THIS INTRODUCTION to the life and teachings of Atmananda Krishna Menon is an excellent way to begin an investigation of the original, important, and liberating teaching known as the Direct Path. Sri Atmananda, who was the founder of the Direct Path, was one of the luminescent Three Jewels of Advaita that shone in India during the 20th Century, along with Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj and Sri Ramana Maharshi. The author of this authoritative article, Dr. Greg Goode, is one of the foremost scholars and experts in the world on both the Direct Path and its founder. Further information on both Atmananda and Greg Goode can be found on our Direct Path Resource page.
_____________________________________________
The
Teachings of Atmananda
and the Direct Path
and the Direct Path
by
Greg Goode
SHRI ATMANANDA is much less well known than Ramana or Nisargadatta. As I write this paragraph, there isn't a Wikipedia entry on Atmananda, and there are relatively few published books either by him or about him. Yet, speaking for myself, I resonated more quickly and solidly with Atmananda's teachings than with Ramana's or Nisargadatta's. Atmananda uses concepts very well suited to a modern Westerner accustomed to logical or scientific discourse - concepts that seem simple and intuitive, and yet when examined, totally dissolve under scrutiny. This feeling of having the rug pulled out from under one is part of the experiential teaching that has direct and tangible effects as one proceeds with it.
ATMANANDA HAS had well known students, some of whom became teachers in their
own right. Examples include John Levy, Jean Klein, Wolter Keers, and Paul
Brunton. My own association with the teaching comes through the Jean Klein
branch via Francis Lucille. Francis gave me a copy of ATMA DARSHAN one
day, and I read it with the attention and respect I felt went along with such a
gift. This short book resolved in a wondrous flash a subtle question I had been
contemplating for several years about the difference between subject and
object. Here in ATMA DARSHAN were several sections devoted to the exact
issue I had been pursuing, issues I had never seen touched upon
in the hundreds of other books on Advaita or Western philosophy I had read.
Like Berkeley but Global
SHRI ATMANANDA (KRISHNA MENON) was a teacher whose teachings flow from the fountain of nondual wisdom known as Advaita Vedanta. He lived in Kerala, South India from 1883 to 1959. This was in the same modern era shared by Ramana Maharshi (1879-1950) and Nisargadatta Maharaj (1897-1981). Like Ramana and Nisargadatta, Atmananda inspired Easterners and Westerners. And like Ramana and Nisargadatta, Atmananda even has a giant book of insightful dialogues rich enough to be contemplated for years, which has the ability to help establish one as nondual awareness.
THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE too in my
case. When one first encounters Atmananda's teachings, they can seem similar to
the Western philosophy of Idealism, especially as taught by George Berkeley
(1685-1753). It just so happened that I had been seriously studying Berkeley's
teachings and before him, Brand Blanshard's (1892-1987) teachings as part of my
own academic training in Philosophy. This had been going on for 25 years before
I encountered Atmananda's teachings, during which time "physical"
objects had lost their associated feelings of hardness, opacity, heaviness and
brute physicality. I experienced physical objects as ideational.
AND THIS IS VERY very similar to the way that Atmananda first approaches his teaching. He starts by having you contemplate a physical object and acknowledge that it can be 100% accounted for by visual, tactile, auditory and intellectual "forms." And that apart from, say, a visual form that arises only as something in knowledge, it makes no sense to think that we "see" an object. We simply never experience anything "of" an independent object other than this form. So we have no way to establish that this form is "of" the object. We have no experience that there's an object independent of this form.
MY BERKELEY TEACHER gave me lots of
hints that Berkeley was actually a nondualist; but to actually find this
element in Berkeley's works, one must cultivate the skill of esoteric and
hermeneutic reading. On the surface level at least, Berkeley wrote as a bishop
in the Church of Ireland; he had to write as though human minds and the
conventional figure of God are well and good, separate and intact. But writing
in a different culture in the middle of the 20th century, Sri Atmananda didn't
have to worry about persecution by religous orthodoxy. His investigation goes
very directly and openly to the core of being. Atmananda applies the same sort
of scrutiny to the sense modalities, to the body and to the mind. We simply
never witness anything external to witnessing awareness. There is no evidence
for a limitation to seeing, or a gap between subject and object. There is also
no evidence that awareness is personal, separate, limited or compartmentalized.
And so nothing is missing.
THIS AWARENESS IS our very self, since we don't stand apart from it and see it. It is our very seeing itself, as us. It is not separate or personal. It is clarity and openness. As Knowledge, it never feels that anything is missing. As Love, it is always accepting to everything that arises, never prohibitive.
ATMA DARSHAN is the more
fundamental and poetic of the two works. It lays out the kernel of Shri
Atmananda's unique method, which could be called the "outside-in"
approach. Instead of expanding the individual so as to become universal, ATMA
DARSHAN shows how the universal is always the sum and substance of the
individual. Specifically, it shows quite clearly just how everything that seems
to be outside oneself (i.e. world, body and mind) is actually inseparable from
oneself as pure awareness.
ATMA NIRVRITI can be seen as
answering questions that might have occurred to the reader of ATMA DARSHAN.
Questions may arise such as how there can be seeing without a seer or indeed
without an actual object that is seen, or how knowledge of your nature is
different from everyday factual knowledge. ATMA NIRVRITI clarifies the
issues in ATMA DARSHAN from different angles of vision, and in places
from a higher level. In addition, ATMA NIRVRITI has three articles as
appendices, "I," "Witness," and "World" which are
extremely helpful in understanding how these concepts are regarded by this
unique teaching.
IT HAS BEEN MANY YEARS since Advaita Publishers last reprinted these two great works, which carry a copyright date of 1983. With available copies having gravitated into the rare and out-of-print book markets, I had created a PDF file of the combined edition of ATMA DARSHAN and ATMA NIRVRITI, which could be downloaded from this site. Recently, Advaita Publishers wrote informing me that the books are still under copyright. Out of respect for this legal issue as well as respect for the heirs of Sri Atmananda, I have removed the downloadable PDF file from this site. The publisher wishes me to make known that any copies that have been downloaded from this site are similarly in violation of Sri Atmananda's heirs' rights of copyright.
IF YOU WISH to obtain these books,
you can try the rare and out-of-print market. AbeBooks.com
and Amazon.com carry copies occasionally. But
I am sure that you will join me in wishing that Advaita Publishers reprints
these two classic works sometime soon.
THIS IS IT, Shri Atmananda's big
book, 517 pages in length! It is a collection of dialogues compiled from
Nitya Tripta's notes kept over the ten year period from 1950 to 1959, plus a
biography and collection of spiritual statements from Atmananda. This is a new,
digitally remastered PDF file, with searchable text and a linked PDF table of
contents and index. In its scope and depth, this great work can be
compared to Ramana Maharshi's Talks and Nisargadatta's I AM THAT.
It has been compiled in a similar format - Q & A items on a wide variety of
topics approached from different angles, with a topical and chronological table
of contents.
THIS VOLUME HAS NEVER BEEN for sale
or been under copyright. In fact, for many years it was photocopied and passed
around privately among Shri Atmananda's direct students and later generations
of those inquiring into truth.
ACCORDING TO THE DIRECT PATH, suffering is based on taking things as real or independent, whereas they arise in thought only. I call this kind of “taking” a sense of inherent existence. The direct path is a way of following one’s direct experience to test whether the claims of inherent existence are confirmed. It is practical, not theoretical. It is like a treasure hunt – like looking for the greatest treasure in the world.
THE PROCESS IN A NUTSHELL goes like
this:
- We notice that the world, body and mind seem as though they are really there, and really separate, limited and vulnerable. We ask, is this confirmed by experience?
- We follow our direct experience, finding that the answer is No!
- Dualisms evaporate in the discovery that everything is awareness, that is, happiness; that is, experience itself.
THIS AWARENESS IS CLEAR, open, and loving,
and is the reality of our experience at every moment. It is happiness. The
direct path is complete from “beginning” to “end,” and is found by many people
to be very intuitive for modern times. Basically, it
- Requires no need for expertise in meditation
- Involves both understanding and heart
- Has been tested by experience; there is no belief required
- Sees through creation stories
- Dissolves issues about doership
- Involves the body in a holistic way
- Is modern and incisive in style
- Transforms one’s attitude towards language, perception, thought, others, and the world
- Gets past common sticking points
Suffering and Freedom
IN MORE DETAIL, suffering is caused
by believing that our experience is characterized by objectively real objects,
dualisms and distinctions, such as
- I / Not I
- Freedom / Bondage
- Nirvana / Samsara
- Physical / Spiritual
- Appearance / Reality
- Good / Evil
- What I want / What I have
- Present / Future and Present / Past
THE INQUIRY PROCEEDS through a
direct and experiential investigation of the world, body and mind. This
investigation results in the knowledge and unshakable experience that there is
no separation or difference anywhere. The inquiry is global, and includes an
examination of every type of experience. This includes physical, psychological,
emotional, social, esthetic, intellectual, religious, mystical and spiritual
facets of experience, as well as waking, dreaming, deep sleep, trance,
anesthesia, clairvoyance, intuition, samadhis and meditative states, etc. The
reality of experience (as well as the reality of the self, mind, body and
world) is actually experience itself. The nature of this experience is the same
everywhere – free, open, loving, and sweetly beautiful. It is the same
awareness to which everything appears, and as such, is your very self.
In Vedanta, reality is called
Sat-Chit-Ananda:
- Sat or Being (as opposed to nothingness)
- Chit or Knowledge (as opposed to ignorance)
- Ananda or Happiness (as opposed to suffering)
THESE ARE NOT MENTAL STATES, though
if a person has certain analogous mental states, she can feel empowered and
inspired to inquire further. They are also not objective qualities of
experience or reality, because actual qualities require the possibility of
their opposites. Instead, the terms Sat-Chit-Ananda are sometimes called
“non-qualifying attributes,” provided in Vedantic teachings in order to
counteract the impression of their opposites. That is, these terms are used to
correct false notions that reality is characterized by nothingness, ignorance
and suffering.
Sources
SEVERAL WRITERS have written helpful pieces that can assist one’s inquiries at various stages along the say. Sri Atmananda (Krishna Menon, 1897-1981) is increasingly recognized as one of the great sages in modern India, along with Ramana Maharshi (1979 – 1950) and Nisargadatta Maharaj (1897 – 1981).
SRI ATMANANDA is a great guide to
this way of inquiry; his books are a blueprint from beginning to end of this
path. But there are many possible sticking points along the way, such as
- the belief that awareness comes into contact with inherently pre-existing objects
- the belief that one’s self is contained within the body
- the belief that awareness is a product of brain activity
THIS IS WHERE other writers, both Eastern and Western, can support and enhance one’s inquiry. These writers help examine the assumptions behind these common beliefs.. The most intuitive and helpful approaches I have seen come from the following. My own Standing as Awareness performs some of the same functions, especially as it addresses common sticking points the come up during the inquiry:
- George Berkeley’s clear, intuitive yet destabilizing Three Dialogues between Hylas and Philonous, and A Treatise Concerning The Principles Of Human Knowledge.
- David Hume’s Enquiry concerning Human Understanding, which helps break down (i) one's notions of causality, (ii) the belief that external objects matching sensations, and (iii) the assumption that there is a separate self inside the mind,
- Gaudapada’s masterful “karika” or commentary on the Mandukya Upanishad
- Nagarjuna’s groundbreaking Treatise on the Middle Way
- Brand Blanshard’s Nature of Thought
From the Outside In
THE DIRECT PATH can proceed in two
possible directions. Both are possible ways of dissolving the distinction
between the self and the world, or subject and object.
- One may examine the self to see that it is the world (inside out) – This consists of looking at the separate "I", which seems small and separate, and making it larger and larger until it incorporates everything. In this way, one begins with the subject and shows that it’s really the object. After this point, the distinction between subject and object drops away.
- One may examine the world to see that it is the self (outside in) – This is the direction taken by the direct path. It starts with what seems most obvious in our experience. It dissolves the distinction between the world and the self by examining the world. The world seems infinitely large and separated from the observer by an un-crossable gap, but when approached in this direct method, it’s seen as nothing other than the "I". This method proceeds by several stages, which correspond to the stages outlined in the writings of Atmananda and George Berkeley:
- Objects into sensation – You examine an object in the world and see that there’s no evidence of an object external to colors, sounds, textures, etc. Objects never claim that they exist separately, and there’s no experiential evidence that they do. The most important realization at this stage is this – since everything you think you experience about an object already includes sensation, there’s no independent way to verify that you actually sense AN INDPENDENT OBJECT. Sensation actually goes into the characterization of the object, and there’s no way to separate them. The sound of the barking dog IS the barking dog. There’s no independent access to the object other than sensation. Therefore, there’s no way that you actually SENSE an OBJECT. This is key to the direct path’s approach, and it’s easy to overlook its importance. If this stage is realized clearly, two things happen. (i) the basis for the sense of physical separation as well as the sense of all other separation is removed. And (ii) the rest of the stages are very easy because the realizations are analogous to this one, but on more subtle levels. This is not easy to see, and the best texts to have as assistance are George Berkeley’s Three Dialogues and Treatise Concerning The Principles Of Human Knowledge, and my own Standing as Awareness. And it’s pivotal to examine one’s own body in this same way, because similar discoveries apply to the body as to the barking dog. The body does not convey sensation. Rather it is made out of sensation.
- Sensation into thought – Here’s an analogous process. Sensation now dissolves into awareness the same say that in Step 1 objects dissolved into sensation. Once objects are seen as nothing more than sensation, you examine the senses themselves, and see that they are not subjects or experiencers, but rather experiences. Seeing, hearing, touch, taste and smell are not experienced as existing apart from witnessing awareness. In other words, seeing must arise as an appearance in awareness in order to exist. It does not exist somewhere else. Along with this investigation of seeing and the other senses as faculties, one investigates the apparatus of the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, hands, skin, etc. This is done in stillness, in motion, and in locomotion. Examination shows that they are nothing other than arising thoughts or appearances in witnessing awareness. This awareness is not personal, because there is no basis left for the distinction between one separate point of Awareness and another. Awareness is not the kind of thing there can be two of. All distinctions are witnessed thoughts only. The person has dissolved into the sweetness of Awareness
- Thought into pure consciousness – The relationship between witnessing awareness and thoughts is analogous to the processes in step (1) and (2). At this stage, one analyzes memory and the relationship between thoughts more carefully. Because a thought is never experienced to exist apart from the presence of Consciousness, it makes no sense that a thought actually exists in the first place.
IF IT IS NEVER YOUR EXPERIENCE that
a thought exists outside of consciousness, then it makes no sense to carry
around the notion that it really does exist externally. And because memory is
itself another thought, it can’t prove the existence of another thought even
within consciousness. One realizes that there’s no evidence that a thought
existed other than the present thought. There cannot be two thoughts. If there
can’t be two, then it makes no sense that the present thought is actually a
thought in the first place. At this point, thought itself dissolves into
consciousness. Even the most subtle separation and movement and sense of
existence/non-existence dissolved into the sweet, loving arms of pure
consciousness.
PURE CONSCIOUSNESS is called the
"I-Principle." It is that to which everything appears. It is your
very self.
Stages of Realization
THE DIRECT PATH mentions three stages along the path of realization. At each stage, the interest is placed on something more subtle, and what was seen as real and inherent to a lower stage is seen as nothing but the play of a higher stage.
- At Stage 1, everything seems like it exists independently, and consciousness seems as though it comes from the head and flows out through the senses into the objective world.
- At Stage 2, the activities (AKA superimpositions) of Stage 1 are seen to be appearances in impersonal, non-localized consciousness, which reveals them in the light of awareness.
- At Stage 3, even the subtle superimposition of “revealing” or “illuminating” falls away, and consciousness shines in its own glory.
THIS IS A CAPSULE SUMMARY of how the
direct path examines the world to see that it is nothing other than the self.
AS YOU TAKE YOUR STAND as being something, the world changes accordingly. This happens on the everyday level for everyone. If something nice happened and you feel good about yourself, the world looks rosy. If you feel bad about yourself, the world looks bleak.
SIMILARLY, IF YOU TAKE YOURSELF as
a physical body, the world and other people seem like external physical bodies.
The events in the world seem like they are mechanically caused. If you take
yourself as a mind or spirit, then the world will seem spiritual, like a flow
of energy. Events will seem as if accomplished by magic, perhaps willed into
being by your mind or a higher mind with control over everything.
THE WORLD FOLLOWS the stand you take for yourself.
IF YOU TAKE YOURSELF as awareness,
then the world will be experienced as awareness - the same awareness. There's
nothing other for the world to be. The world won't be IN awareness, it will BE
awareness. There's nothing else it can be. There'll be no separation between
you and the world. Things won't really seem to happen, and there's no sense of
cause, but rather of causeless spontaneity and miraculousness.
THE WORLD FOLLOWS the stand you take for yourself.
Skillful Teaching
ONE OF THE SURPRISING and hidden principles that traditional nondual teaching methods use is this – use the lowest-level or least abstract teaching that helps deconstructs the current object at hand. For example, if a person has a question about memory, it is more effective to examine memory's false claims directly than to tell one's self "Don't worry about memory, everything is consciousness anyway." Both methods tell the truth about things, but from their own level. If one immediately goes to the "everything is consciousness" answer, then the question is likely to pop up again and again. But if the claims of memory themselves are seen to be false and unwarranted, then that very seeing will dissolve the very roots of the question and it will not come up again.
IN GENERAL, too subtle or abstract
a teaching given too early will simply not have any lasting transformational
effect. It can inspire and motivate and open the heart to some extent. But it
will also be taken literally, which therefore gives the student another set of
beliefs which will have to be examined later. But a more down-to-earth, less
subtle teaching will be experienced as more relevant. It will have a more
powerful effect on the inquirer since it accords with their background
assumptions more fully. And then this lower level teaching will itself be
deconstructed with a more subtle teaching later. This is why many nondual
teachings seem gauged and staged.
THE DIRECT PATH is practical. It sees no inconsistency among its methods. There often seem to be inconsistencies between statements such as the following:
- The external object is merely a thought
- There is no external object
- There is no externality in the first place
- Externality is a thought
- A thought arises in awareness
IN THE PRESENT EXAMPLE, at an
earlier stage the focus is usually on the world and its nature. The
questioner’s natural assumption might be that the world is made out of physical
stuff, like rocks, chairs, or sub-atomic particles. The direct path’s strategy
at this point is not to deny that the world exists. That would be too much too
soon, and might alienate the inquirer. It could be scary if you’re used to a
world and are told all of a sudden that there isn’t one! So instead, the direct
path takes advantage of the assumption that the world exists, but refines the
assumption by specifying how it can’t be made of anything other than
consciousness. This is a smaller leap for the inquirer.
LATER, THE FOCUS IS ON consciousness
itself. At this point the issue isn’t what the world is made of, but whether it
exists at all. When there’s the feeling that the world exists, even when it is
thought to be made out of consciousness, there’s still a bit of separation
between the I and the world, between the subject and object. So at this point
the strategy is to deny the very existence of a world, which amounts to
refuting the distinction between subject and object. Waiting to do this at a
later stage is not so jarring and un-intuitive as it would be earlier on.
BECAUSE THE TEACHINGS have this
pragmatic, temporal dynamic, they don’t contradict each other. They have
different purposes and targets. They depend on the target of refutation for a
particular body of assumptions, at a particular moment as the teaching
proceeds.
CONSCIOUSNESS ACTUALLY has no function and performs no actions. It does nothing and has no purposes of its own. But in coming to recognize this, our understanding often attributes functions to consciousness, such as memory, creativity, or purpose. Advaita knows this, and has devised teachings to take advantage of the tendency.
THAT IS WHY there is a distinction between
how the witnessing awareness seems when the teaching is beginning and how it
seems when witnessing has stabilized. As one learns the witness teaching, the
witness seems psychological (with the ability to record and retrieve memories),
less abstract, and easier to grasp. It is not personal, but can seem almost
personal. And although it isn’t an accurate characterization of consciousness,
it nevertheless allows you to deconstruct your everyday dualistic
presuppositions, showing what was assumed to be definitive of your self
is actually an object appearing to the self.
THIS IS HOW the witness feels when
the inquirer feels that consciousness is in the body-mind (instead of vice
versa). The witness allows the inquirer to realize that the body/mind is an appearance
in awareness rather than the source of awareness. The witness depends on
realizing that what comes up in memory had to have appeared to awareness in the
first place.
WHEN THIS IS FULLY REALIZED, then the body will no longer seem to be a container within which awareness is located. It’s at this point that one can examine more subtle things in a new light. One now turns the same light of inquiry upon the mind, values, memory and the senses that one had earlier used to examine tables, chairs and the body. The realization that none of these things are located anywhere and that they don’t belong to any ONE, is the dawn of the more subtle witness.
THE PSYCHOLOGICAL WITNESS assumed
that the witness is able to remember and value things. These abilities
attributed to the psychological witness are superimpositions, but helpful ones.
The more subtle insights actually transform the witness. What was seen as a
function of the witness (especially memory) is now seen as another witnessed
arising. What seemed to be part of the subject is now seen as an object. And
witnessing is experienced as infinitely lighter and clearer.
Stabilization of the Witness
AT THIS POINT, one’s interest is not in objects, but in awareness, in consciousness. One is no longer trying to analyze external objects to see what they are made of and whether they are separate. Objects no longer have an ultimate metaphysical or emotional charge, and one doesn’t feel that one’s nature depends on objects. It’s natural at this point to become interested in consciousness, to fall in love with consciousness.
THIS IS A MUCH MORE subtle
interest, one which is able to be satisfied wherever one looks. One has also
dropped the superimpositions that had been attributed to the witness. It’s now
realized that memory is itself an arising, along with valuation, thought and
sensation. In the more subtle witness there’s no separate mind, body or world.
All there is (and it’s even too much to say this) is awareness and the
appearances that arise, abide and subside in awareness. It feels warm and
wonderful and sweet.
OF COURSE THE WITNESS is itself a
superimposition, but a subtle and benevolent one. It is pleasant and free. As
soon as it is firmly established, it begins to collapse. This can happen
spontaneously if left alone, or it can happen through inquiry into how it
works. One begins to suspect that there simply cannot be a difference between
the witness and that which is witnessed – and to realize that they are both
pure consciousness.
WHEN THE WITNESS is very stable, it begins to open or dissolve into global, loving lightness of pure consciousness, which is without any gaps or separation anywhere. This happens through time, or when one looks into the witness the same way that one looked into objects at the beginning of the investigation.
THE WITNESS has become stable when:
- Witnessing doesn’t seem like a mental state
- Witnessing doesn’t seem as though it needs practice or vigilance
- Witnessing doesn’t seem as though it’s reversible or able to be "lost"
- Witnessing no longer seems like it is happening “here” as opposed to "there"
- It no longer feels as though there are objects that exist outside of awareness
- You no longer wonder whether awareness allows one person to see all of another person’s thoughts
- The witness no longer seems personal
- There no longer seem to be unseen arisings
AT THIS POINT, there is no
presumption of a person. There is no separate “one” that arisings appear to.
There is no felt authorship, doership or receivership. There is no
personalization or experience of separation.
EXPERIENCE IS SWEET, open and loving
– the source of the arisings is awareness and love, and the arisings themselves
are sweet because their source is sweet. Even pain is open, loving and sweet.
Its nature is not pain, but awareness. One can no longer "be" a
person (indeed, one never was a person). One has recognized one’s self as
awareness.
BUT THERE IS STILL a very subtle
dualistic structure to the witness. Sweet, but dualistic nevertheless. The
dualistic structure consists of:
- A subject/object distinction, i.e., a distinction between awareness and the arisings in awareness
- A multiplicity, a distinction between arisings themselves
BOTH OF THESE DISTINCTIONS go
together; they need each other. And inquiry into the either one of them will dissolve
them both.
THE INVESTIGATION at this level is
very subtle, but the basic insight is the same as it is everywhere. There is no
experience of objects outside of awareness. There is no phenomenon that organizes
or structures awareness; if there were such a phenomenon, then it would
be just the same as any other phenomenon has been discovered to be: just
another arising in awareness. This was what was realized with color,
sound, the body, seeing and hearing, memory, will, intention and causality. So the
same realization is available for these ultra-subtle relations – relations such
as subject/object and multiplicity/unicity. There is no subject/object
distinction outside the current arising. It is never witnessed. There is a
projection or presumption of this distinction, and the presumption is nothing
other than an image in this very thought. When it is seen that neither
distinction nor multiplicity is an objective feature anywhere in experience,
then the feeling that these subtle things are present dissolves. And then
experience will no longer seem conditioned by any duality, even the most subtle
or hidden duality.
THIS CAN BE LOOKED AT in another way
too. All that is ever experienced is the current arising or thought. There is
no passage of time experienced in that arising. There is no passage of time
experienced outside of that arising. There can in fact be no time. Without
time, then there can't be any such things as arisings. They don't make sense
unless time is present – which it's not. This establishes you as the Timeless.
And your experience confirms this.
ANOTHER WAY TO SEE THIS is also to
see that, according to the way the witness is structured, only the current
arising is ever experienced. There are never two arisings experiences,
expecially since memory is itself inoperative. That is, memory itself has been
seen through as merely an arising, therefore absolutely incapable of
establishing anything other than what is current. So there cannot be said to be
two or more arisings. Nor is it your experience that there is an arising
before THIS or after THIS. If there cannot be two arisings, then how can
there be even one? What is present is not even the kind of thing that
numbers apply to. The present is not one of several items in a string, nor is
it experienced in any way like that. Without the present seeming like it arises
in a numerical series, then the very notion of arising itself gently and
peacefully collapses in to pure consciousness. Consciousness shines as itself.
Openly, sweetly and lovingly.
Special thanks to Dr. Goode for allowing me to use this. This link will take you to Scott Kiloby's website, where he's done a great, three-part interview with Greg on the Direct Path. http://bit.ly/JjvDwX
Fred
* * * * *
Special thanks to Dr. Goode for allowing me to use this. This link will take you to Scott Kiloby's website, where he's done a great, three-part interview with Greg on the Direct Path. http://bit.ly/JjvDwX
Fred
Greg's home website: http://www.heartofnow.com/
Greg's emptiness teachings website: http://www.emptiness.co/
Greg on Amazon: http://amzn.to/JPB6xZ
Greg on Barnes & Noble: http://bit.ly/KJZv7o
Greg at Nonduality Press: http://bit.ly/Lmemn5
No comments:
Post a Comment