Radical Non-duality (Meeting) Message

[Ewwerrin]

Here is my attempt to make sense out of this:

So, there is a contraction in the body. Out of it comes the "I am". Then "I am" somehow falls away, Then the contraction in the body falls away. And then it is realised that the "I am" has never been there to begin with. UHH??

This is like saying, I have hair. Then it falls away. And then it is realised there never was hair. All the while I am looking in the mirror... At my hair...

Or it's like flexing my bicep. My bicep becomes more curved. And suddenly somehow the curve falls away. And then my bicep becomes unflexed. And then it is realised that there never was a bicep.

I just can't make sense of it.

And why does no one feel outraged by this, boggles my mind.
There is literally being said "You don't exist."
And no one even argued about that.

But the text does have a point. It is nondual to say that there exists no subject-object experience. So I don't know. I guess it is very radical as the title suggests. But confusing.

"I don't exist." uuuhh? maybe I am a mystery or something.

[FallingLeaves]

it could be about creation... you create stuff and then when it exists you see that it exists you say it always exists/existed and don't question the continuation of your act of creation?

For example I saw a long time ago the words in my head are superfluous - something complete comes before them and in response I create them.... when I am attached to the words themselves I tend to forget about that something and completely forget about the fact I don't even need the words because what came before is complete in and of itself... and I just run around in circles trying to find the 'correct' words to describe the something that comes before words... when all I have to really do is simply forget the words and experience the something...

lol...

[Ewwerrin]

Originally Posted by FallingLeaves

it could be about...
... words and experience the something...

Yeah it feels like it is so. That is mentioned in the message. About a feeling of contraction that vanishes, without understanding.

If I read the words, it's beyond experience, beyond consciousness. Or no experience, no consciousness, no self, no awareness. Only what appears to happen. And these words are contradictory. Like, how can I say, this writing appears to happen, but I am not experiencing them and there is no awareness that is aware of the appearance, there's just the now appearance/happening...
It makes no sense.

I can not really imagine not existing, not being aware. I can be aware of nothing in some sense.

Also when asked how the person realises or knows, and they respond "I don't know this, it is unknowable."
Then the words again are useless or pointless. And the message cannot be grasped.
Except to say, maybe everything is what it is, but simply minus a self. So awareness can appear to happen, but it is the absolute appearing as awareness. So it's no ones awareness.

I don't know, the closest "experience" could be deep sleep, where there seems to be nothing.

Oh and your idea about creating is familiar to me aswell. Simply align with the reality, regardless of what current manifest/condition is.

I think if there is talking about stuff, or if I am writing this. And there is no awareness. Then I could assume that there is awareness but no one to be aware. And so it is not awareness. Just an appearance of awareness. Or an illusion, within the absolute.

It seems that at the foundation of the message is how it begins. This message is not about "you" it states that "you" don't exist. There is no subject object experience. So since there is no two, maybe there is no self. Already. Without a need for it to fall away. Because it is just an illusion that appears to be "I am". But when its gone it is realised that it has never existed and then no one realises this. There is just realisation happening, without, any one being, realising it. Not to mention that nothing is real. So even the appearance of anything is not real, just an appearance.

Trying to make sense of all this, like this, it melts my brain a bit. Very strange message. Someone saying "I dont exist, you don't exist. nothing is happening." And yet what is happening is the absolute. And yet nothing is happening. And the strangest: the absolute is the relative, uh what??

mind boggling. I think I would need allot more questions to understand it. Altho it is said to not be understandable.

At some point it seens to be collection of thought errors. And I cant make any sense of it. But I am still drawn by curiosity to make sense of it, as such a outlandish message.

[Ewwerrin]

#5

"""""""""""
Q: There's usually a tendency to deal with the tension itself, as a problem.
A: Yeah.
Q: saying: I need to get rid of the tension.
A: Well, the individual is on a journey. So anything that doesn't, like what we spoke about. Anything that doesn't fit in to the story that it told itself of how it is gonna find what its looking for, is a problem.
And it, and it works on that with its toolkit. To try to make it fit.
This doesn't make sense. This happening, actually doesn't make sense. So the individual comes up with a story about what this is about.
There's no intrinsic story in this appearance.
It's completely empty. It's chaotic, anarchic, without neither meaning and purpose, just pfffggggg.... This is everything. The individual arises and puts it all in little boxes, with its toolkit, so that it makes sense to it. Because that is how its gonna find what its looking for. Whats next. The next experience its gonna be better than this one.
Q: Do you think that humans are hardwired to do that, because maybe when we weren't so (inaudible) we need to do that to get food or shelter.
A: No. It has no evolutionary purpose. But if you talk to neuroscientists, they'll tell you that 9 nodes in the brain that collaborate to create the sense of "I". But that's just a story.
That has nothing to do with, what, what, How it falls away.
When it falls away, there aren't a recognition of 9 nodes that then are no longer talking to eachother.
There's an actual just falling away of that experience, the collapse of experience. The collapse.
Collapse of real distance, real time, real happening.
Q: But there's a sense that, uh, I'm trying to figure this out. But I know I can't figure that out.
A: Oh, I think the concepts are quite straightforward and simple
Q: yeah
A: They're just not what we're talking about.
Q: Oh.
A: I mean, it's fair enough to, to talk about the concepts and get it clear. There's no problem with that. But what we're talking about is an actual, a shift, beyond understanding, or beyond words.

Q: Could you review the basic concepts?
A: There is no one and nothing is happening.
Q: Then you die.
(laughter)
A: Then you, Or not! Ahehe
(laughter)
Q: That's it?
A: Yeah, that's about it.
Q: So this is a dream? This is an illusion.
A: This is an appearance. The dream, the illusion, is the experience that this is personal, or this is real, or this is happening to me. That's the dream.
Q: Would you say that the absolute is perfection?
A: You could. It's a little misleading for the individual, cause the individual thinks perfection would be "I'm gonna get what I want."
For the individual is looking for "I'm happy for forever."
Q: But minus the individual, minus (inaudible)
A: Yeah you gonna have to say it's perfection, it's absolutely perfect.
Q: Can you say that this
A: But perfection in the sense that there is no need or possibility that it could be anything but what it is.
At the same time, you have to say, there's no need for it to be what it is.
For the individual there is a real need for this to be what it is.
So, another mindtrick, which isn't the reality behind it, but it points to how thin the experience of the individual is.
You know how in a dream, you know, when you're asleep at night, you have a dream, and that dream just starts somewhere, and somehow you just assume, or there is the experience that it just makes sense.
There is no question of where did this began, or anything like that.
You do not know that this isn't that.
You do not know, that this isn't a dream that has no real beginning. You don't know.
There is no reference point to know that from.
Any reference point could just simply be a part of the same dream.
Q: But it is a dream right?
A: This is an appearance. The only dream is the individual.
Q: ok.
A: That this makes, that this matters, or that it's personal, or that it's happening to me.
Q: So, when the body is no longer here. So you die. Do you have that?
A: Nobody dies.
Q: I mean do you get the sense of the freedom of everything, being everything.
A: This is, this is everything being everything.
Q: Oh, it's the same thing. Ok.
A: Well, I don't. You're telling me a story that there's something called death.
Death only makes sense, is if there's somebody who's alife, and then is no longer alife, and therefor doesn't know they're dead. So who is dead, if they don't know they're dead.
Or somebody who's alife that knows they're dead. And if there's somebody who knows they're dead, who is dead?
Death is a concept. Has no reality.
Q: ok

Q: That was a little fast. Could you, is it possible to just go back?
A: Death only makes sense if there is somebody that knows they're dead.
Q: So it's still the "I".
A: But who would know they're, if somebody knew they were dead, who would be dead?
Death assumes the knowing end, of "I am".
Q: hmm
A: Doesn't make sense.
Who could know the end of "I am".
It's just a concept. It's again another mind trick.
But it points to the flimsy, the concepts, the flimsy concepts that the individual has about what this is.
Q: mmm.
"""""""""""

[Ewwerrin]

#6

"""""""""""
A: The reality of the end of the individual is spacious everything. Spacious aliveness.
And what it's looking for, is... This.
This is that spacious aliveness that it's looking for. There is only that.
The experience, the false claims of the individual, just are false. They're not true.
It's very simple.

Q: Can the absolute be experienced?
A: No.
Q: There's no reference, by which to experience it?
A: It can't be known or experienced.
It's the unknowing.
Which ofcourse is the end of the individual. The individual is the experience of "I know."
In buddhism the've got a, a, a saying of "Nailing a, a, a nail into the air."
And that's the knowing of the individual.
And it actually has stepping stones. In their imaginary, in the imaginary re, they're just little stepping stones of in the air of knowing, and it thinks it's going somewhere.
Q: mhm.

Q: (inaudible) people strive for experiencing over (inaudible) experiences. So I think we bring that into non-duality whats the experience.
A: Yeah.
Q: (inaudible) fair enough?
A: Oh, the individual will necesserily misunderstand what's being said
Q: Yeah.
A: It can't, it can't relate to it.
Q: That's (inaudible) I keep going back, to, like, how. How. I don't...
A: Well, there is no you. First there has to be a you, for their to be a how there's no you.
If the question is "How do I", how could you if there is no you.
There's no one inside that body (pointing at questioner).
No one has ever made a decision.
There's no one there with a life. There's no one there with a future.
So where would that "How" happen?
Q: And the individual can't just live by these concepts. It's not like now...
A: Oh, it'll try. It will. "I'm nobody."
Q: Yeah.
A: "I'm not here. I don't have free will and choice." It'll try that, it can't help it.
Q: So when practicing
A: It'll take everything and try to make it into the story, you remember the story of the consequences, where we trying to find the end of... Yeah... It'll have to... It uses everything, or it tries to.
But all it does with that, is, it lives in a circle. (circling finger in air)
"I want to not be. I want to not be. I want to not be."
(laughter)
Which is a confirmation that "I am, wanting to not be."
(laughter)
Q: Yeah
Q: It's the best confirmation.
A: Yeah. Yeah.
(laughter)

Q: Hi.
A: Hi.
Q: Sorry I'm late.
A: Well, that's alright.
(laughter)
A: I heard you were in another elm street somewhere.
Q: Elm avenue.
(laughter)
A: Oh right.
(laughter)

A: You didn't miss anything.
(laughter)
Q: Nothing happened.
A: The experience was only appearant. It didn't happen to anybody.
Q: I kept reminding myself
A: Alright, who was reminding themselves. Haha!
(laughter)
Q: practicing
A: Aaww. Mmm.

Q: Is there any benefit in knowing?
A: Absolutely not.
(laughter)
A: This isn't, this isn't about helping you. This is the difference between, what's being shared here, and almost every other message or teaching. They're trying to help you. They're trying to tell you something
Q: mhm
A: This has nothing for the individual. It doesn't even acknowledge that it's real.
Q: So it's just the falling away, of the illusion.
A: The, you know, the funny thing is, is when it falls away, and when it does, there. What'll be obvious, is it didn't happen. There is no falling away. It's a non-happening.
So when it fell away here, there's a realisation that there is no one, that's not the end of the individual, because that realisation still seems to happen to somebody.
But a part of that realisation, is; it didn't happen.

Q: And it didn't happen, because it never was.
A: That's right. Well, there's never a, that's nothing, the claim that the individual has about what this is, they're false.
All of it's claims, about that "something needs to happen, or this isn't complete, or fulfilled, or that I'm real. That everything is happening to me, or that I have free will and choice, to create a future which will be better than this."
Those are all false claims.
That's not true.
So it never is true. There is no duality.
So the falling away of duality, or experiential duality, doesn't create non-duality.
This is already non-dual.
There never was duality. It's not happening...
Q: This is it?
A: This is it.
Q: So in a way, that's it.
A: No, not like that. Not like Now. Not like an exclusive this. Not like an exclusive now. The now of seeking for something is an exclusive now. "Oops, I wasn't being now. Now I'll be now. Now I'll focus on now. As exclusive to discursive thought, or the past, or the future, or a focusing attention."
The suggestion here is, there is nothing else.
It doesn't need to be recognized. It requires no effort.

Q: And it has nothing to do
A: With you.
Q: With learning to quiet the mind.
A: It's got nothing to do with you, period.
So anything you think you're doing, it's got nothing to do with that.
It's got nothing to do with anything you could suggest. Because there is no relationship left, when it's th, when it's gone.
The experience of relationship in that sense, is an illusion.
"""""""""""

[Ewwerrin]

#7

"""""""""""
Q: So what would be the, trying to use the word mechanism (inaudible), hearing what you're suggesting, and, a falling away of someone hearing that.
A: Yeah.
Q: Is there, I, I guess I'm
A: There is no relationship.
Q: Oh ok. Ther, there's
A: There is an energy here, and I hesitate to say it, because it sounds like there is something on offer. There isn't.
It just seems that in these meetings, there's a little bit, there's an energy that arises.
But the fact is, is that energy, or that saying of this, everything is always saying this.
The bus that is about to run you over, is saying, this is all there is.
(laughter)
The dog**** on the ground you just stepped in is saying; this is all there is, this is fulfillment.
The bird singing is saying; this is fulfillment
There is nothing that's not saying; this is all there is.
This is whole and complete and fulfilled.
Q: So me (inaudible) the mind wants to say; well, is there a deconditioning process
A: No.
Q: the body work for the contraction
A: Now. Now, when ther
Q: I realise that's absurd, but yeah.
A: When there's an individual, the appearant ending of the individual seems like a process. Because its living in a process.
Because its hope that the process is gonna lead to something.
Something happening never leads to nothing happening. This is nothing happening.
And there is no need for a process.
So a couple of months ago, somebody called me up, said "hey, I watched one of your videos. There is no one left. Thank you very much. Good bye."
(laughter)
Q: A happy customer.
A: Ofcourse, you have no idea
(laughter)
A: You have no idea where they are. Or what's happening. But it's quite... Why not? It's very possible that no one leaves this room.
Q: I've heard
A: I'VE LOCKED THE DOOR, YOU'LL NEVER GET OUT!
(Laughter)
A: No, but there is quite possible that no one will leave this room. There's no need for anything to happen.
This end of the individual isn't an experience.
And it's not the consequence of other experiences.
Q: I've heard one make an (inaudible) to the energy
A: Yeah, it's true.
Q: Like appearantly, I don't know.
A: It's true tho.
Q: Yeah, yeah.

Q: I know I can't understand what you're saying
A: Ofcourse you can.
(laughter)
A: It's very simple. The concepts are very very simple. They're just not the reality we're pointing to.
Q: Uhuh. You know what, I just wanna describe. It, it feels so fast.
A: Yeah.
Q: It feels so fast, that I. I cannot. You know, generally I'm just (laughter) but it feels so fast, that I.
A: yeah.
Q: I kind of don't understand.
A: Yeah.
Q: But I kind of also intuit,
A: Yeah.
Q: that it's shaking up something.
A: Yeah.
Q: So that's kind of... Whatever.
A: Yeah. Doesn't mean anything.
Q: Doesn't mean anything.
A: No.

Q: That's the nail in the sky.
A: That's a nail in the sky.

Q: That's a what in the sky?
A: A nail in the sky.
"""""""""""

[Ewwerrin]

#8

"""""""""""
Q: A nail in the sky.
A: Yeah.
Q: (inaudible)
A: Nothing wrong with that....
But it can appear, people seem to, "people" seem to respond to this in very different ways...

Q: But is not the absolute self aware of itself?
A: Who would who, how could it do that?
Q: If it's, if it's the absolute, woulden't it have the ability to observe itself?
A: Well, I mean, with the, you're saying the absolute has some sort of intelligence beyond the appearance of everything.
Q: Well..
A: Yeah, but it doesn't.
Q: If it is, should be able to observe itself.
A: But you're saying it has an intelligence beyond the appearance everything, which means that, with its intelligence, it could seperate itself from itself, to be aware of itself. As tho there would be some sort of need for that.
It's already everything and there's no need to be aware of itself.
And nobody is ever aware of the absolute.
Q: (inaudible) not saying the absolute being aware of itself.
A: But all there is is the absolute.
Q: So doesn't it have self aware capability.
A: Well, how would it do that if it's already everything? There is no real distance or time, for it to do that.
Knowing is dream.
(laughter)

Q: It's (inaudible) like saying itself, automatically divide (inaudible) as soon as you say "know itself" seperates it.
A: Hmm.
Q: It coulden't be (inaudible)
A: Right.
Q: (inaudible) it's everything.

Q: So what's, what created the (inaudible)
A: Nothing. It's not created.
Q: (inaudible) love created.
A: It's not created. This isn't coming from anywhere.
This is everything. This is absolute freedom.
Appearing as a question. Appearing as movement. Appearing as this.
That's it. That's All there is. There is nothing else, except what's looked for.

Q: You know I experienced that, while you're saying it.
A: Yeah. That's the energy we're talking about.
And you don't know that.
(laughter)
You don't know that when you leave it will be different.
You don't know that.
Q: Yeah.
A: You don't know anything. There is no you.

Q: You use the word "This" allot.
A: Yeah.
Q: Is there any possibility at all of describing what you mean. It's.
A: Yeah.
Q: It's everything.
A: Spacious aliveness
Q: Thank you.

Q: Sounds like fun.
A: Oowww.
(laughter)
A: Ahaah! It's everything. It's fun, suffering, sadness, joy, bliss, depression.
It's everything. It has no need not to be anything.
It's not going anywhere.
It's the experience that this needs to go somewhere, this needs to become something, that makes what seems to be happening right or wrong, good or bad.
When it's not going anywhere, that falls away. It's just what seems to be happening.
And really get away with, ge ge, stop with "seems to" and just say "there's only happening."
Happening. Body happening (points at self). Pictures happening (pointing at painting). Body happening (pointing at questioner). Table happening (pointing at table).
There's just happening. There's just happening.
And that happening, is everything. It's all there is.
The individual puts happening in relationship to itself, and so there then is something else. And that something else is what seems to be missing, in this happening.
When that "something else" falls away, never was something else, there's only what's happening.
Which is obviously complete. Obviously whole. Obviously everything.
Not in the sense that I become something, that I get something, but in the sense that there's no longer any need for it to be anything else.

Q: So you use, use of the word "Everything" does not restrict it to the physical "this" or it's...
A: Well, it's anything. Can we say anything?
Q: ok
A: yeah? This is anything. All there is is anything.
(laughter)
Q: It doesn't put a limit to this
A: Yeah.
Q: yeah.
A: yeah, that's right.

Q: Would it be a mistake to describe the message more akin to existentialism than nonduality? Cause in nonduality
A: No.
Q: (inaudible) I am.
A: Well, I mean. Pfff... Non duality means not two. Where is the "I am" in "not two"?
How do you have an "I am" in "not two"?
"I am" (lifts left finger) and then something else (lifts right finger).
How do you do that?
Even if you say, "I am everything". Then "I am" doesn't make sense anymore.
So how can you have "I am", if what we're talking about is nonduality.
And existentialism is sort of materialism. And this isn't material. There is no actual thing. There is no solidity.
Q: Yeah thats where I'm stuck, because I'm interpreting the message
A: Well she was too. She was pointed out correctly, "This", as tho all that there is is the senses.
All that there is is what the senses are reporting.
Q: (inaudible) body
A: Exactly. But its emptiness bodying. So it's beyond the concepts of exten of mater, extential, what were we talking about?
Q: Existential
A: Existentialism yeah.

Q: Beyond the concepts of anything.
A: totally.
Q: It coulden't be out into words.
A: Totally.
"""""""""""

[FallingLeaves]

bearing in mind that im using words as a finger to point at the moon lol...

and this is the way i see it doesn't mean im right though lol....

Normally you are looking at your own creation, and that is what you see, and quite obviously from the understanding we have that the creation is somehow 'absolute', that means that to us, what each of us sees is the definition of 'what is here'.

But on the other hand it IS your own creation. It doesn't HAVE to be here, you don't HAVE to always be creating it. And if you quit creating it, what you think is here would no longer be 'what is here'.

So maybe at that point there is something more fundamental that is the definition of 'what is here'. And you find that your original definition of 'what is here' was just obscuring it.

I guess at this point you are reading that that definition is 'what is here' is 'nothing'.

This more fundamental definition of 'what is here' would seem to exist independently of whether or not you are creating stuff on top of it....

So the real trick is understanding that there are multiple meanings for the same general concept... Going with your original definition, that the creation you have made observably exists, it is definitely here. But going with the new definition that it doesn't have to exist and thus there may be a more fundamental thing which is a better representation of what is actually here in the absence of it, you get... that nothing is here.

Then to translate these kinds of sequences we get both of these being true simultaneously because one is taken in one context and the other in the other context, and that is where the conversations come in:

'something is here' (true when thinking of the existence of your creation)
'nothing is here' (true when thinking of an existence that doesn't have your creation)

so it isn't a matter of just saying seemingly contradictory things to confuse the mind, it is a matter of switching contexts from one sentence to the next.

[Ewwerrin]

Originally Posted by FallingLeaves

bearing in mind that im...
... sentence to the next.

Yeah, creation is a beautiful thing. And how we co-create with it.

And also if we don't create, but just observe, often things that seem very bad can actually reveal something very good and redefine itself completely.

Especially when I read the last two 9 and 10 transcripts. I was feeling the tension, thinking this is all about being dead. And then it turned 180 in one fell swoop and made everything perfectly ok and good again. Very interesting experience, reading these. It's very much how you describe the dynamics of definitions. And how flexible or maleable reality is.

Thanks for sharing that. I always love reading new replies.

[Ewwerrin]

#9

"""""""""""
Q: Would you say that there is anything like a misperception, when you say there is no solidity. If we're experiencing solidity, are we misperceiving this?
A: Absolutely. That's what I mean with the false claim of the individual.
And that misperception does not make it true.
Q: So, there is a seeming misperception.
A: Abs, that's all we're talking about.
Is the seeming misunderstanding, I call it a psychosomatic misunderstanding to get underneath the experience or the idea that the individual (inaudible) do anything about it.
Q: So, it's ilusory misunderstanding.
A: Well
Q: Conceptual misunderstanding.
A: It's illusory. Yeah. This isn't solid.
Q: Which is n, which is not even real.
A: What. No, it's not, it's not true.
Q: Yeah.
A: This isn't solid.
Q: It's an appearance of a misunderstanding.
A: There's not real duality.
It's an experience. That's the big trouble for the individual, is this is an experience. And it's whole journey has to do with experience
Q: Mhm
A: So it's actually trying to overcome this experience, or experience, by having more experience.
Q: Right.
(laughter)
(laughter)
Q: That's allot.
(laughter)

Q: What do thoughts and emotions appear like to you.
A: Well, there is no one here, so they just appear.
Q: There's no self reference.
A: There's no self reference.
Q: That's terrifying.
A: Yeah, that's terrifying. It is.

Q: There's never a thought that runs through there, and it starts with "I"?
A: Well, I don't know what you mean by that, but there is no "I" in here. (pointing at self)
But there are thoughts. And I will say "I want to go have sushi."
Q: Ok.
(laughter)
A: But no nobody's saying that.
Q: Got ya.
(laughter)
A: Nobody's saying it there either.
Q: No.
A: Yeah.
Q: (inaudible) we agree.
(laughter)
Q: Oh wait! Not we.
(laughter)
Q: Atleast no one agrees.
A: Aawww. No one agrees.
(laughter)
Q: It (inaudible) work murdering babies.
(laughter)
A: Oh, we're back to murdering babies, are we?
(laughter)
Q: I was telling him about that, I went over to krishna murti's place (inaudible) hawaiian (inaudible) nondualistic meeting and the one lady coulden't just get rid off, she coulden't accept the fact (inaudible) it just seems to come up with the suffering everytime.
Q: Yeah.
Q: Why is there suffering.

Q: If I basically see all as an activity, would the word activity be something similar to your happening?
A: No.
Q: No.
A: Well, I don't know. When you say "I see this", that doesn't sound similar.
This doesn't see this. (pointing at self)
Q: No, no. I don't mean that. I mean... It all appears, let's say, as an activity, rather than something else.
A: Maybe, I don't know.
Q: So I guess, uhm, since I'm asking about definitions and words, what would be a way of describing happening.
A: You, You can't.
Q: Ok, good.
A: There's no relationship to it. No one knows what's happening.
Q: Right. Yeah.
"""""""""""