There is That which becomes
and there is that
which is caused to exist
by the becoming
of That which becomes.
That which becomes
knows as experience
that which its becoming
causes to exist.
That which becomes
is the Formless
whereas that which the Formless
causes to exist
and knows as experience
is form.
When That which becomes
knows Itself
as the Formless
there is then no delusion.
But when That which becomes
knows itself
as form
there is then only delusion.
When That which becomes knows itself
as that which its becoming
has caused to exist,
knows itself only as form,
then the Formlessness
that is Itself
becomes obscured from Itself
leaving only
the appearance of form,
leaving only
what That which becomes
knows as experience.
And so it is that when the Formless
identifies with form
then the world appears to be
composed only of form,
when it is actually
composed only of the Formlessness
by which the world of form is known
and by which the world of form
is being brought into existence.
Energy in relation to energy
creates a shadow
and Formlessness in relation to Formlessness
creates form.
Neither the shadow nor form
is what is actually there
where they appear to be.
What if the Sun
in gazing upon the Earth
knew itself as the shadows
created by the Light
instead of as
the Light Itself?
And what if Consciousness
in gazing upon the Universe
knew itself as the forms
created by the Formless
instead of as
the Formlessness Itself?
Consciousness
trying to find Itself in form
is like the Sun
trying to find Itself in shadows.
Looking for Itself
in the one place it cannot be found.
Looking for Itself
in the shadow of form
that is created
where the Formless meets Itself.
This is like the hand
looking for itself
in the line that arises,
in the form that arises,
where the tips of two fingers meet.
Consciousness
trying to find Itself in form,
looking for Itself
in all that remains
once what it actually is,
once the Formlessness that it is,
has been completely obscured.
Such a game
this agreed upon opposition
whereby the Formless becomes,
and in that Becoming
creates a playground
we call the Universe
where it can also become
hidden from Itself,
where it can also become
obscured by all the forms,
all the shadows,
that its Becoming
causes to exist.
But shadows do not really
hide the Light,
and form does not really
hide the Formless.
For the Light to be hidden by shadow
the Light must know itself as shadow,
and for the Formless to be hidden by form
the Formless must know itself as form.
And so what really hides the Light,
and what really hides the Formless,
is the misidentification of each
with its own creation,
the misidentification of each
with what is caused to exist
and so with what only arises
where each meets Itself
in agreed upon opposition to Itself.
And so what really hides the Formless
from Itself
is the Formless Itself,
which is how it must be
because nothing else actually Is,
as all else only seems to be,
all else is only a seam,
a form,
that is caused to exist
where indivisible Formlessness
meets Itself
in agreed upon opposition to Itself,
as it plays the game
of its own Becoming.
And in that Becoming
occasionally becoming lost to Itself,
but not by mistake,
because inevitably finding Itself
after losing Itself
is just a part of the game,
just an inseparable part
of its own Becoming.
so why not just allow it,
why not just go with it.
You can oppose it
but that is not going to make it
other than it is.
All opposing this moment does
is put you in conflict
with what is.
And while in conflict with what is
all hell breaks loose,
because all hell is created
when what is opposes Itself.
You are part of the Isness of this moment,
and so when you oppose what is
in this moment
you oppose your Self
and so are in conflict with your Self,
and while in conflict with your Self
you suffer.
Why create suffering for your Self
just because the moment
does not appear
as the mind says it should?
The only problem
that ever arises
is the difference between what is
in this moment
and what the mind thinks
this moment should be.
For what is a problem
but the mind trying to determine
what it will take
to get from what is
in this moment
to what the mind thinks
this moment should be?
This moment, as it is,
plus or minus something
equals what should be
in this moment.
That is the problem
the mind continuously generates
as it endlessly produces thoughts
regarding how this moment should appear
regarding how this moment should be.
And because we view the world
through this conceptual veil
of what the mind thinks should be
there then seems to be a problem
when the moment does not appear
as the mind thinks it should.
And so the only problems
that ever arise
are problems that the mind generates,
but only because we think
that what the mind says should be
should somehow trump
what is.
So foolish,
so completely insane,
and yet,
so completely normal.
It has been said
that there are no problems
only solutions,
and this is true.
But every solution
is ultimately the same solution
because the solution to every problem
begins with the acceptance
and allowance
of what is.
What is is the universal solvent
the universal solution
that washes away all problems,
because there never really are any problems,
there is only the solution,
only what is
in this moment.
Problems are only the variance
between what is,
in this moment,
and what the mind thinks
this moment
should be.
You can try to close that gap,
to solve the problems
that the mind has generated,
through the reactive movements
of attachment and aversion,
by clinging to this
or pushing away that.
Or you can solve the problems
by realizing
that there actually are no problems,
only the illusion of problems
created by the mind
with its continuous and endless predictions
of what this moment
should be.
This moment is never a problem,
this moment is only ever
what is.
Even if your house is burning down
that is not actually a problem,
it is only what is.
If you think,
"my house should not be burning down,"
then you have generated a problem
where there is actually only what is.
Houses do not often burn down
but every day
some form arises or dissolves
that we think is a problem
because we think
it should be otherwise.
But how can it be otherwise
in this moment
if it is what is
in this moment?
The mind says
this should or should not be
in this moment,
as the weatherman says
it is going to rain tomorrow.
Both are predictions.
Neither is what is.
And just as we think the weather
should obey the predictions of the weatherman,
as when the sun comes out
we say it was supposed to rain,
so we think that what is
should obey the predictions of the mind,
so when this happens
or that does not happen
we say this or that
should or should not be.
So foolish,
so completely insane,
and yet,
so completely normal.
Surrendering to the moment,
accepting what is,
allowing what is,
is not weakness
but is wisdom.
To do otherwise
is to operate continuously
in the state of insanity
that we call normal,
and to continuously generate
the state of suffering
that comes with conflict
with the present moment,
that comes with conflict
with your Self.
So many problems,
just because we believe the mind
when it tells us
how this moment should be.
How does the mind know
how the Isness of this moment
should be?
It doesn't, it can't.
But the ego, the form-identity
wants the moment
to arise in a certain way,
to enhance itself
or avoid its diminishment.
And so the ego uses the mind
to create an image
of how it would like
the moment to be,
to either enhance itself
or avoid its diminishment.
And when the moment comes
and is at variance
with what the mind says should be,
which it usually is,
then the ego has a problem
it has itself created.
The mind is just doing its job
as assigned by the ego,
as assigned by the form-identity
as assigned by Consciousness
that has mistaken itself
for form.
You don't have to believe the weatherman
when he tells you what tomorrow will bring,
and then whatever tomorrow brings
will not be a problem.
And you don't have to believe your mind
when it tells you how this moment should be,
and then whatever the moment brings
will not be a problem,
but will only be
what is.
What profit it a man
if he gains the world
and loses his soul?
What profit it a man
if he gains the Treasure
as it appears in some form
and in so doing
loses sight of the actual Treasure
that is his own formless Nature?
We seek the Treasure
in this or that form,
and because we occasionally find it
we think that in form
is where it must always lie.
The Treasure is there
where there is both success and failure.
But we only allow ourselves to find the Treasure
when the form of the moment
takes the shape that we call success,
when the form of the moment
takes the shape that we call wanted.
For when the form of the moment
takes the shape that we call unwanted
then we deny ourselves access
to the Treasure that is always there,
where there is both success and failure,
where there is both wanted and unwanted.
But we promise to once again
give ourselves access to the Treasure,
but only once we have arranged
the form of the moment
into that which is wanted,
into that which we define as success.
And so we strive and strive
to arrange the moment
into a form that is wanted,
into whatever form we define as success,
so that we can have access
so that we can grant ourselves access,
to the Treasure that is always there
to the Treasure that is our birthright
to the Treasure that is our essential Nature.
And so we become our own slaves
driven on by the carrot
that is the promise to ourselves
that we will be given access to the Treasure
when the wanted is attained,
and driven on by the whip
that is the promise to ourselves
that we will be denied access to the Treasure
when the unwanted is obtained instead.
And both the carrot and the whip
are held by the master
that we call ego,
by the slave-driver
that is our form-identity.
For no one but ourself
can deny us access to the Treasure
that is our True Nature.
But the ego can only wield this power
as long as we believe
that form is what we are.
For once it is realized that the ego,
that some form,
is not what we are
then we have found the Treasure
within our Self,
then we have found the Treasure
that is our true formless Self,
unobscured by the wanted forms
that it only appeared to be.
And then it can be realized
that the Treasure that was found
that the Treasure we gave ourselves access to
in all the wanted forms,
in the pile of money,
in the promotion,
in falling in love,
in a baby's eyes,
in the sunset,
in the sunrise,
was all the same Treasure
appearing in different forms.
And then it can also be realized
that the Treasure that was hidden
that the Treasure we denied ourselves access to
in all the unwanted forms,
in the lack of money,
in the demotion,
in the loss of love,
we always really had access to
because it was always still there,
we just could not see it
because we were too busy
following the orders of the ego
trying to get rid of the unwanted,
trying to make room for the wanted,
and in so doing placing ourselves
in opposition to our Self.
For why does the Treasure
only seem to appear
when the wanted arises
and seem to disappear
when the unwanted arises
if the Treasure is always there
underlying both these forms?
Because when the wanted arises
we do not resist it,
and so we do not enter into
the relation of Self-opposition
that hides the Treasure from us,
that hides our formless Self from us.
And because when the unwanted arises
we do resist it,
and so we do enter into
the relation of Self-opposition
that hides the Treasure from us,
that hides our formless Self from us.
It is that simple.
In each moment we are involved in either
a relation of Self-allowing or Self-opposition,
and so in alignment with the Now,
or in conflict with the Now.
If you are not in one
then you are in the other,
and if you are in one
then you cannot be in the other.
But as long as we think that we are some form,
then even while involved in the relation of Self-allowing
that reveals the Treasure to us,
we still do not recognize what has actually been revealed,
because as long as we think that we are some form,
then the Treasure still appears as whatever wanted form
we are unconsciously and reflexively allowing,
and not as the Formlessness by which all form is known.
And from this position of form-identification
the Treasure is easily lost, easily hidden,
because as soon as some unwantedness arises,
which it always does,
then the unconscious and reflexive Self-allowing
that causes the Treasure to appear as some form
is replaced by the unconscious and reflexive Self-resistance
that obscures the Treasure
and leaves only suffering in its wake.
The ironic thing is,
by trying to make the unwanted go away,
we only create more of it,
and in the process only obscure more deeply
the Treasure we then seek
the Treasure we then have lost,
even though it is always here
right here where we are
as the Consciousness that seeks
the formless and endless Treasure
that is Itself.
There is no world,
there is no mind,
there is no me.
There is no this or that,
there is only what Is.
The world is this or that,
the mind is this or that,
me is this or that.
What Is is the Mirror
in which this and that arise.
And how do this and that arise
in the Mirror of what Is?
When the Mirror of what Is
bends upon Itself
a reflection arises in the Mirror
that is either this or that.
That reflection is never what Is,
is never the formless Mirror Itself,
but it does reflect, in its form,
the way in which the Mirror
is being in relation to Itself
in order to create the reflection,
in order to create the this or that,
that arises within Itself,
and which reflection, once created,
the Mirror then knows
as reality.
Reality seems to be what is there
where it appears to be,
but what is actually there
where reality appears to be
is the Mirror of what Is
that is both creating and apprehending
the reflection that arises within Itself,
owing to the way It is being,
in that moment,
in relation to Itself.
What Is Actually There
where a rock appears to be
is not hard.
What Is Actually There
where a rock appears to be
is neither hard nor soft,
but is empty,
devoid of form.
It is only when the formless Mirror
that Is where we are,
that Is what we are,
comes in relation to that same formless Mirror
that Is actually there
where the rock appears to be,
that a reflection arises within the Mirror,
that a form arises within the Mirror,
that a reality arises within the Mirror,
that we call hard.
The relation creates the reality,
and the particular relation
creates the particular reality.
One relation of the Mirror to Itself
creates this reality,
whereas the opposite relation of the Mirror to Itself
creates that reality.
The reality is not there
in the absence of the relation
of Isness to Itself
that creates it.
Nor is the reality what is actually there
even in the presence of the relation
of Isness to Itself
that creates it.
For what is actually there
is the Mirror of Isness
that is both creating and apprehending
as reality,
the reflection that has arisen within Itself
owing to its being
in relation to Itself.
That is why I say
there is no world,
there is no mind,
there is no me,
because these things, these forms,
that make up what we call the world,
that make up what we call the mind,
that make up what we call me,
that make up what we call reality,
are not what is actually there
where they appear to be,
nor are they actually there
as they appear to be.
These things, these forms,
of which the world, the mind, and the me are composed,
are thought to be there
as we apprehend them to be there
whether or not we are,
in this moment,
aware of them as being there.
This is an illusion
made possible by the mind,
because it is an illusion
that rests upon what is only a thought,
and so rests upon what is itself
only a reflection.
These things, these forms,
of which the world, the mind, and the me are composed,
only appear to be
where they appear to be,
and as they appear to be,
as long as we, as the Mirror,
are aware of them being
where and as they appear to be,
as long as we, as the Mirror,
are involved in the relation with our Self
that brings into existence within our Self
the particular reflection,
the particular form,
that we, as the Mirror,
apprehend as that particular reality.
In the absence of a mirror
there can be no reflection
and in the absence of Awareness
there can be no reality.
Why then do these things, these forms,
the this' and that’s that make up reality,
seem to be what is actually there,
where they appear to be,
if they are truly not
What Is Actually There
where they appear to be?
Because the Mirror has lost sight of Itself,
lost sight of What Is Actually There,
and so now what are only the reflections
that arise within Itself,
that arise within What Is Actually There
appear to be
what is actually there.
And how has the Mirror
lost sight of Itself,
and so lost sight of
What Is Actually There?
Because the formless Mirror
at some point, and for some reason,
instead of letting the thought "I am"
continue to flow forth from the realization
of its own formless Being,
instead chose to think
"I am this," or "I am that,"
and so made the mistake
of linking Itself to form,
and so made the mistake
of identifying itself with form,
with something that arises within Itself,
yet which is not actually Itself.
And as long as the Mirror
knows itself as some form,
as some reflection,
as some reality,
that has arisen within Itself,
and so also mistakenly knows that reflection
to be what is actually there
where it only appears to be,
then What Is Actually There,
which is the Mirror Itself,
must remain hidden
while still in plain sight,
as a mirror becomes hidden
while still in plain sight
as long as the reflection that arises within it
is mistaken for what is actually there.
"I am" is a thought, and so is a form,
that points one toward the Formless,
and so points one toward their true Self,
because it is a thought that arises
from the direct realization of one's Self
as formless Beingness.
"I am this," or "I am that"
are also thoughts,
but they are thoughts
that point one toward form
and so point one away from their true Self,
because these are thought that arise
from the experience of one's self
as form.
The relation of the Mirror to Itself
that is the direct realization of its formless Being,
that allows the Mirror to know Itself as it Is,
as the formless Isness,
while still in relation to Itself,
and so while still creating form within Itself,
while still creating the reflection "I am,"
is the opposite of the relation of the Mirror to Itself
that creates the reflections "I am this," or "I am that,"
which cause the Mirror to know itself as it is not,
as other than the formless Isness.
And because these relations are opposite,
they are also mutually exclusive,
meaning that while the Mirror is involved in one relation,
and thereby creating one reflection,
It cannot be involved in the other relation,
and so cannot create the other reflection.
This is why a long as we, as the Mirror,
know ourself as this or that,
know ourself as some form,
what we truly Are remains hidden
while still in plain sight
as the Formlessness
within which all form arises,
which is also the Formlessness
by which all form is apprehended.
Because knowing ourself as this or that,
knowing ourself as some form,
requires our involvement
in the particular relation with our Self
that creates that particular form,
that particular thought,
that particular reality,
within our Self.
And as long as we are involved
in that particular relation with our Self
creating that particular form,
that particular thought,
that particular reality,
and so knowing ourself in that particular way,
as this or that form,
it is simply not possible
for us to become involved
in the opposite relation with our Self
necessary to create the opposite form,
the opposite thought,
that points beyond reality,
necessary to create the "I am"
that would point us back toward our Self,
and simultaneously reveal to us
both our formless Nature
and the illusory nature of our form-identity.
Consciousness is non-dual
but the reality Consciousness creates
through relation to Itself
is nothing but duality,
nothing but this or that form.
Know yourself as form,
as this or that,
and you cannot know yourself
as the Consciousness that you are.
For Consciousness to know Itself as Consciousness
still requires Consciousness to be in relation to Itself.
but Consciousness cannot be in the relation with Itself
in which it knows Itself as Consciousness
while continuing to be involved
in the opposite and so mutually exclusive relation
in which it knows Itself as some form,
in which it knows "I am this" or I an that."
Because while involved in the relation
in which Consciousness knows Itself as some form,
in which Consciousness knows "I am this," or I am that,"
formless Consciousness must remain hidden from Itself,
while nonetheless always there in plain sight,
as the Formlessness which must be there
for there to be the apprehension of any this or that,
for there to be the apprehension of any form.
This is why so many seek
but so few find,
because the very action of seeking
while still identified with form
and so while still involved in the relation
that creates the form-identity,
that creates the idea "I am this," or I am that,"
must keep hidden the Formlessness
that is ultimately
what is being sought.
The difficulty is in realizing this conundrum
while still identified with form
and so while reality still appears
to be what is actually there
where it appears to be,
and so still seems to be
all there is,
and so still seems to be
of absolute importance.
You may not, in this moment
be able to disidentify with form,
and so you may not, in this moment,
be able to extract yourself from the relation
that keeps What You Actually Are
hidden from You.
But you can, in this moment
realize the relative nature of form,
realize form to be but a reflection,
realize reality to be but a reflection,
and in that way prepare
for the realization that will inevitably follow,
for the Mirror cannot remain long hidden
once the reflection begins to be recognized
for what it is,
and so therefore also begins to be recognized,
for what it is not.
For what a reflection is not,
and what it can never be,
is what is actually there
where it appears to be.
There is no world,
there is no mind,
there is no me.
There is no this or that,
there is only what Is.
Everything else is just a reflection.
Everything else is just reality.
And all reality,
emotional, mental, and physical,
only seems
so absolutely important
as long as What Is Absolutely Important
remains unavoidably hidden
by one's involvement in the relation
that creates the reflection,
that creates the form,
that creates the idea,
that creates the reality,
that reality,
that the world,
that the mind,
that the me,
are what is actually there
where they appear to be,
where there is only ever actually
the Mirror of Isness
the Mirror of Consciousness
in which all the reflections,
all the forms,
arise and exist,
and by which all the reflections,
all the forms,
are known as reality.
Reality is real
but the real
is not the Actual.
The Actual
is what is there
where the real
only appears to be.
A reflection is real
but still is not
what is actually there
where it appears to be.
And so it is
with all of reality
with all that we call real.
Caught up in the forms
that we call reality
we lose sight of the Actuality,
and so lose sight
of what is actually there
where the reflection we call reality
only appears to be.
And in losing sight
of what is actually there
where the reflection we call reality
only appears to be
we lose sight of ourselves.
And in losing sight of ourselves
we see only the forms,
see only the realities,
which then leads us
to the mistaken conclusion
that we too are a form,
that we too are a reality.
And so we become lost in a reflection
that only arises
within our now hidden Self.
And so we think that we are real.
But we are far more than real,
for we are the Actual
within which the real arises
like a reflection
on the surface of a pond.
So what is this Actuality
within which reality arises
like a reflection
on the surface of a pond?
It is not other than the Formlessness
which apprehends as reality
the forms that arise within Itself,
and which forms it mistakes for Itself
when it has lost sight
of it formless Self,
when it has lost sight
of its formless Being.
But that which is lost
can be found,
and that which is hidden
can be revealed
once it is understood that
the forms that compose reality
are less fundamental
than the formless Actuality
upon which reality rests
and by which reality is apprehended
and known as real.
Know yourself as a reality,
know yourself as some form,
and you lose sight
of the formless Actuality
that you always are
always have been
and always will be.
For when you think that
what is only a reflection
is what is actually there
then the mirror
within which the reflection arises
becomes hidden
while still in plain sight.
But know yourself as the Actuality
and you do not lose sight of reality,
as a reflection does not disappear
once one recognizes
the presence
of the mirror
within which it arises.
Know yourself as the Actuality
and you only lose sight
of the related illusions
that reality is what you are,
and that reality is what is actually there
where it appears to be.
Because once you know yourself
as the formless Actuality
and not as some reality
you then know your Self
to be what is actually there
wherever the reflection
that we call reality
only appears to be.
Reality is real
but the real
is not the Actual.
The Actual is what you are.
The real is only
what you appear to be.
The real is only a reflection
that arises within the Actual
causing the Actual to appear
as if it were only real.
This is the essence of maya,
the essence of the illusion
by which Beingness,
by which the Actual,
hides Itself from Itself
while remaining always
in plain sight of Itself,
obscured only by that which
the Actual Itself
apprehends as real,
but obscured only
when the Actual mistakes
what it apprehends as real
for itself.
Reality is a thin veneer
that lies over and obscures
what is actually there
where reality appears to be.
How thin is the veneer of reality?
As thin as a reflection on a pool of water.
But that reflection can only hide
what lies below
as long as you think
it is what you are.
For when you think
it is what you are
you remain focused upon it
and what is actually there
remains hidden
while still in plain sight.
What is actually there
where reality appears to be?
What is it that remains hidden
while still in plain sight?
Nothing that seems important
as long as the forms
that you apprehend as and call reality
seem to be
of primary importance.
And that is how it remains hidden
while still in plain sight.
Because as long as you identify with the forms
that you apprehend as and call reality,
as long as you think those forms
are what you are,
those forms, those realities,
which are only reflections,
only a thin veneer,
seem more real
than the underlying Actuality
upon which they rest,
seem more real
than the underlying Actuality
by which they are apprehended and known
as reality.
So what is actually there
where reality appears to be?
What is it that remains hidden
while still in plain sight?
It cannot truly be said,
because what is actually there
where the forms
that you apprehend as and call reality
appear to be
is not Itself a form
and so is not itself a reality.
And yet it Is,
else no form, no reality,
could ever exist,
or be known to exist.
And so what is actually there
where reality appears to be
can only be pointed toward
by saying that it is That by which
the forms that you call reality
are apprehended and known as reality.
And it can truly be said
that That which is not itself a form, not itself a reality,
and yet is That by which all forms are known as reality,
is what you truly are
and is also what you can know yourself to be
once you recognize reality
to be but a reflection,
to be but a thin veneer,
and so turn your attention
away from the reflection
toward what lies below,
toward what was always there
but was hidden
while still in plain sight
while your attention remained focused
upon the forms, upon the reality
that you only thought you were,
upon the forms, upon the reality
that you only seemed to be.
What we experience as reality,
emotional, mental, and physical,
is nothing more than the forms that arise
like a sort of boundary or etching
as That which is actually there,
as That which is beyond reality,
as That which is beyond words,
as That which is beyond conception,
flows in relation to Itself
and so becomes defined in relation to Itself,
and then apprehends as reality
the forms, the etchings, the boundaries,
that have arisen within Itself
as a result of its flow,
as a result of its movement,
as a result of its being,
in relation to Itself.
And so it is not that reality
is not real,
because it is.
It is only that reality
is not really
what we are.
Put another way,
it is not the realness of reality
that is in question,
it is only the realness of reality
as what we are
that we need to question.
Of all the thoughts that we can think, perhaps the one that most thoroughly hides from us our nature is the thought that something should not be. And why do we have the thought that something should not be? Only because the mind holds what is only an idea of what it thinks should be.
But beyond both "should be" and "should not be" lies what is. And it is only there that one may find their true self. "Should not be" places one in conflict with what is. And in that conflict with what is, one loses sight of their true nature, which is itself what is.
When we think that something should not be, we reject what is, and in rejecting what is we reject ourselves, because we are what is.
Thinking that something should not be is different from thinking that one does not like something. One may or may not like asparagus. The mistake is in thinking that that which you do not like should not be, and that only what you like should be. We think that getting to what we like must somehow involve the elimination of what we do not like.
But both what we like and do not like, what we want and do not want, are both what is.
We have the ability to imagine what we would like to happen, and then act to try and make it happen. But what we would like to happen may not be what actually happens, may not turn out to be what is.
When what we want to happen corresponds to what is, then we are happy, because then the idea that what is should not be does not arise, and so we are not in conflict with what is. But when what we want to happen does not happen, when the should be does not correspond to what is, then the idea arises that what is should not be, and we are then in conflict with what is, in conflict with the Now, in conflict with ourselves, and we suffer.
Should be is only a picture we draw on a paper, an image that arises in the mind. For some reason we think that what is should correspond to this image, to what is only an idea, and when it does not the idea should not be arises, and there is then self-conflict, or conflict with the present moment, with the now.
Most people spend their lives trying to make what is correspond to the idea that has arisen in their mind of what should be, because when there is correspondence between the should be and the what is, conflict with one's self does not arise and so suffering does not arise, and instead the opposite of suffering arises.
But the illusion here is that the good feeling or happiness that comes from this lack of self conflict is coming from the particular situation or arrangement of forms that just happens to, in this moment, correspond to our idea of what should be. And so we seek those forms or situations that correspond to what we think should be because we think that is where happiness is found, and we think we need to get rid of those forms or situations that do not correspond to what we think should be, because it seems that until they are gone, until they cease to be, there is no room for the what should be that we mistakenly think we need to be happy.
The actual source of happiness is the absence of conflict with one's self, and that can be had regardless of whether what is is or is not, in this moment, what is or is not wanted. It is only when one applies the idea "should not be" to that which is not wanted that the self-conflict that creates suffering arises.
But because we do not recognize what is happening, because we are not conscious of what we are doing, it seems that the suffering we then feel has as its source the form we do not want, making that form seem even more unwanted and even more something then that should not be, when the actual source of that suffering is only our manufactured conflict with the what is that is masquerading as the unwanted form.
We have the habit of applying the label or thought "should not be" to whatever form arises in our awareness that is not wanted. But we are not aware we are doing this; it is automatic, unconscious. And because we are not aware we equate what is not wanted to what should not be.
But we do not have to apply the label "should not be" to that which is not wanted. And when you don't label the unwanted as something that should not be, it may remain unwanted, but it will not then become the seeming source of your suffering, because you will then not be using it as an ingredient in the creation of the self-conflict that is actually the source of all suffering.
Freedom is finding happiness in what is, regardless of its appearance as wanted or unwanted. Bondage is being able to find happiness, to not be in self-conflict, only when what is happens to correspond to the idea of what should be that has arisen in one's mind.
You cannot know your true self while in conflict with your self. You can only be in conflict with that which seems to be not self or other. Therefore, while manufacturing self-conflict by labeling what is what should not be, the true self remains hidden and appears as something other than self.
This is not to say that the ideas should be and should not be should not themselves be. They are also what is when they arise.
If you find yourself in conflict with this moment because you are thinking that something should not be, then you may begin to think that the idea "should not be" should itself not be, but there it is. To think that the ideas "should be" or "should not be" should themselves not be is to simply continue the unconscious process at a more subtle level.
This is why the solution always lies in simply being aware of what is, which means without labeling what is, in whatever form it appears, as either what should be or should not be.
Which means that if you do find yourself labeling what is as what should be or should not be, then the way out is not to continue the process by labeling those thoughts as themselves what should not be, but to instead see them as what is, in that moment, which is, after all, what they are.
The suffering, when it arises, is what is. The negative emotion, when it arises, is what is. The unwanted form, when it arises, is what is. "What is" is the shovel that allows one to dig one's self out of the hole of self-conflict rather than just dig the hole deeper using the shovel of what should and should not be.
Perhaps the only thought that has the ability to free us rather than just bind us more subtly is the idea that whatever form appears is just what is. Calling something what is is still a label, still a form, but it is not a label that places us in conflict with our self, and in the absence of that conflict awareness emerges, or merges with what was always itself, but was mistakenly seen as other while it was obscured by the label "should not be."
That which sees cannot itself be seen.
That which hears cannot itself be heard.
That which feels cannot itself be felt.
That which knows cannot itself be known.
That which comprehends cannot itself be comprehended.
What is seen and heard and felt and known are all forms.
That which sees and hears and feels and knows is formless.
And so in a world of sight and sound and feeling and knowing
That which apprehends it all has been completely forgotten,
or if it is remembered, has been cast aside
as unimportant, or as less important
than what is seen and heard and felt and known.
And so science holds that it is form
that gives rise to the formlessness
by which all form is apprehended.
Science holds that when physical form
reaches a certain level of complexity
that formless Consciousness
poofs into being.
Science has no proof of this,
it is only an idea, a belief,
mistaken for fact.
Science has never even considered
the opposite possibility.
What is the opposite possibility?
That it is when formless Consciousness
reaches a certain level of complexity
that physical forms poof into existence.
How does that which is formless become complex?
By flowing in relation to itself,
over and over and over again.
When the formless first flows in relation to itself
the first forms that poof into existence
are what we refer to as emotions.
And so arises one level of complexity,
one level of reality,
composed of formless Being
flowing in relation to itself,
and then apprehending as experiential reality,
as emotional reality,
the forms that arise within itself
as it flows in relation to itself.
And then, while already flowing in relation to itself,
while already creating and apprehending emotional reality,
the formless flows in relation to itself again.
And when the formless again flows in relation to itself,
while already flowing in relation to itself,
the next forms that poof into existence
are what we refer to as thoughts.
And so arises a second level of complexity,
a second level of reality,
composed of the same formless Being
flowing in relation to itself,
and then apprehending as experiential reality,
as mental reality,
the additional forms that arise within itself
as it flows yet again in relation to itself.
And when the formless flows yet again in relation to itself,
while already flowing in relation to itself,
as it already flows in relation to itself,
the next forms that poof into existence
are what we refer to as physical objects.
And so arises a third level of complexity,
a third level of reality,
composed of the same formless Being
flowing in relation to itself,
and then apprehending as experiential reality,
as physical reality,
the further forms that arise within itself
as it flows once again in relation to itself.
Which seems more likely,
that form already is
and then somehow combines with itself
to somehow create that which apprehends form,
or that the formless already is
and then flows in relation to itself
thereby creating the forms
it then apprehends as reality?
Prior to the advent of quantum physics
it certainly seemed that form
had an objective existence
independent of the formlessness
by which it was apprehended.
But with the advent of quantum physics
it has become apparent
that how form appears,
that the form that is created,
has no existence
apart from the formlessness
by which it is apprehended.
Be in relation to what is there in one way
and this form appears.
Be in relation to what is there in the opposite way
and the opposite form appears.
This is called wave-particle duality.
And while being in relation
to what is there
in one way
so that this form appears,
it is not possible to be in relation
to what is there
in the opposite way,
and so not possible
to make the opposite form appear.
This is called uncertainty.
Wave-particle duality and uncertainty.
The two pillars upon which all quantum theory rests,
and which two pillars refute the notion
that form has an objective existence,
or any existence,
apart from the formlessness
by which it is apprehended.
It is as if we had a machine made of wood
that we somehow thought produced trees.
And then someone came along
and took the machine apart
to the point where the parts of the machine
were found to have no existence
outside the context of the trees
they were thought to produce.
How can a machine produce
that which its parts
cannot themselves exist without?
How can form produce
that which it
cannot exist without?
Prior to quantum physics
there was the assumption
that in the absence of
an apprehending Consciousness
form still was.
And so it was possible to believe
that form could be
prior to Consciousness
and so could produce Consciousness.
However, quantum physics has shown
that in the absence of
an apprehending Consciousness
there is no form,
but only the potential
for form to arise.
This makes problematic the assumption
that in the absence
of an apprehending Consciousness
form still is,
making it no longer tenable to believe
that form can be
prior to Consciousness,
making absurd the notion
that form somehow produces
the formlessness,
the Consciousness,
by which it is apprehended,
and apart from which
it cannot be demonstrated
or said to even exist.
Name or think of one form
of which you are not conscious,
of which you are not aware.
It cannot be done.
Thus the dependence of form
upon the formless,
upon Consciousness,
revealed by quantum physics,
is really quite obvious.
And yet, because we live in a world
that places form first
dominated by a science
that places form first,
the findings of quantum physics
that reveal form to be
that which is created,
and so reveal form to be secondary,
are simply ignored,
because those findings conflict
with the preconceived notion,
with the belief,
that form is primary
and Consciousness secondary.
Such is the nature of beliefs,
such is the nature of thoughts,
such is the nature of forms,
that because they are created
by the involvement in a relation
of the formlessness which apprehends them,
that while held to,
while being created by the formless,
and so apprehended by the formless,
they make impossible the creation and apprehension
by that same formlessness
of any opposite beliefs, thoughts, or forms.
This is also uncertainty,
only now operating at the level of thought creation,
where mental form is created,
rather than at the level of physical creation,
where physical form is created.
In the same way that a scientist's creation and observation of a particles' position
makes impossible their simultaneous creation and observation of its momentum,
a scientist's creation and apprehension of the idea of form as primary
and Consciousness as secondary
makes impossible their being able
to simultaneously create and apprehend
the opposite idea,
wherein Consciousness is seen as primary
and form is seen as secondary.
And so scientists have not really ignored
the findings of quantum physics
with regard to the relation
between form and formlessness
for the past one hundred years,
because one can only ignore
that which it is possible to apprehend.
Rather, scientists are blind
to the findings of quantum physics
with regard to the relation
between form and formlessness
because those findings
cannot even be comprehended
by any scientist, or any person,
that continues to maintain their belief
in the primacy of form.
Because to maintain that belief
requires one's continued involvement
in a relation
that makes impossible one's involvement
in the opposite relation
necessary to create
the opposite idea,
the opposite form,
wherein form would be seen as secondary,
or as that which is created,
rather than as that which creates.
Why do we apprehend emotional, mental and physical reality?
Science tells us that it is because
the form we call brain
became complex enough
to create Consciousness.
And yet science also tells us
that if we dig deep enough into form
there really is no form,
only the potential for form to arise
when observed by the formless.
And so why do we really apprehend emotional, mental and physical reality?
Because we are the uncreated formlessness
that is flowing in relation to itself
creating all these forms within our Self,
and then apprehending as reality
that which has arisen within our Self,
becoming more complex,
more entwined within our Self,
and yet remaining unchanged
in our essential nature
as formless uncreated Being.My philosophy is simple. That of which the universe is actually composed is not other than that which is aware of the universe.
The universe seems to be composed of space and objects, whereas that which is aware of the universe is not an object, but is more like the empty space in which objects reside.
Objects have form, space is formless, or at least appears formless. (Space actually has a subtle cellular form that science has yet to recognize, but which subtle cellular form Buckminster Fuller recognized as the cubic closepacking arrangement of spheres. )
On the other hand, that which is aware of the universe, and that of which the universe of forms is actually composed, is itself completely formless, completely devoid of form, although it gives rise to all forms.
The human condition is that, although we are the formlessness of which the universe of forms is actually composed, and so are also the formless awareness that is aware of the universe of forms, we think and so believe that what we are is a form, that what we are has form.
That is, we harbor within ourselves, within our awareness, within our formlessness, a form, an object, a thought, an idea, that tells us that what we are is a form.
It is not that we are a form, it is only that we think that we are a form. And all a thought is is itself a form. That is, a thought itself is nothing but a form. And so we have a form of which we are aware telling us that what we are is some other form of which we are aware, when all the while what we actually are is the formless awareness that is aware of those forms and gives rise to those forms.
Now all these forms are ultimately composed of what we are, composed of formlessness, composed of formless awareness, but that does not mean that what we are as that formless awareness is itself a form. Forms are created, we are not created, formless awareness is not created. Formless awareness is just what is.
Our identification of ourselves as forms would be as if water thought that it was just a whirlpool, just the pattern of flow, and not that which is flowing. This is a subtle but vital distinction, and is the difference between knowing what you are and being deluded with regard to what you are.
In our misidentification with form it is not just that we do not know what we are, it is that we do know what we are, only what we know ourselves to be is not what we actually are, and is the opposite of what we actually are. If we had no knowledge of our nature this would be innocence. But what we have is ignorance, false knowledge, knowledge of ourselves as we are not, knowledge of ourselves as the opposite of what we are, knowledge of ourselves as form when what we are is formless. Thus we are not innocent with regard to our nature, we are ignorant and deluded with regard to our nature.
Were we only innocent it would be quite simple for us to realize our true nature. But because we harbor false knowledge of our nature, acquiring true knowledge is quite difficult, since we cannot acquire that true knowledge until we release our grip upon the false knowledge, and therein lies the difficulty.
The false knowledge we harbor regarding our nature, our idea of ourselves as forms, is mutually exclusive of the true knowledge of our nature as formlessness. That is, we cannot be simultaneously aware of ourselves as both form and formlessness. As long as we cling to the idea, to the form, that tells us that what we are is a form, we cannot become aware of our true nature as formless awareness.
To let go of the idea of ourself as a form while still believing ourself to be a form seems like an act of self-annihilation, and so we do not and will not do it. And so we spend our lives clinging to what is only an illusion, clinging to what is only an idea, clinging to what is only a form that arises within the formless awareness that we truly are, and which idea while clung to hides from us our nature as that formless awareness.
How can one stop knowing themselves as a form while still believing that what they are is a form? It cannot be done. It is like asking someone to let go of a rope to which they cling when it seems to them that if they let go they will plummet into a chasm of non-being. It is in our nature to be, since we are what is, and so it is not in our nature to act in a way that seems to us will lead to our not being.
In this way our very nature, our true nature as formless Beingness, functions to perpetuate the illusion of our false nature once that false nature has been accepted as real.
We need make no effort to continue to be, nor to continue to be what we truly are, for what we truly are is what is. Effort is only needed to continue to cling to and sustain what we mistakenly think we are, and it is that effort to cling to and sustain our mistaken idea of ourselves, our idea of ourselves as form, that is the source of all suffering. For it is this effort that places us in conflict with our nature, and it is conflict with our nature, with our self, that is the essence of suffering.
Effort = E-fort = the protection and fortification of what we consider to be our existence. The fortification and protection of our existence, or what we think is our existence, which is really only an idea or form that we have mistaken for ourselves.
Effortless being, that is what we truly are. Beings engaged in a constant effort to fortify and maintain a false identity is what we are doing. When Beingness recognizes its essential Beingness, it stops doing, and yet still acts. But when Beingness does not recognize its essential Beingness, continuous doing seems necessary to maintain the form identity, to maintain the false identity.
This continuous doing, or the seeming need for continuous doing, is what keeps the mind churning, is what keeps the mind producing an endless stream of thoughts, an endless stream of forms that seem more real and more important than the formless awareness that apprehends those thoughts.
Effort is needed to know yourself as you are not. No effort is needed to know yourself as you are.
One cannot, through some effort, cease effort, for that is itself an effort and so sustains the illusion of form-identity.
The rope of form-identity to which we cling is not saving us from annihilation, rather it is keeping us from realizing that our annihilation is not even possible.
We create the form to which we then cling, thinking that our continued being depends on our continued clinging. But how can our being depend upon something that we ourselves create, something that in the absence of our being, in the absence of our awareness, cannot even be known?
Take away awareness and there is no form, but take away form and awareness remains.
We look into the Universe
and see that it consists
of both objects
and the space out of which
those objects arise.
But when we look at ourselves
we see only an object,
only a form.
And yet even our bodies
consist mostly of space,
just like the Universe
out of which we grow
like fruit on a tree.
We just don't see it,
so we pretend
that it's not there.
So we look at the Universe
and we see form and formlessness
but when we look at ourselves
we see only form
and not the Formlessness.
This is our first mistake,
if one wants to call it that,
and really our only mistake,
because all other mistakes
are just the continuation
of this one mistake.
And what is this one mistake,
that is not really a mistake,
but just a necessary part of the game
of cosmic hide and seek
that we came to play?
It is the twin ideas
that what we are
is only a form,
and that what we are not
is the Formlessness
in which all forms arise.
If someone said the Universe
consisted of only the objects
and not the space
that is also clearly there,
we would then say
they were either crazy or blind.
But when we know ourselves
as only an object,
as only a form,
and not at all as the Formlessness
that is also clearly here
where we are,
we call this normal,
we call this seeing things
as they are.
What is this Formlessness,
in which all forms arise?
What is it within yourself
that is formless?
I will give you a hint.
It is not your mind,
nor is it space,
for mind and space,
as formless as they may seem,
are themselves subtle forms,
from which the less subtle forms
of thought and matter arise.
For if neither mind nor space had some form,
if neither mind nor space had some structure,
no matter how subtle,
then the forms we call thought and matter
could themselves have no structure,
and so would themselves have no form.
So what is it within yourself
that is truly formless?
I will give you another hint.
It is That by which you know
both the subtle forms
of mind and space,
and the less subtle forms
of thought and matter
that arise within mind and space.
It has always been there,
you just do not recognize it
as either a valid part
of what you are,
or as the essential part
of what you are.
Which is more real,
form or Formlessness?
Which is more enduring,
the objects that arise in space
or the space in which
those objects arise?
The forms seem more real
than the Formlessness
when form is all
you know yourself to be.
But once you recognize
the part of yourself
that has been hiding from you,
and yet was always there
in plain sight,
then what once seemed most real
becomes the shadow
and what seemed to be the shadow
becomes what is most Real.
And then the game
becomes much more fun
becomes much more enjoyable
becomes much more filled with joy
and so less filled with the suffering
that seems to make this life
a burden, a task, a chore,
rather than the game
that it really always has been.
When you do not recognize
your True Nature,
you cannot recognize the Universe
as your Self,
and so then the Universe,
which is really your closest friend,
appears as your opponent.
And then what is really only a game
being played between friends,
being played with your Self,
appears as a battle
between sworn enemies.
And so we find ourselves
in almost perpetual conflict
with this or that form,
with this or that situation,
with this or that person,
with this or that nation,
because we do not see those forms
as our Self,
because we cannot see the Formlessness
within our own selves.
Blind to the Formlessness
of which all forms are composed
we are blind to That
which connects all forms,
and so blind to That
which makes all forms One.
Love thy neighbor as thy self
was not a command,
nor even a suggestion,
but simply a statement
regarding how one will feel
about the Universe of things,
about the Universe of forms,
once it is realized
that the Kingdom of Heaven
is truly within us
as the Emptiness,
the Formlessness,
the Fullness of Life,
that is already here,
has always been here,
and will always be here
Now,
in this Moment
as our true and essential Nature.