not objective.

This implies that such efficacy as it may have for physical and philosophical reasoning, is automatically inoperative when it is employed for reasoning about whatever is metaphysical.

Relative reasoning can have nothing to offer whenever it is used to the subjective or the noumenal.

It should be sufficiently clear that the reason for this is the presence of the suppositional subject which is brought into theoretical existence in order to account for an apparent existence of objects as phenomena in mind.

Is it not clear that none of this can have any ‘but’ a conceptual existence in mind and the source of this psychic construction is the ‘conceiving’ as such, about which nothing possibly can be conceived?

So there is no do-er or anything done, but only a ‘do-ing’ which is the conceiving of whatever action may appear to be performed.  

Relativity or divided mind, is whole mind split by conceptualising. It is ‘mind’ conceptually dividing into apparent object and the suppositional subject of that object.

                                                                                    ******

Do you see that?

Yes of course,

Well, do you believe it?

Why do you ask?

Because for you seeing is believing

For me seeing is –just seeing.

96. Minding ‘within’ and ‘without’.

Normally it is said that the mind is always engaged in projecting itself outwards and that it should ‘somehow’ be turned inward. So we need to use the mind like ‘an eye’ to look within. The mind is similar to an eye. The eye is used to choose the area of looking or seeing and the mind is used to choose the area onto which attention can seem to be focused. So when we meditate, we put awareness or focus of awareness on hands, legs, frontside, backside, centre of the chest, head etc.

For a while, like breathing on purpose, it feels like, such focus is with a freewill. But such a governing force, soon escapes, leaving the mind wandering on its own. It’s not possible to keep control on the mind, as there is a controller and there isn’t a mind. It only seems probably possible to have control on mind.

The looking within is specifically interesting. For a year or two, we are trying to put our attention inside the body, as if within and without are addressed to the frame of the body. In any case, one fine day, you would know, how mind keeps playing its tricks.

To focus anywhere, inside the body, or at the right of the heart or between your eyes or at the far off landscape, is called without. Its opposite is ‘within’. The word ‘within’ seems to refer as related to the body, but in this case, it is pointing to look within the mind, as if the other sense awareness were as if happening outside of the mind. You cant look outside of the mind, because one does not know much about the boundaries of the mind. So to know what is being pointed, we have to use the nature of ‘projection’ of the mind.

The outside world is termed to be the projection of the mind. The world or Universe includes our body frame, so that the whole featured world, with the ’we’ as a body based entity in it, is actually the outside world or just World. However, the mind interprets the world as different from what we are, so as to make an outside world vs an inside ‘me’. This is the world as we normally know it or the world of ‘duality’. The mind knows the world with the sense of non-duality, but interprets it with a sense of duality. So sensing the world as a bundle of sensations and interpreting the world in terms of ‘me’ here and a world of objects out there, making sense to such a ‘me, is totally mental work or the work of the mind, which is said to be a projection.

The difficulty is to use the projector to project light on itself. Like a torch trying to shine on itself. It requires a lot of circus, to the extent of turning the mind / torch inside out to make this happen. So, many years pass away, trying to hang around to get a hang of how to hang this upside down or inside out or both.

The mind is a ‘looker’. It has to keep looking. Presence, absence, changes, beauty, ugliness etc etc are its contents. The day it stops looking, it is dead. It cannot dye because, it is still looks at death and conveys the emptiness that is sensed as the ‘dead’ or conveying a sense of emptiness all around.. So looking has no limitations of time, precisely because it is ‘time’ that so looking everywhere and featuring contents. So stopping to project, reveals an un-projected perception or the emptiness of the contents featured in sensation.. We cant call it the world anymore, because world is a sensible story. When the projection, as learnt is taken away, what remains is ‘raw’ staring at itself. Its like saying that sound is sound, until you can recognise what the sound is, and when so recognised, its called words or English or French, but no more as sound. Sound is not what English is, even though English is sound. Similarly, world is not what perceiving is, even though, the world is a perception.

So to look within, only means to look without conditioning or interpreting or judging. To look within is to perceive and to look ‘without’ is to conceive. The purpose of mind is twofold. It is sentience or whole mind and is knowing wholeness as featured and then has to convert the knowing into the feel of a knower as one part of such perceiving and ‘known’ as the rest of the perception. The only way it can be memorised is make a story of such subject object world in time-space and interpretation of such inseeing is outseeing.

So looking within, is to ‘just be’ or still the mind or relax to the fullest etc. This opens up the sense of focus until the focus from a point, becomes wholeness itself. It starts with the game of focusing on chest and shoulder etc and slowly trying to go over to focus, what coming up in the mind. Then you start seeing your thoughts more loudly as they come up. The game continues to subtly focus in the field from where these thoughts arise or its source. Now you are inseeing mind itself as a field. The focus will learn how to rest in the field until the focus gets absorbed as that field itself. Its like the focal centre becoming the circle itself. This suddenly becomes the open field of sensations and thoughts. Thoughts don’t come so much now. The external sensations cant be stopped. But all the while, the thoughts were pulling the attention and the outside sensations and inside sensation were kept at bay. Now all sensations starts to dance in the field. Keeping eyes shut can help. But not allowing the ‘focus’ to focus on visuals, but be focused into the mind, is as good. The sensation now that come up are more like ‘sounds’ happening, feeling happening, movements happening etc, as if, whole of perception is just a happening in the mind and such field where it occurs would be the ‘I am’  field that you are. Even the body is a sensation in that field, just like external sensations. So all sensations, external and internal will be named sensations and the focus of attention dissolving into becoming the ‘mind’ or field in which such sensation appear, would be whole mind. The thoughts are now ’not’ interpreting the sensations, and so you are in touch with ‘life’ directly`. Here the you is just a impersonal mind. All sensations in its raw direct feel is 100 times powerful in clarity and is a good feeling. You start loving it and become one with it, as if Love was you, embracing all sensations.

Personally, I realised, while focusing within, that I was hearing sounds like a Tinnitus problem, until the problem was used as a tool to jump into inseeing any time of the day, for every little space of time that I could accumulate for this purpose. It was a 24 x 7 hobby.  So look and look and look, until all is within and there isn’t a in or out, because you as a body boundary is  myth. That is real meditation.

95. Freedom from desire.

The word ‘desire’ is a tricky word. The sentence –‘to be free from desire’ also is tricky, because the mind makes a target of freedom, believes in the target and works towards the target, as if freedom from desire is taken to be ‘desire to be free’. It may work or not, like all desires that are sought.
Desire is a sense of wanting more or desperately wanting. However it is a functioning aspect of sentience. Its unique for human forms, the desperateness about the wanting more, or the continuous pursuit of wanting, as compared to other forms of sentience. So the basis of human function as an individual or a group is based on this theme. Alternatively, functioning with this theme, is what is making  the feel  of individuality (or separateness) or belonging to group, as if human nature supports this theme to maintain itself as a unique  human race.
Desires are of various kinds. Desire to know, desire to become, desire of acquire, desire to comfort, desire to more security, health, wealth, prosperity, status, power, knowledge etc etc. Its all coming under one method of functioning, which is ‘mind’s exclusivity in its nature of functioning.  Then there is a desire to solve problems, to achieve perfection, so on and so forth. There is nothing right or wrong with this aspect of functioning of mind, as it is its ‘skilled’ nature or expertise. Its evolution aspect to be more skilled, creatively or destructively. Unfortunately,  the mind functions largely in a   desirous way, to maintain a commonality in functioning of the human race. The entire human race, is conditioned to acknowledge, maintain and pass on this basis of mental behaviour for the whole of human race. However the whole of such mental functioning is thought based or thought ‘provoked’ and has little chance of falling out, as long as thinking process is maintained, by sentience.
In a matter of basic survival, this functioning supports the cause. Desire for food, shelter etc, when dealt with and maintained, becomes basic essentially  However desire has an inbuilt aspect to raise the requirement of such basic necessity in order to change for the better. To understand what better is, a sense of judgement has to fall in place and this becomes a mechanism of original perceiving mechanism to make up certain conditions within perception.  So desire, includes use of mind to check out probabilities and deal with them to evolve some result, that is regarded effective. The effectiveness so judged, lies in the condition the result, which must then offer more pleasure and less pain. So, ideas regarding pleasure and pain must take form and be deeply embedded in the psyche, so as to fall back each time onto that, to make the basis of choice and thus make the choice effectively progressive. The choice so made, being personalised will affect the surroundings also,  as all forms are in the end, connected  as one single form, that we call creation or Universe. The choices focused as ones personal target will be automatically bound to have consequences on wholeness, as such choice is a movement of wholeness, even though seemingly personal. Some other ‘parts’ of wholeness will ‘suffer’ consequences of the first part, as it has to be sacrificed to some extent to support such a single ended choice. Impersonal choices are more of a statement and 'impersonality', doesn't need to choose to have a particular end.  
Sentience by itself, being singularity, should find a way to balance its functioning as plurality of individual minds, by finding a method to see success in comparison and not as an absolute, so that the game of mind is kept alive. So success become a progressive game of mind, to that individual and may be at a cost of the rest of the seeming world. Desire then takes on a complex process of dividing all that is, into many brackets of opposites so that there is space for the mind to make progress in terms of achieving more and more pleasure and less and less pain, be it individually or as individual groups.
Desire thus has to be the cause from making of individuals or groups and maintain such separation. In order to achieve the said desire, mind must uses a method of ‘hook or by crook’ to get over with the desires in shorter and shorter span of time. So to desire peace, wars may be raged and to desire wealth, health may be sacrificed and so on and so forth. When these become the primary nature of the conditioned mind, and gets established and settles down, it starts to show that the basic ‘desire’ is getting to be the root cause, having to keep its own game plan active, and that this maintains  separation in the cross section of all creation. This gives hope that there could be a method for such discriminating mind to transcend mind, to overcome ‘desire’ which was by now, seen as the basis of all progress and also regress, to be used for bringing an end to desire, which normally is achieved at a cost of rest of the creation.
Considering that the mind has to function in its own sphere, this problem is now taken head on to have  this ‘new’ desire, which is - to be free of desire. The thinking mind or human mind or split-mind cant work without this principle. Being a desire in itself, its still bound in the original mind game. It is then seen that it becomes difficult to transcend mind, using mind, as keeping the mind active is still its own normal behavior  However, when the mind seeks to use mind to challenge its own functioning abilities, as not to desire, which is not what it is original designed nature, it is possible that the mind may go into a spin and collapse (or not, for that matter, depending on its conditioning ). Such a state where thinking gets out of way, in terms of being fully functional, in its desirous aspect, there is a lot of rest and freedom. Freedom is then seen to be an absence of a desiring mind or thinking mind, in terms of judgement.  However, other than this function, that consumed most of its energy, the mind suddenly gets exposed to a its basic nature of only perceiving, prior of conceiving, for the purpose of maintaining itself expertise in being judgmental  Then it is seen that ‘desiring’ or mind function, comes to ease.
So freedom from desire, must come as a easing of the functioning of the mind, in filling up time, continuously, being judgmental about all perception.  Until then, mind behaves, as the separate individual, desiring or else called suffering a ‘lack’.

94. Time and Me.

What is time?  This is a difficult question, which assumes that there is an answer.  It’s the assumption of a positive answer that 'objectivises' time. This assumption is also is what, is enabling ‘time’ to exist as, an independent thing. Time is thus a concept or agreed upon term, used in communicating one’s idea with another; as if such a ‘thing’ called objective time exists. If you ask someone to define time, he could not make it tangible.
Time is an idea to 'grasp' change or movement. So you choose a frame of a second or hour or a day, mentally. This frame can take a story of an event to fill that frame. The frame of time is purely mind made or imagined, as physically other than now, nothing is 'sensable' directly. Its the sense of duration that makes a feel of time through knowledge, that 'change is with respect to time'. So change gives rise to time rather than time gives rise to change. A sense of space make three dimensional objects ‘seem’ to exist and a sense of time seems to make 'change or movement or event' as a 'story' of change to exist. 
Duration is memory dependent and arises with a ‘sense of perception’ wherein, what is already perceived seems to overlap with what is now being perceived as if, the previous existence continues into the present.  So we have persistence of vision, sound, smell, feel, etc, from the previous moments into the present moment. This drag smoothens each frame that is perceived, to make continuity to what is perceived  seemingly increasing the present frame of time from past to future. The perceiver ( sense instrument or body) within the frame of time is also appearing to change, even though the fact is that its the unchanging element that can perceive change.
If you take a movie film, and run it at slow speed, it is all frames. At a certain speed, it feels like a movie and at full speed it may just be white light. So the existence of a movie to the film is a matter of resonance between the perceiver’s persistence of vision and the speed of at which perception is displayed. So the experience of movement or duration in the movie is purely a type of synchronicity of perception and display. In case something happens, to change your sense of perception, the whole world may crumble on itself! So the existence of the world is magically maintained through a sense of ‘duration’ to what is perceived using a magical memory, that is somehow maintaining the ‘reality’ of ‘things’.
It doesn’t take much to see through this ‘fact’ that all there is -is -a magical operation happening, what we call life, wherein a world is maintained on a mental screen, magically through the use of direct perceiving, memory and a time lag of the perceived sensations, that gives continuity to the world having ourselves also as perceived.
What is eternal is not recognised as such, because the process of recognition, being the intelligence of what eternal is,  is purposely designed to make feel one content of cognition as a cogniser of the rest to create reality of an illusory separation in the content of display. The concept of time, being real or feeling real, ignores the possibility of timelessness or that there can be something as absence of time or something beyond the concept of time as intemporal or eternal. When the basis of existence is accepted vide a time concept being real, the unreality of time is sacrificed for good. Thus the ignorance of the eternal sets in due to the strong belief in the concept of time, or a bondage to concept of time.
Such an ignorance that time could simply be a concept with no independent reality, is the obstruction in seeing the factual reality of existence ( of objects or world).  This ignorance is identical with the ‘me’ thought. Seeking the source of such ignorance will automatically result in the vanishing of time and ‘me’ concept, as both are realised as illusory concepts that make up the illusory reality.
The absolute cogniser or the ‘I” concept is purely and entirely a ‘temporal product’. The ‘sense’ of continuity of the ‘me-sense’ is subject to the feel of temporal extension of perception. If you apperceive what ‘time’ is, it must simultaneously dis-appear as an object in the mind.  It is then revealed that the essential element that constitutes a me-concept and objectifies it, also dis-appears, for the simple reason that neither ‘time’ nor the ‘me’-concept can have any objective quality to sustain. They only have a mental strength that holds their reality.
The ‘me’ concept and ‘time-concept’ are inseparable from the intelligence that creates it, like light creates brightness. The intelligence or the Absolute or 'I' principle plays out the mind to create both me and time. However 'me' and 'time' which are expressional aspects of the absolute create a feeling of reality to me and time and thus all objective seeing sets into the subjective creation. Magically me and time are believed to have independent objective existence, even though there is nothing objective about them.  The concept of ‘sequential happening’ in time believed to be sensible or logical or real, mentally, is the foundation of the ‘notion’ of bondage. As long as the concept of ‘time’ is left untouched, with objective existence, its subject, as the perceiver, is precisely the ‘me’ concept that remains unquestioned. That is why the nature of time must be investigated into.
Trying to remove the me-concept, and retaining the time concept implies that the mechanism of functioning of perception is not recognised. On the other hand, if duration is ‘seen’ or felt as invalid, as an objective existence to which we seem to be bound, but as an essential part of appearance, then removal of duration would necessarily remove all that seems to be ‘existing’ in time. Then the supposed objectification of time and me ceases, leaving ‘us’ as what ‘in- temporally’ we are. As long as we regard space-time to be objectively factual, we are bound and tethered.
The term ‘absolute’ is just a symbol for the functioning of mind as a ‘split’ into relative duality, consisting of conceiving ‘other than self’ as a space- time entity or the world and its interdependent counterpart ‘self’ also as another space-time entity. This dual or divided functioning of mind , referred as merely ‘mind’ by Maharshi, appears as the conceiver or the functioning ‘I’, temporally extended in duration. So ‘I’ thought is really the Mind.
The only way to subjugate the concept of time as an objective reality, external to ourselves, is by identifying ourselves with it, which is apperceiving that, it is what we are., not objectively but subjectively. When we recognise ourselves as temporality, we have only to apperceive that temporality and in-temporality and inseparable, each being aspect of the other, one appearing in movement and the other static. They are twin modes of cognition, temporality accompanying and making all phenomenal existence possible and intemporality remaining noumenally ‘eternal’.
As ‘time,’ we are Intemporal and as ‘intemporality’, we are time. So we all can say, Intemporal, I am Time;  temporal, I am eternal.

93. Objective existence – a Concept.

It is interesting to know how we conceptualise a real world. It is also interesting to know who it is that is behind this game of making the world feel real. Furthermore it is surrendering to the fact that we as a ‘concept’ cannot pull off the veil to get out of the conceptual world and to get into a non-conceptual world, because both the ‘we’ and the ‘world’ simply do not exist other than as each other’s concept.

What is existence or non existence?. This begs a question that such a ‘term’ exists. The same is the case with what an object is.

An object is an ‘appearance’ in the ‘mind’ about what is perceived. It has no other factual existence. What is perceived is – shapes and colours and the ‘mental’ objectification makes the perceiving into an object and is called ‘conceiving’ it so. So there cannot be such a ‘thing’ as an object, in its own right, to exist or not to exist. The objectification is the conceptualisation that takes place out of splitting part of the perceiving, comparing with memory based data and mentally making an object here, to a perception, imagined there. So the object of the form, is a mental existence of reality. Its not physically real. So its non-existence may be real. Again, non-existence cannot exist at all as neither real or unreal. So neither existence or non-existence is real. Such the only reality of the world is its unreality as an objective bundle of objects.
So there can be no objects at all. There can be no ‘Subject” either, in absence of an ‘object” because such a ‘subject’ is another concept about what is perceiving and trying to objectifying what perceiving could be, into an object, which now cannot be ever there, for real. Its simply is a name given to an ‘object’ that seems to objectify objects. Subjects and objects are as such mental imaging of making meaning ‘in a prescribed manner’ to make seem perception as objective reality.

So it is inevitable that the appearance of all that is objective, is necessarily an objectivisation of whatever is perceiving it and this whole game is being played out by the ‘perceiving itself’ or the cognising itself or the ‘being aware of’ itself or ‘being conscious of’ itself, which, as such, can be termed THIS or ‘I’.

Now, how can one apperceive that there cannot be such a ‘thing’ as an object? The answer to this question can makes volumes of writing and cannot be specify to the query. It can only be ‘just apperceived’ for it is an inseeing, when such inseeing is presented in consciousness, becomes too laborious when elaborated dialectically in an objective medium that language is designed to be.  The process involving language would then have to prove the inexistence of ‘what is functioning’, because, it has already kept in place that, what is functioning, is an objective subject, that simply is a term for the functioning aspect of ‘life’ that is always playing out dualistically even though, it is simply not as such.

The question ‘what is an object’, can have no answer, dialectically speaking, for it cannot be a question at all and ‘objectivity’ is just taken as a ‘given’ factor in ‘phenomenal living’ , as it has been ‘always’ taken as the basis of science and philosophical thinking.

Metaphysics alone ‘seeks’ to transcend conceptuality, being as such, in its function. So –functioning, seeking dualistically to conceive non-conceptually, can only record ‘inseeing’ symbolically or by indication. So object, therefore, can be understood, only as an objectification of its subject – subject making an object of what it is- or objectivisation, or Subject perceiving what it is, as an object, and can have no other being, what so ever. In other words, objectivisation of what is, is a functioning happening at the psyche, and not what is there, existing in its own right.

To regard the ‘subject’ as an ‘entity’ is more nonsense as it is a functioning trying to conceive itself as an object of itself, making these words, and trying to understand itself. It is like ‘understanding’ trying to understand what understanding is, while such understanding is a functioning and not an object of understanding.

Further more, an object, in order to be ‘apparent’ must be conceptually extended in space and time and any being of such an object must lie in the inherent subjectivity, that is causing such illusion, much like the substance of the shadow must necessarily ‘lie’  in the substance that is causing such a shadow and not in the shadow itself.

We are conditioned to regard the ‘phenomenal’ as existent. However to ‘know’ our own reality, such conditioning must be discarded. What happens then is that, what is ‘sensorially perceived is then seen as purely conceptual structure in mind, which is all that it can be. ‘Existence’ as such is conceptual and cannot be otherwise, and noumenaility, not having an objective quality, cannot be conceived, being conceiving functionality by itself. What is conceiving cannot conceive what is conceiving while conceiving.

So what is ‘conceptually extended’ in space time, cannot be said to have, other than, conceptual existence, and its noumenon cannot be conceived at all, so that no concept such as ‘existence’ can  be applied to perception.

So it has been said “ from the beginning nothing exists”.

92. Understanding of ‘What we are’.

Life is a paradox being played out. We are, are not and neither, all at the same time true. This is what makes life a paradox in the ‘understanding’ of it. Apperceiving ‘this’ understanding brings in a possibility of not misunderstanding, the previously accepted normal understanding to be true.

We try to seek ‘what we are’, while what we are is playing out as’ what we are not’, to be understood as that, what we are. Normally, the mind is not applied to understand ‘what we are not’ as this kind of analysis is simply a ‘not done thing’. So what ‘we are not’ as a ‘feel’ in terms of 'what we are' in thought, survives unto death or till such time, such apperceiving about this understanding sinks in.

Life is ‘functioning’. Understanding THIS  is the key to ‘Life’,. This functioning, has a interwoven sense to give us a glimpse of ‘what we actually are’ being the 'absolute' feel of ourselves, before understanding of what is sensed and interpreted, to make a feel, into what 'relatively' are as the only way to feel 'what we are'. In other words, what we are, can come about through understanding of what we are not. However, we are being ‘lived’ and there is little chance of such happening, unless intuition has mercy, to dwell 180 degree reverse into its normal working process to enable a subtle glimpse into how LIFE, plays itself out..

Life plays out in parts. It functions as sensing, understanding or conceptualising as if in thought and finally ‘feeling’ of such thoughtful understanding. This is the sequence. All of this happens automatically or without a body referenced coordinator. Sensing happens, like seeing and hearing, sensing happens of thoughts that interpret direct sensing into subject object related stories  etc,. The interpretation about such direct sensing, as if to make a story of time, in which, events continue in time with a feel of logic or science, is also a automatic happening. Such thought process makes a 'feel' of a logical separate individual with freewill and choice with body, as its center of operation. So finally, we feel ourselves as separate individuals, inside and the world outside to be negotiated to make a meaningful living. This completes the 'living' for that moment. So what goes un-noticed is that fact no understanding can happen, unless such interpretation in thought, which is what understanding is, comes about and is sensed and felt as experience at the body. Such is the complexity of ‘Life’ playing out itself as if separate entities involved in co-ordinating each aspect in time.

So the direct sensing is never understood immediately until interpreted in thought, into a world of objects and a feel of such understanding becomes a feeling or experiencing at the body level. This final interpreted sensing, seems to register in memory as the only feel of whatever is sensed. It works as a close loop, sensing, interpreting as objects, believing it so, by the feel of such understanding and so on and on.

For example, we don’t and cannot sense a tree. Interpretation of the wholeness sensed, includes whatever that tree is and also whatever we are as ‘one’ seeing, interpreted in its understanding by thought process as separate objects, out of which, one such object, separate from the rest, is made to feel like ‘me’ or ‘subject seer’ and the rest of such seeing as ‘objects seen’, which was never the original ‘seeing or sensing’ but only ‘felt’ after such understanding of such single seeing, was broken up into part seeing and explained or interpreted to be a subject- object world. So the creation of an objective world with a subject ‘me’ is more on the basis of interpreted story about such seeing. Understood?.  Again, only thoughts are understood or we can say, understanding is in thought and percolates to the body level as a feel of such thought.

So, thoughts are streaming down in the mind, continuously interpreting every sensation, combining all direct perceiving and interpreting as a  bundle of thoughts, also finally sensed and felt 'real'. However most of it is mental process, after direct sensing.

So generally, you feel your thoughts, about what is sensed, rather than a direct feeling of ‘what is’ that is sensed. If one could see this, then the game is over, at least the basis of play that includes   ‘suffering’ as a feel created by thought, about such a story, deserving suffering, as a subject sufferer. But such seeing is an in-seeing, before thought can work on the subject of what is sensed.

When you see a snake, for example, the colour is very colourful. It is theme to enjoy. Its movement is like a dance, a theme to enjoy, its feel is the feel of a skin, very soothing and also a theme to enjoy, but all said and done, what one finally feels, what he thinks is a snake, is the thought that snakes are  ‘ughh’ and then what is felt is repulsion and fear. So in its practical finality, the sensing of the snake of such was beauty, was turned ‘down’ give rise to repulsion and fear as associated appeal coming from the snake, rather than being a process at the mind. The ‘feel’ of repulsion and fear, is a feel based in thought, as if such feel was true and belonged to the snake.

Thoughts have a way to make its feel true, because the understanding, which is the intelligence that life is, has given preference that such understanding should be felt, rather than life in its direct form. All understanding in terms of thought, is linked with the theme that life ‘as’ a a subject person -is real- and events, in time and space, and is sequential with cause and effect, being the basis for such reality.  Such understanding, about life is nothing but an assumption, ‘agreed upon’ to feel as REAL.

The ‘agreed upon’, is also a process, that life passes on down te ‘years’ so to speak, which we call as   conditioning of mind. This is nothing but a belief that thoughts about the sensing, by a conditioned mind, must be believed, as understood. It seems that such understanding uses logic, based on continuity of ‘sensing’  as a set of object, linked to each other making them into ‘events of all the changes’ that are happening, to be converted into a ‘story-line’ in time and lived from that point of view. Such conditioning gets strengthened in times to comes, as all that is happening fro this point of view, is accepted as logical, in the understanding of it.

However, life uses ‘cause and effect’ or logic, without getting deeper into the logic of such assumption, digesting all conditioned thoughts, to prove a world of objects ‘real’ to a subject that is ‘real’ and apart from or independent of such a real world. Its feels genuine from birth to death and also to everyone, as the marketing of such theme to process thinking, starts from birth. So ‘life’ robs life out of all objects, converting them simply to objects without life, to go about the story making, from a unreal world to a world of assumed reality.

There also is - what seems to be - a focus. An attention to what is happening. Sensing is sensed and thoughts are sensed. Now what is felt, is what is thought, about what is sensed. So thoughts have to form around what is sensed at such speed and this focus, has to move faster, to know sensing and also the thoughts and remain in thought, so that, the feeling of sensing, is not focused as it happens, but is skipped until, the feel of thought about such sensing happens.

If attention is put on focus of what is happening, like putting attention on attention, one can see that, what ‘moves’ is what focus clings to. Focus is only what changes. Without change, attention cannot be sought. So what is focused on, is what changes fastest, which are thoughts, as if there is juice in the story about what is sensed. Finally, one is at the mercy of such focus, to come about to rest, on the movement of thoughts, which is the ‘understanding’ of ‘what is’ that is sensed, as an event, with objects in the world, having their real stories, make the final feel, to make oneself also, real, as if party to such story.

If and when such focus becomes weak.  attention does not wait on thoughts. So, seeing is felt before, the feel of a thought of such seeing.  In absence of focus, what is not focused is not registered to mind or memory. So, when you are seeing a tree, if the focus, is on thoughts, the tree is not registered. Only the story in thought is registered. Even so, if the focus is not on thoughts, thoughts cannot be registered, and gives a chance for the ‘feel’ of direct sensing to take place prior to any conceptualising about such seeing can take place. This is the place of Direct living. Once this is tasted, the taste of interpreted living becomes ‘stale’ or unreal.

This feel of life, in absence of thought, is not concerned with time and space. Time and space is not felt, as such feel is an act created in thought. The feel of absence of time and space and story about such logic, depending on time and space, cause and effect, subject ‘me’ and an objective world, is the feel of direct living, where in, being lived is plainly noticed rather than ‘living a life’. It’s a feel when focus dies out on individual sensing, through interpreted thoughts. All that is sensed is now in focus.

Once this focusing process, selecting what next to focus and interpret - drops, the sense of a center from which such focusing was operating also drops. Then all that is happening is, only ‘WHAT IS’ without a story line in time, as if nothing ever happened. All ‘stories’ with logic about what is sensed, goes into background or goes unfocused, to reveal a world, devoid of story line, as if no world ever was happening and never happened.

This is direct living, or a sensing of life directly, as it show up in the now, changing its looks, and dancing its play, with no-one to watch, as a separate entity,  as if to make some meaning to ‘life’ that is so playing out. This show is the dance of life, as creation, in its nascent form, before being adulterated, by agreed upon method of conceptualising, or meaning making, to bring in time, space, cause, effects, me’s and you’s into the process and depicting a real world to take on day after day.

So forcing ourselves to understand life, within the parameters of our conditioning beliefs,  is the root of changing the feel of ‘what we truly are’, to a ‘feel of what we think we are’ as separate individuals, that causes our world of suffering to be real, even when not. 

91. Life, a functioning.

The manifestation that is seen, is a functioning ‘of’ life.

There is always a ‘catch’ in words. Especially words like ‘of’. This creates a meaning of duality instantaneously. It is meant for being used, to project meaning to the functioning ‘of’ life, as if an ‘objective world of creatures’. Functioning ‘is’ life, rather than being understood as ‘an aspect’ - ‘of’ life.

When we function we feel alive. It is more so, we think so, of others. If they don’t function, they are not alive. All thinking process, is functioning ‘of’ life itself. But the thinking is ‘required’ to convert such functioning or ‘manifestation’ into a story ‘of’  manifestation or ‘theme’ about the manner in which functioning happens( using space and time as mental reality, being physical).

Functioning is a term used for change. Change is interpreted in the ‘functioning’ aspect as ‘growth’, decay, movement, brightening, darkening, etc etc, to make some meaning within the theme,  that seems to be played out in manifestation. The comedy, is that, the theme plays out, in reverse also and new meanings are given, to take it ‘forward’ in time. For example, change to body is growth and decay, both as ‘functioning’ of life. In both cases, it is a process of aging and even if it is so, after death, as if the dead body also continues to age, as we use them while noting details for fossils. However, it is termed as growth, when body was apparently alive and thereafter, left to archaeologists, to make new words about these bodies. It is not considered as ‘growth’ any more. So words have the strength to make a meaning, that enforces the story of manifestation in time.  However such words happening is also the functioning or expression of life.

Life ‘is’ functioning. The word ‘is’ makes life and functioning as ‘one’ unit. That is how it is. Functioning ‘of  life, makes life as one unit and an ‘aspect ‘of it, makes it as if another, without the first. Words are very tricky. At the most, we can say, change or functioning is an ‘expression’ of life. But ‘expression’ ‘is’ life, in fact expressions bring about aliveness ‘as’ what is expressed. All there is -is expressing- is life. So we must replace all words that point to ‘change’ or ‘expression’ as ‘life’ itself (in action). There is nothing, that doesn’t change, and so, nothing other than ‘life’. However change that is felt, is an aspect of time, and time is an aspect of change, without one, there is no other. Both are same, Time and Life, giving a ‘feel’ of change or expression, which brings about a ‘notion’ of a solid world of objects.

Shape is expression. We change the shape of our face, to expresses. We swing our body to express. You might swing your hand hard to express anger. So all shapes, are meant to bring about an expression, that life ‘feels’. Actually all there is –is ‘feeling’ only, as if moving, as if hearing, as if living etc, but that is another topic.

When we say, flame is the shape of fire, what is meant is that, the functioning of fire, looks as if a ‘flame’. So also, the functioning of ‘life’, looks as if creation. Its like in a dream, the functioning of life, looks as if a dream world. It is magically felt by ‘life’, as an aliveness of itself. So is the seemingly real world.

What is important to know, is that ‘life’ is creation and all functioning of all shapes, meaning all humans, animals, trees etc, is one functioning, which when happens, is manifested to seem ‘as’ world of different objects. So don’t be misled by ‘different’ people, functioning differently. There are no people and no different individual behaviour. It is the mind, that has some ‘memories’ to compare past an future, to bring about the ‘feel’ of change and thus make the difference, seem apparently meaningful. But even that is the ‘functioning of life’ ‘or’ what ‘Life’ is. Is-ness is ‘life’ felt as the changing world. Meaning to say, only change can be felt.

It is life that lives, life that hears, sees, understands, and all this, apparently as ‘from’ individual reference points, which makes a feel of individuality, called ‘me’. But since all this is a movement or functioning of life, meaning, life itself behaves or understands so, as if from a particular reference point.

So next time, when your wife or anybody expresses, note that, your feeling about such expression is also an expression, along with those expressions, that seemed to be of your wife, as one ‘functioning’ or ‘expression’ –which ‘Life’ is.

90. The Person That We Think We Are:

What would be the idea when we say that there is a person to a body. A character, that may be good or bad or unknown? 

There is definitely a difference between a dead body and a live body. The person that we think we are also seems to die with the body or disappear somewhere. But that is ‘life force’ to a body, rather than the person to a body. The person seems to be there, playing out, as a felt character, day after day, as if such a character to the body is real. Its like a ‘real’ story of ‘a character’ to a body. But is there no evidence of one, even though all bodies behave, like individual ‘persons’ with likes and dislikes inside of each body. When we try to see with our own experience, we cannot experience such a ‘person’ at a particular point in the body, but we somehow, accept, that ‘we are’ such a person that is always there and afraid of whatever we don’t like, as a person.

Life plays out bodies as different real characters, other than just as a ‘life force’ animating bodies. The life play out as if protecting its individuality, by socialising, loving, hating etc etc, as if to make sense, as individual entities, even though, all bodies, have the same ‘life’ as animating principle. Also there is an effect to believe others as ‘people’ and ourselves as dealing with them, in this world of people. The character that we make to our body and other bodies, gives an effect of a person inside the body who seems to take responsibility for what he does or does not do.

If we try to analyse what this person in the body, we see that, this ‘person’ that we are, is more like a capacity to cognise. So the body has life which is nothing but the intelligence to cognise. So the intelligence of the body to cognise is the basic 'me' or 'he' that basically makes ‘a person’. Thoughts that arise in perception, give reality, to ‘react’ to a story, which mind spins out as thoughts, as if all such people are real, and have to be dealt with.

There is also an intelligence that grasps knowledge. We say the person is intelligent or dumb. This intelligence seems to grasp knowledge by dividing all sensation into parts and reassembling to form a concept which is then seen as the whole. For example it  'divides 'what is seen outside as a splash of colours and cuts out bits of the scenery to make them into separate objects, puts concepts onto them that are taken out of the baggage of knowledge and converts them to make them real things. It then assembles these 'things' to form the world that is seen. Like for example, it can isolate certain pattern of sounds to make them into music or language or words etc. In other words, it is an intelligence that can make meaning from the basic cognising after separation into so called things or concepts about what is being cognised.

Depending on the efficiency of this second set of intelligence that seem to be in use, the 'person' has the capacity to cognise data and recognise as ‘concepts’. The 'person'  is then regarded as more intelligent or not, depending on the capacity and  if the concepts thus made are agreeable to other 'persons', it is regarded as intelligent or else the capacity is regarded dumb.
.
So there is basic cognising intelligence and a recognising intelligence or conceptualising intelligence. The re- cognised concepts are then stored in memory 'God knows where' for a 'future' use of 're-experience'. Actually the re-cognising is the 'experience'

There is another intelligence used to operate the body, like giving out the right impulses to move the hand and legs and the neck etc. Or for that matter move the lungs or digest food or pump blood etc.

So these three segments of intelligence or energy act in various ways which is responsible for the creation of the unseen ‘person’ in the ‘seen’ body.

So, the unseen 'person' is basically a ‘set of intelligence’.

We can see the body and feel the ‘person’ even though we cannot see the person. This is like cutting out a circle in a paper and feeling the circle even though it is cut off and not there. Or seeing the presence of intelligence as the 'absence' of the 'person' and conceptualising as the ‘person’ that seems to be present.

Meaning to say that even though there are only animated bodies; the intelligence that seems to be ‘in’ the body is taken as an image and converted to being a ‘person’. The conversion of the 'intelligence' of 'other' bodies 'seems' to be happening in 'our' body. Meaning - all the 'persons' are  only concepts .

This is also extended to things. We see a shape and convert this shape and colour in our head to read as table, chair. However the names of the things are given more to the shape and colour and believed to the 'things' itself as if existing on its own even if the shape and colour wasn't.

For example, if we take a 'flower', we see a flower or experience a flower. But if we stick all the parts of the flower like petals and sepals and stem etc, we see it as parts of the flower. Where did the flower disappear now?. The imagination of the whole flower was different from the imagination of the flower assembled out of parts. It is like seeing a ‘person’ is much different from seeing an assembly of or addition of hands and legs and head etc. All these activities happen on its own without interference of a central controlling authority because that control is the intelligence itself and acts on its own without a controller.
 

What is the difference between seeing people as animated bodies and seeing animated bodies as 'persons' and giving reality like father, friend, enemy etc. How is it that we are able to recognising the person that can't be seen?.

Firstly we need to understand that all appearances are itself an interpretation of a basic energy or intelligence. Meaning, if there is vibration of energy at 20 hz to 20000 hz, this appears as sound. Factually there is only vibration and the 'sentience' or intelligence, that feels personal, converts this vibration to appear as sound which is only heard by us but it does not exist other than as vibrations. So there is an appearance thrown upon by the vibrations appearing as sound.

 We can accept similar behaviour with colours because colours are nothing but 'appearances' of vibrations.

 Since the vibrations are converted to and appearance of 'sound' at the source of vibrations itself, and similarly colours at the source of 'colour vibrations', the intelligence that acts as the convertor of vibrations to appearances, is basically 'available' at the 'source'. This intelligence of cognising is available at the source of vibrations rather than happening after it came in contact with the body or rather than happening inside the head. So 'life' or that intelligence that we say as cognising capacity, seems to be in space in the vicinity of sound and colours to make them appear from its basic format of vibrations to its appearing or final format as sound or colours. Similarly is the hardness or softness. So, all sensations are basically cognising capacity of different types of vibrations.

 Going in the same direction, we can attribute cognising power of 'life' to cognise tastes and smell which also seem to appear in the space of awareness. However since cognising is happening both inside and outside the body, and some of the cognition appear close to the body or inside the body (and rest outside the body), we discount what is happening outside and think that all cognition is happening ‘inside’ which is not true..

 The person that we think we are is only this cognising capacity (and the recognising capacity as things through use of knowledge). There is no other individual person that is hiding inside the body and carrying out these duties of cognising. So when we say -I see or I hear, we are not putting an effort to see or hear, but is happening on its own because the intelligence is already doing the needful. So the 'I' has no role as a separate activator of converting vibrations to appearances.

The worst part for all of us is that this three set of intelligence bundles (cognising, recognising, and causing movements of the body)  are all arising out of a single set of intelligence bundle which is the basic energy that is vibrating also.

This means that the source of the vibration is that intelligence, that is also doing the cognising, and playing out bodies.

So,  there is only this energy and we can give it any name from GOD to consciousness to awareness to whatever you want to name it, because, naming it is conceptualising it and becomes the objective appearance of the subjective energy.

So where is the person? Only an non-objective appearance that exists as a concept of the ‘presence’ of the absence of the person that is not.