R: All questions are an attempt to garner intellectual understanding. Yet, intellectual understanding is not the end of the game; it is merely a way-station. The finite mind will never perceive the infinite. However, I understand that you will ignore this and continue to raise questions. So, let’s have at it.
Q: What can you teach us about the soul?
R: I don’t use the word “soul” because it brings all sorts of imaginations into people’s heads and prompts numerous questions that are not relevant to the task at hand.
Q: What, then, of religion?
R: There are six religions that have shaped our civilization: Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, Taoism/Confucianism, and Islam. On the surface, these religions seem to be quite at odds insofar as their most fundamental doctrines about the nature of Reality appear to contradict each other.
For example, there is Judaism’s worship of one god in direct opposition to Hinduism’s worship of several million gods and Buddhism’s assertion that there is no God.
However, within each tradition we find a set of mystical teachings on the subject of the Ultimate Reality that, despite large variations in time, geography, and culture, are surprisingly similar. In fact, when they are viewed as a single body of thought, they can be said to comprise what Aldous Huxley called The Perennial Philosophy.
Below are six points agreed upon by the mystics of all the great traditions:
1. Ultimate Reality, regardless of whether It is called Allah, Brahman, Buddha-nature, Ein-sof, Yahweh, God, Krishna, or the Tao, cannot be grasped by the mind or expressed in words. This is so because thoughts and words, by definition, create distinctions and, hence, duality. Even the simple act of naming something creates duality because it distinguishes the thing that is named from all other things that are left unnamed.
2. All distinctions are imaginary; the Ultimate Reality is therefore non-dual. While this Ultimate Reality constitutes the true nature of everything, in Itself, It is no thing.
3. Although it is not a thing, this emptiness or no-thingness is not a mere vacuum or void. It is radiant with the Light of Pure Consciousness, or Buddha-Mind Itself.
4. All the traditions also agree that when distinctions such as subject and object, I and other, self and world are taken to be real, we lose sight of the Ultimate Reality and experience delusion which is the cause of all our seeming suffering.
5. In the absence of separate selves, our True Nature is God, Brahman, or Consciousness Itself.
6. Although the truth of one’s unity with Ultimate Reality cannot be grasped by thought, all agree that it can be realized via an apperception which bypasses the thinking mind altogether. This, in turn, brings freedom from suffering and death.
As such, there is really no argument about what constitutes the Ultimate Reality or God.
Doctrines, laws and rituals are only of value as signposts, which point the way to what is beyond them. Isn’t it time that we set them all aside and end the warfare of competitive dogmas that separate us?
Isn’t it finally time that we all agree to share God? You want to see God in all, but not in yourself? If all is God, are you not included in that all?
Q: It’s difficult for me to grasp the idea that after enlightenment there are no longer distinctions between things. How can that be?
R: It’s a misinterpretation. The transcendence of distinction is not the denial of distinction.
What is discerned is that the world is an event; it is something that happens to you in the same way as your body and your mind happen to you. There is the individual and the world, the macrocosm and the microcosm.
The inquiry should be directed:
To what does the body appear?
To what does the mind appear?
To whom do they happen?
To where do the body and mind appear?
To when do the body and mind appear?
Q: Is there any difference between thinking and watching the mind?
R: Yes, for those who are pursuing the discovery of our essential nature, it is vital to distinguish between the two. Witnessing the mechanism of the mind is vastly different from being fixated by thought. When we are in thought, we are absent to what is present, but when we watch the mind, without getting involved, we can discern our very own beingness.
We have for a long time had the benefit of a microscope to be able to explore, in minute detail, what’s “out there”. The investigation I am suggesting is essentially a microscope for what’s “in here”.
Over time, we discern that we can exist without thoughts, but thoughts cannot exist without the energy we provide them. When we are no longer chained by our beliefs and our mechanical responses, we are autonomous, free.
Q: Can consciousness be experienced?
R: Consciousness is the Experiencing. In that sense, it cannot be experienced any more than you can discern the taste of your tongue.
Let’s come at it differently, shall we? You are sitting here. Where is your sitting experienced?
Q: In my body.
R: Where is your body experienced?
Q: In my mind.
R: And where is your mind experienced?
Q: In my consciousness.
R: And where is consciousness experienced?
R: Now you get it.
Q: I have been actively turning away from the world in order to develop desirelessness. Can you offer any advice on this method?
R: Desirelessness is not a turning away from the world. Desirelessness is the recognition of one’s fullness, one’s completeness. When one has everything, what can be desired?
Q: Your claim that there is nothing to attain makes no sense to me. I can attain what I presently don’t have. Yet, you insist that I already have it. Can this be reconciled?
R: Yes, it is the attainment of the already attained. The only distinction is that you do not as yet see that.
Q: Why do you meet with us, give us your time and ask nothing in return?
R: All that I can say is that I am moved to free you from your self imposed imprisonment. I am the instrument that will remove the cataract from your eye.
Q: Many Buddhists believe that the development of a set of specific virtues is the correct path. Do you have any thoughts on this?
R: The development of virtues or special powers are like bright coins to children. Don’t become distracted. Virtues or special powers are byproducts of recognition, not prerequisites.
Q: Where do I go after death?
R: Where does a flame go after it is extinguished?
Q: So, the problem is identification with the body. Is that right?
R: I myself often reference it in this manner and many others will likewise suggest it is so. This is one approach. Another suggests that the larger problem is with the non-identification with everything. Is there Self and not-Self or is all Self only? In this approach, identification with the body is seen as the fragmentation from a larger, all-encompassing identification.The focus is not on differences, but on commonalities.
In so doing, one is no longer able to project in front of oneself anything whatsoever other than one Self.
Q: Many teachings try to move us away from the idea of differences. Is paying attention to differences another impediment?
R: Sugar candies may come in varying shapes and sizes. But, they are all sugar.
In the same way, see the One in the many, and be clear that the only thing you can ever know is what appears in your mind. The moment you grasp this, you will easily discover that anything perceived by you comes and goes, whereas you were there before its appearance, during the moments when it presented itself to you, and after it had left you. In the absence of water, there are no waves.
Q: Can you say definitively whether or not the world is real?
R: Sure, take your pick.
The world is not real because it is discontinuous and changeful. The world is real because it is sourced from the Real, in the same way that silver earrings are silver.
The truth is that the whole issue of whether or not the world is real is nothing more than an intellectual distraction.
If the world is an illusion, then the one who sees the world must also be an illusion, since the seer is part of the world. The alternative view is that the world is real. In either case, the Perceiving, be it of an illusion or of reality, is real.
So, let’s agree that, at the least, the world is an appearance, and there is the Perceiving of the appearance. When the attention stays on the incontrovertible constant, the Perceiving, then whether or not the world is an illusion is not critical.
R: All questions are an attempt to garner intellectual understanding. Yet, intellectual understanding is not the end of the game; it is merely a way-station. The finite mind will never perceive the infinite. However, I understand that you will ignore this and continue to raise questions. So, let’s have at it.
R: Waking up involves recognizing who you truly are by letting go of who you imagine yourself to be. When you know who you are, you are free to observe how who you pretend to be plays itself out. In so doing, you see that the gap between what we defend as “reality,” and what reality is in fact, is enormous. Memory is responsible for your identity. In the absence of memory, who are you? Who you are in the absence of memory is no different from who you really are in the presence of memory. The only distinction is that you buy in to the construct that memory provides.
Consciousness is the container both for What-Is and for the falsehoods we construct to defend a preferred rendition of what is. The truth is that most people have clearly seen only a tiny segment of what there is to know. What we know, for the most part, is only what we seem to know. This tiny aperture structures our perception and stimulates the imagination.
False premises must, by their very nature, result in false conclusions.
False premises serve us because they defend who we insist we are and what we insist reality is. What-Is is right there in front of us, but what we believe is often prettier.
Illusion or deception requires a certain degree of unconsciousness to support these fictions.
The tendency to return to a limited definition of yourself lasts only as long as you feel the definition has validity. When it is known to be false, an imagination, when there is no longer anything in it for you, then you don’t return to it. In time, when you stop returning, it stops appearing.
Q: What am I?
R: When we speak the word, “I”, we are usually referring the one who lives in our heads, and who is known intimately only to ourselves. When we speak of ‘our’ body, it is spoken of as a possession of “I”. Though we rarely separate out these two clearly distinct aspects of our being, when we do attempt to examine them separately along with the mechanics of their relationship one to the other, we find ourselves in very deep waters.
I would prefer to keep matters simple. As such, the answer to your question is you are that by which you know you are.
Q: I don’t see how the world is my personal delusion. Can you explain?
R: It can be said to be delusory insofar as man seemingly acts to create for himself a sphere of security and permanency in a world that offers neither.
Q: Can anything really be said about the Absolute?
R: Not really, although we continue to talk.
The Absolute is without characteristics. Even to say that it is one is not strictly true, for the category of number is not applicable to it. In that sense, both advaita, not two, and aneka, not one, fall short.
Q: Why is it called Self Realization?
R: The term Self realization is a misnomer. When is the Self not realized? It always is, Existence and Consciousness. However, it is not recognized, being obscured by a personal world. Self-Realization is not learning something new, but of unlearning, eliminating the eroneous knowledge.
As such, what is desired is Self recognition, a re-cognizing of what had been known before.
Q: What is Eternal Reality?
R: The Eternal Reality is the source of what we regard as phenomenal reality and that Eternal Reality can be directly known.
However, we must acknowledge the dominance of the rational left brain over the intuitive right brain and that this imbalance is the source of confusion.
Discovery is always restricted by beliefs, hypotheses and expectations. In this regard, an emptying is a prerequisite for the direct knowing of Eternal Reality, of What-Is.
Q: As I understand it, we don’t know that we don’t know. This is the ignorance that must be removed. Is that so?
R: Admittedly, most don’t know that they don’t know.
There is virtually a global ignorance, an ignorance in the sense of ignoring What-Is. I prefer to use the word confusion which is characterized by both non-apprehension of What-Is and misapprehension of It. What I place before you is an alternative to the tendency of the human mind to seek the path out of its confusion by way of the ideological fixation of belief.
Whatever is perceived is an appearance in the mind. The table cannot enter the mind, only the sense impressions of the table can.
This mind must not abide on any image presented to the senses or on any thought presented to consciousness. It has to go beyond both image and thought, if it wants to reach the ultimate which cannot be thought or imagined.
Q: What is the difference between consciousness and the functioning of the brain. Isn’t the brain the source of consciousness?
R: Consciousness is prior to matter, essence is prior to substance.
Consciousness experiences the output from the brain in the body in the same way as one experiences the output from a TV. In my case, I am subscribed to the Roy Channel, one world in an infinity of worlds.
The brain takes its protective shell, the body, to be itself and then initiates a set of processes to protect it. The sum of these processes has come to be known as the ego. The self image that arises therefrom is anchored to bodily sensations and memories. These memories and sensations are what boot up after sleep is completed in the morning. Dreaming ends, I-am-this-in-the-world appears.
This self can be said to be both real and unreal. It is unreal insofar as there is no entity to which it corresponds. Yet, it is real as the set of brain processes.
At death, what dies? The body, which prior to the meeting with the Conscious Life Energy, was an inert ovum, returns to its inert state and decays. Dust to dust, as it were. The ego, which is brain process, ceases when brain function ceases.
Authentic-I never dies. Man has a subtle intuition of this. He watches others die yet continues to act as if immortal. To those preoccupied with the idea of reincarnation, I would inform them that it is the Conscious Life Energy Itself that is the only transmigrant, the posthumous continuity.
Q: Do you believe in miracles?
R: What greater miracle could there be than that this world appears out of nothing and that an “I” experiences it all? The sight of a flower is as extraordinary as the vision of God.
Q: Can you cite any scriptural support for your experiences?
R: My experiences require no outside support, scriptural or otherwise. If my experiences align with any scripture, I assign no importance to the correlation.
Q: What you are talking about here is not in accord with traditional advaita?
R: Must it? Are you here for an advaita lecture or to possibly expand the boundaries of your understanding?
Let’s not forget that there are other valid views of non-duality such as Dzogchen and Kashmir Shaivism. Advaita holds no monopoly. I speak from my experience. Whether it conforms with advaita is the advaitin’s problem, not mine.
Q: Can man attain immortality or is that only some pipedream?
R: Immortality is the death of the I-am-this-body illusion. In that sense, it is not dependent on our ability to extend our personal illusion indefinitely, but on our ability to transcend the illusion. All there is is essence and substance, that-ness and what-ness. It could be said that substance is objectified essence. Every thing that you are conscious of is of Consciousness.
Q: What is Self Realization?
R: Self Realization is the reconciliation of the dualities of self and other and the experiencer and the experienced. It is the end of the Discriminant.
Q: Do you believe in God?
R: What do you mean by God?
Q: Well, you know, a Supreme Being that watches over us rewarding goodness and punishing evil.
R: What is obvious to me is that there is an Essence, an energy if you will, that is the source and sustenance of all that is. It has no will nor does it intend specific outcomes. It is there for support. I refer to it as the Conscious Life Energy; it is, so to speak, my God.
Q: Why is this process so damn difficult? If we understand it so well, why can’t we bring it about?
R: That’s really key, isn’ it? Here’s what we’re up against.
Our brains possess involuntary mechanisms that make unbiased thought virtually impossible while creating the illusion that we are rational. What is given as the perceived Universe is only a stream of stimulations on the surface of the sensory reception fields. The rest is a cognitive interpretation of those streams of stimulation.
What you are, in the relative sense, is a result, a result of genetics, of social conditioning, of hearsay and of erroneous beliefs. What I talk about here is how to return to being who you used to be, not being a result of anything. It is sort of a reattaching of the umbilical cord to the Absolute.
In the world of duality, there is the Self and its antithesis, ego. All actions arise from It, not from Its usurper, the ego. This brings us to the question regarding the ego: “Who is to remove it?”
The ego is password protected, so to speak, and can only be removed by the one who initially placed it and set the password.
Q: You’re saying that this I that I am is not real? How can that be?
R: This self, in fact, is just a bundle of perceptions and memories, but the more actions performed imagining that it is the self that originates and executes them, the more substance we endow this insubstantial entity with.
In this manner of gaining substance for itself, this structure assumes authority, takes it upon itself to mediate between consciousness and reality. It continually intrudes between the mind and what is, screening and filtering, so that it becomes an impediment to true knowing.
Paradoxically, this process is deemed an unsatisfactory condition, resulting in seeking new experiences in order to transcend this self or to take oneself out of oneself. But who is to do this when that which seeks to transcend is no different from the transcended?
Q: What is the difference between you and I?
R: Who said that there was a difference? There are periods of activity followed by periods of inactivity. Certain events are registered in memory, in service to the organism. Most are immediately discarded. Thought appear, emotions arise. I am not a dead tree stump.
Q: Are you suggesting that there is no difference between us?
R: The difference is one of viewpoint only. Whatever arises in me, there is no attachment to it. It comes, it stays, it goes. You use what arises to build narratives.
Q: Why won’t you be more specific about the means of attaining self recognition?
R: Providing you with a system or method for attainment is an obvious and viable business opportunity and there are many who are exploiting the opportunity. But can anything really be done? Is there a proven means?
All one can do is to stand naked before It and invite It to act to clear away all the obstructions. Then wait on It. The sun pushes away the darkness in its own time.
I recognize that this seeming passivity is distasteful to most, especially those who hold to the idea that they can actually bring about recognition. To those I extend my best wishes and ask that they come back in a decade and tell me how things are progressing.
R: All doing by a seeming doer is little more than imagination amidst all of the ideational wave-forms on the one integral ocean of Conscious Life Energy. A single year free of this hypnosis is superior to a lifetime under this hypnosis. This is why those who understand this have gathered here.
Q: In the final analysis, is “Who am I?” the only question?
R: Not necessarily. Depending on your disposition, the final question might be “What am I?” or “Whose am I?”
Q: What benefit do I derive from listening to you?
R: None whatsoever if you are not receptive to seeing things differently. Most people visit only to have their previously established viewpoints confirmed.
An infant is born without beliefs; all beliefs are acquired. Most beliefs are unverified, simply taken to be true at face value. Hence, the primary problem, taking belief to be reality. All we do here is to encourage checking it out.
Q: You don’t seem to be very accommodating toward religion. Why is that?
R: A true religion participates in the ongoing search for ontological truth. A religion that has stopped this search and is, instead, focused on raising funds, building buildings, proselytizing its dogma and expanding its social network has ceased being a religion and has become a cult.
Q: What do I have to do to get enlightened?
R: Despite what you are being literally and figuratively sold, there is no recipe for enlightenment. What I have discerned is that when one observes oneself, that is the organism, a space is created between the observed and the Observing. As this space widens, further clarity ensues.
Q: OK then, I’m new here. Can you briefly summarize your teachings?
R: My viewpoint is this:
The world does not exist apart from the body; the body does not exist apart from the mind; the mind does not exist apart from the Conscious Life Energy; and the Conscious Life Energy does not exist apart from its Potentiality, the Absolute.
All there is is the functioning of the manifestation and the Knowing of the functioning.
It begins with Conscious Being, I.
The experience of Being is I-am. This is fullness, unity, peace, with there being no other to be in conflict with.
Finally, there is the particular experience of being: I am this. This is a descent into fragmentation, into limitation. The experience of being hungry becomes I am hungry. The experience of being angry becomes I am angry.
The sum of all the particulars becomes organized as “me” and its derivative “my”. What can be said to be the obstructon to unity other than “other”? In the instant the “I am this” is born, the obstruction is set in place.
When one is clear, when one lets Reality be realized, it is discerned that whatever is mine cannot be me and that me is nothing other than the particularized experience of That.
What is this That? It is that by which I-am is known and I am That. It is achieved via the path of returning. One returns from what you have taken yourself to be since the self consciousness arose at around age 2, when the “I am this” began, to what was prior to this arising.
This is the sole instruction: Go back the way you came.
Q: I have no practice, as such, other than reading scripture. Is that enough?
R: Reading scripture is fine, but in and of itself, it is incomplete. Prove scripture to be right; that will be enough.
Q: I feel that you are doing tradition a great disservice by devaluing spiritual practice. What makes you think that all the great ancients were wrong and that you are right?
R: Under certain rare circumstances, one is able to reverse the outward direction of one’s conscious attention, turning it inwardly, so as to have clear and direct experience of
the original emanating Source. The issue is whether or not, through one’s efforts, it can be made to happen.
I have not seen any proofs that would affirm this to be the case. All these claims of the efficacy of a specific practice suffer from a self-serving bias. That is to say that they fail to give adequate weight to all those whose practice did not produce the desired result and instead focus on only those with positive outcomes.
If true awakening is spontaneous, that means it is without cause. You can’t cause it; no practice can cause it. Spontaneous combustion cannot be caused.
All of the great teachers in essence said “Don’t take my word for it; prove it to yourself”. Their attitude is echoed here; test and verify.
If you want to unquestioningly take another’s word that such and such a practice will result in your enlightenment, then by all means begin the practice.
Q: I am unclear on what you mean by the Absolute. Can you describe it for me?
R: The Absolute cannot be described. It is infinite as it is the negation of limits and it is eternal as it is the negation of time. Even to say, “It is,” is misleading, since It is beyond Being. Even the word “prior” connotes causal or temporal sequence, and It is beyond both. It is even prior to The First. Nothing can be said of It without settling upon a name in order to speak of It, and so I choose to name It the Absolute or Pure Potentiality. It is the Potentiality of all multiplicity, and it holds this potential multiplicity within it.
Q: I recognize that I am here today because of all the spiritual work I have done. But I have no sense of how far along I am. Can you put this into some perspective for me?
R: It is good that you see that you are here because of all that you have done. Can you also see that you are here in spite of all that you have done?
Q: I never thought about it that way before.
R: When you see that both what you did and what you didn’t do brought you here, you understand that neither can therefore be a cause.
Q: Then what am I to do?
R: What you want to become, you already are. If you were to imbibe this, how would your outlook and approach to life change? What would need doing?
The central choice is a simple one. You can place yourself in a confrontational stance with the world or you can accept What-Is. The discovery of What-Is cannot be achieved through any system. I have no interest in systematizing anything. In fact, all systems are the foundation upon which mindless servitude is built.
Q: I still haven’t arrived at my destination. If all my spiritual practices have fallen short, why should I believe that whatever you suggest will bring about a different result?
R: Stop believing that you have a destination. You are the destination. There is nowhere to go, nothing to do, and nothing to become. Sometimes, we lose the sense of the most basic things. Never forget that oneness can only be achieved by that which already has oneness inherently. A wave can become the ocean because it is already ocean. A log can never become ocean, regardless of its spiritual practice.
Q: I have found your tying together of ancient teachings with neuroscience to be very provocative. Do you think that the brain can break out of the prison it has created?
R: The human brain introduces itself in between the Seeing and the seen by creating an entity, an individual seer. This entity then takes on a life of its own, developing ever-increasingly complex responses whose primary function is the continuity of the organism and the brain contained therein. This system of responses is commonly referred to as ego.
In that sense, “me” is the secret identity, so to speak, of the brain. When this “me” turns in the direction of the world, there is dissatisfaction. When turned back toward the authentic-I, there is peace.
Liberation is only liberation from the secret identity as an autonomous individual.
Because we are so preoccupied with honing this psychological identity, we have lost sight of our true identity. When the I-am-this is finished, when there is no longer any “this” to polish, I-am can shine.
What is obvious is that grass is green in the spring because a lot has died in the winter. Death is the prerequisite of renewal. Whether or not there is any activity that one can undertake to finish the I-am-this continues to be a source of much debate.
Q: What is the experience of non-duality?
R: In a sense, there is not an experience of non-duality because that would presuppose an experiencer and the experienced.
Setting language aside, in the experience of the union of the knower, the object of knowing, and the process of knowing, the familiar separation between subject and object is transcended. All that remains is the Knowing. More than mere theory, this is a direct experience, one that is unavailable to the rational faculty because reason always presupposes the existence of an objective world distinct from the subject or knower. In order to transcend the limitations posed upon reality by the rational faculty, the mind must turn back upon itself and away from the senses to know itself intuitively, in its undivided wholeness, in its nonduality.
When experienced through the senses and reason, reality appears multiple, everchanging, and finite; when experienced through the height of intuition (meditation), reality is found to be unified, unchanging, and infinite.
Q: The mind is always wandering away. When we try to bring it back, again it wanders. What is the best way of bringing it back?
R: You know that it wanders. What knows it? No matter how long and how far it wanders, some knowing is present before the wandering, during the wandering, and after the wandering is over. Something knows, and that something is more you than wherever the mind goes. Know this Knowing.
Q: I understand that the world cannot be changed without a radical transformation in consciousness. May I assume that this is why you are talking to us today?
R: No, I am not out in the world with the intention of changing it. But I promise you that if you merely change your viewpoint, that center of reference against which everything is judged, compared and evaluated, your world will change most dramatically.
Strictly speaking, there can be no transformation of consciousness, as such.
When I wash my white shirt to remove the dirt, the shirt cannot be said to be transformed. When a clay pot is broken into fragments and then made whole again, it cannot be said to be transformed. When the veil is lifted, the face beneath it cannot be said to be transformed.
In each of these examples, there is simply a return to the original state.
Q: How do I know that I shall be better off, more contented, and less distressed, if I reject the ego?
R: You know this because there will be no one to be better off, more contented, and less distressed.
Q: How is your world different from my world?
R: Although our respective worlds share similarities, my world is one possibility and yours is another.
Q: To all of us, the world seems very real. Yet, the masters and sages tell us that it’s just a dream. Who’s right?
R: Will my answer change the way you live your life? Will you no longer get out of the path of speeding cars? This world is an appearance in the mind. Dream is another appearance in the mind.
When you see things clearly, these types of curiosities don’t arise. One becomes like a magician, knowing that he creates illusions while never falling under their sway.
Q: What is stopping me from fully grasping what you are trying to get across?
R: Do you need a mirror to prove that you exist? You are Existence Itself. Without you, nothing is, nothing exists. Where it gets tricky is when your existence is restricted to the particular. Once you are a particular, this is bondage. In due course, there must arise other particulars within the multiplicity. But the truth is that when seeing others, one only sees oneself in other shapes.
Many people travel far to come here, believing that I will tell them what to do. Instead, I give them one simple instruction of what not to do: don’t be anything in particular. There is no utility in objectifying yourself. Only do that; no further instruction is required.
Q: Does meditating lead to enlightenment?
R: I have seen no evidence to suggest that this is so. Admittedly, there have been isolated instances where meditators became enlightened. But this only suggests a correlation, not a cause.
There are some things that we can’t impact. Waking up early doesn’t hasten the dawn.
The arrival of enlightenment or self realization requires what the ancients referred to as “favorable circumstances”. This was their way of saying that nothing specific could be pointed to. Whatever arrives arrives spontaneously and not as a result of effort. We have been brainwashed into thinking that, in the absence of effort, nothing can happen.
Q: Many people, myself included, no longer believe in God. What would you say to them?
R: It is easy to understand why more and more people question the existence of God. It isn’t because God doesn’t exist; it’s because God as most people define Him doesn’t exist.
But God as truly God is, cannot be doubted nor denied because God is the very basis of being, of real existence. Further, there is no distinction between God and the Conscious Life Energy that is the support of all. They are one and the same Organizing Principle, Animating Principle.
When this is recognized, the logical question that arises is “Where is the line of demarcation between myself and God?” When this investigation is pursued, it concludes in the recognition that there is none. All is because I am, and this I-am is God. Put another way, I-am is a given; what I-am is the subject for the investigation. Recognition of what I-am ends the investigation.
It is now clear that you and what you experience are not two. You are the experience, the experiencer, and the experiencing. You are this singularity underlying all of it.
Once you know this, there is nothing to remember any more. How can you remember what you are? Do you have to remember that you are a woman? You are that which is remembering. You are prior to the act of remembrance.
Q: This God that you’re speaking of, is it the source of all creation?
R: There is no creation in the sense that manifestation is not something “built” and separate from the builder. Manifestation is the emanation or projection of the builder and you are That. The Source of all things is inside all things, contains them all as the One in all and the all in the One, but remains unaffected by them. Understand that the field of matter is an appearance in the field of mind and the field of mind is an appearance in Consciousness. It is an illusion if you believe that it is in some way separate from consciousness. Turn your attention toward the Source. When you reach the Source there will be no inside or outside, because the Source pervades everything. In that sense, after realization, everything will be inside.
Q: What is the soul?
R: The soul is man’s attempt to objectify subjectivity.
Q: Is consciousness all there is?
R: The underlying supportive state is experiencing: experiencing dreams, experiencing events in the waking state, experiencing the total absence of phenomena. This experiential state, and state is really a misnomer, is no different from consciousness.
In duality, consciousness is all. Prior to consciousness is the potential for consciousness.
Q: Is this mysticism?
R: Mysticism refers to the pursuit of an alternative state of consciousness that enables the mystic to discern an ultimate reality through an immediate, direct, intuitive knowledge or experience. Characteristics of these experiences include feelings of unity, peace and bliss, numinosity, ineffability of the experience, loss of ego, an altered perception of space and time, and profound transformative changes in one’s viewpoint.
Without putting it into a box, I would say that what I talk about shares these characteristics with mysticism.
Q: Is what you’re saying and what Krishnamurti said essentially the same thing?
R: I don’t think so. As I understand it, he was concerned with the transformation of the psychological self. I am more concerned with the movement beyond it via its negation. Before I discard my junk mail, there’s no need to open it.
Q: I came here at the request of a friend. Although what you say makes some sense to me, I feel that I really don’t need it and that move love of God is enough.
R: Thanks for speaking up.
Most worship their god in order to achieve some sort of gain for themselves, either in this life or in an assumed afterlife. Then there are those, like yourself, who claim to worship their god out of love. I suppose that you can love some concept that you have created. But is this really love? But how can you love what you do not know?
We see these beautiful images of Jesus, of Buddha and others. Where are the photos, where are the sketches, that are the basis for these images? It’s all imagination, isn’t it?.
Q: It’s real to me.
R: Imagination can be very real.
Q: I’ll think about what you’ve said.
R: That’s all I ever ask.
Q: Most teachers say that books are not helpful along the path, but I have been told that you disagree. What is your position on this?
R: Authentic words carry authentic power whereas hearsay does not. In that regard, a value can be found in the transcriptions of talks and direct writings. If you really want to know the inner view of a sage, what so-and-so said that so-and-so said that so-and-so said that the sage said is of questionable worth.
Q: Then you are throwing out the Bible, the Buddhist sutras and so much more.
R: Rather than say that I am throwing them out, let’s say that I am not assigning them priority. In the final analysis, the Conscious Life Energy is the only book you need to study and it is available 24/7.
Here’s an example: Those who profess to be looking for God, build God according to the image of that suits them. Jesus is alleged to have said “I am the door”. However, is it not equally possible that this is a flaw of translation or memory and that what he really said was “I am is the door”? Can you see what a huge difference this makes?
In the same way as a bee sting reveals the presence of a bee, “I am” reveals the presence of Conscious Life Energy.
Q: I cannot be sure of anything; even God cannot be proved with absolute certainty. Can you offer anything to me that is actually provable?
R: Yes, I can; you are. Even before you think you are, you are. That is quite provable.
Q: Can you give me peace?
R: No, I cannot. But I can lead you to peace. Free yourself of all your thoughts, of all your projections and imaginations, and tell me if you are not peaceful.
Q: Are you holding back any of your secrets from us?
R: Nothing is held back here. There is no need for secrets because most are unwilling to take in what is being said.
Let’s keep it simple. All there is is the Knowing of the field and the content of the field. The confused believe they are part of the latter whereas the wise know that they are the former, viewing it all as a spectator sport.
Q: What is it that reincarnates?
R: What is it that incarnates?