Meetings in Toronto

Meetings are on hiatus right now, as I complete a farm job until October. Internet stuff always available, email at or skype me at michaelthielmann if you want to chat! Facebook name Michael Thielmann.

Last satsang till October

March 12 Meeting

January 29 Meeting

Saturday Jan. 15 Meeting

November 2 Meeting

Email at for a One to One. (skype or phone).

Friday, December 25, 2009

Who's the wise guy?

As a seeker, it seems like there are actual wise gurus out there, who have stumbled upon profound insight that seem out of my grasp. At this point, I begin trusting the 'wisdom' of these people to whom I assign status, meaning, and create a gap of inaccessibility.

The apparent wisdom comes from a direct investigation, looking at one's own Self, and present condition here and now. It's not a result of being a special person with a bunch of nebulous concepts that the lay-person can't understand.

It's like the clich├ęd story about the seeker who climbs the mountain, and the wise guru tells him that all the answers are within. This is a much more helpful pointer than the idea of "I know the answers, let me tell you how things are." Anyone who is clear on this will inevitably point to something direct and simple, here and now. A simple looking at the immediacy of one's experience reveals that there are no wise guys, and no guys that need to wise up- only the infinite wisdom and love of Being.

Thursday, December 24, 2009

Special moments for "me"

The idea of being a seperate self is all about looking for that special moment. What you are is in no need of such thing, since what's happening now is so totally beyond expectation that the 'seeker's imaginary goals pale in comparison. As seperate selves, we live life as beggars, restlessly moving from one bit of pleasure to the next, hoping for the ultimate thing, someday, somehow. As we look into what we are, it becomes more obvious that this seeking mechanism is just a momentary appearance, and has nothing to do with what we are at all.

The last bit of fullfillment, where is it now? The last orgasm, last bit of chocolate, last meditative experience- all dead and gone. What you are is vibrantly alive and brimming with the life force of unconditional love- for lack of better words. Special moments in the future imply something missing now- is this the case?

What we are is the special moment itself, but not the way we imagined. This is beyond imagination, but immediately more REAL than any imaginary 'me' could ever touch.

Tuesday, December 22, 2009

The paradox of what we are NOT

For what you are, none of the 'rules' of the mind apply. Non-conceptual awareness or divisionless being doesn't have questions or doubts. We often hear of these paradoxes that arise during the 'search,' and the mind would love to resolve them. The key is to see that none of this stuff is even relevant to what you inherently are, as you read this sentence. The notion of being a seeker is essentially a paradox or problem unto itself: why am I "me", and why aren't I whole and complete?

The real meat of this stuff is seeing that none of these imaginary entity notions even touch what you are. Right now, as always, you shine brightly behind the mental activity, unaffected and unconcerned with the important task of seeking (or stopping seeking!) Look directly into the heart of the matter (your own Self) and you can drop the whole notion right now.

How fun is "me-ing?"

Pretending to be a seeker can be fun, at times. It seems like I'm going to make it, any moment now. The next technique or teacher offers something even greater, just over the horizon. If only I keep at it, fighting away at all my important spiritual issues that prevent me from realizing what I already am.

If we look right now, we can see this stuff for what it is. The struggle of being a seperate seeker is very seductive- offering up major prizes in an imagined future state. It's like thinking about being at a party, when you already ARE the party.

What you are is a lot more fun than the activities of me-ing, which is basically an addictive and unfulfilled potential. We seek enjoyment of life, from the perspective that I'm a person who needs something to start enjoying life.

If we investigate directly, we see very clearly that what we've always been is the enjoyment we seek.

Sunday, December 20, 2009

No room for a seeker.

If you really look right now, you can see that there isn't actually any room in reality for this notion of a seeker. There is only wholeness or fullness- the Being that you ARE, and cannot avoid Being. Since this is Oneness without a Secondness, this whole seeker notion must also be That, arising as a harmless game in what you really are. Look, investigate directly. See what gives you so much confidence in asserting your existence- it's not in the mind. You do exist, just not in the way that thinking has suggested. See that the unmoving and aware nature that you are remains constant, while all else is free to change. You aren't a seeker now, see the home-free nature of your being itself.

Thursday, December 17, 2009

Is there even a seeker?

Are you a seeker who's reading this? Is that really what you are? If I take myself to be a seeker, I'm really going to resist the message that "I am THAT". The whole thing ends now in seeing that I was never this imagined "seeker".

Who is aware of the comings and goings of this apparent entity doing the seeking? By its very nature, the awareness would have to be more real than the patchwork set of concepts we call ourselves.

Are you willing to really see that what you are is awareness itself, or are you content pretending to be a spiralling, made-up seeker who holds out hope for a better future? You can't not be this presence of awareness, no matter how good at pretending to seek you get.

No next moment

This is actually all there is. I know we've all heard it, a lot of us believe it, but this literally IS IT. There isn't a place for seeking to start here, and there's no need for anything to be different. What you are is whole, complete, and self obvious. There won't be a next moment better than this one. There won't be a next moment at all. There isn't even 'this' moment. No past, no future, no now.

All you are, is this. The blankness just beyond the words. You aren't any-thing, you don't need anything, all there is, is that YOU ARE.

Monday, December 14, 2009

Who needs to be ready?

The suggestion on my site about being ready to die can be quite misleading. What it's really pointing to is seeing the false nature of our conceptual self, and being willing to let go of it. What we are cannot die, it's just a matter of seeing our timeless aware nature directly, right now.

Being a "me" is like carrying a big garbage can around. It's heavy and it stinks, but I'm pretty sure there's some money in the bottom of it somewhere. So I take with me wherever I go, and pick around in it, tell people about it, and compare my garbage with other peoples' garbage. We talk about how close we're getting to finding the treasure, and about how much we hate the smell.

Someone walks up and tells us to drop the garbage can, because there's nothing of value in there. I clutch it closer, and defend it with my life because I'm sure there's something of value in there, if only I have more time to seek it out and get past the bad smell.

If we see what we are, the garbage of me-ing will be dropped because the true treasure has been seen. There's no treasure in our treasured concepts. See that you are the light behind this heavy can of concepts. No one needs to be ready to be what they are.

Sunday, December 13, 2009


Charlie Hayes once alluded to how serious people can take this stuff, to the point of becoming ever more serious and enslaved by the obligation of seeing something properly. We take on the idea of having to "get it right", and compare ourselves with others that we imagine have gotten it right. The nature of what we are is simple and present, with a quality of light-ness about it. The word "enlightenment" may simply be pointing to this childlike nature that is present and aware right now. It's not a state to be reached by anyone, because the notion of a "someone" is just a bunch of heavy concepts arising in the Light of Being that we are.

Keep it light- don't worry. See that you are this awareness, even if there still appears to be a search or a process. There's no need to go into the heavy concepts, just see that you are the light prior to burden of self.

Search or no search, self or no self, you are that same shine-ingness that you cannot avoid.

There's nothing wrong that there's nothing wrong.

Inspired by Charlie's latest podcast with John Wheeler I decided to look into a core notion that drives the whole seeking mechanism.

As long as I took myself to be some type of seperate entity, there was always something wrong, to a greater or lesser extent. I was always driven to try to compensate for the "wrongness" of life, and my existence was focused on small moments of being ok, through some sort of psychological gratification.

For what we are right now, there is nothing wrong. Look and see, if the natural Being-ness that you are has a problem. Notice how concepts arise about problems, solutions, and the like. See that what you are is fundamentally present and aware, and is not affected by these notions.

For whom is there something wrong? Where is this elusive problem maker? The seeking is perpetuated by believing that I am a limited entity with a problem of some kind. There are plenty of options to try to remedy this supposed problematic person, but it's much easier to see that I'm not this imagined entity.

Get familiar with the natural presence of beingness that's always been right here. See what's wrong with that, and see what's wrong with there being nothing wrong.

Friday, December 11, 2009

Jesus didn't need the Bible, Buddha was not a buddhist.

If we look at people who have (clearly) shared this message, there seems to be a commonality. They did not rely on any 'outside' authority. Jesus wasn't referencing anything to prove his 'points,' he merely spoke out of the revelation that was apparent to him. Buddha didn't say "become a buddhist," he too simply pointed to our true nature. Of course, I'm merely speculating by saying this. The key thing to see, is that there's no need for anything besides what you already are.

How much scriptural referencing, podcasts, or reading of these words does it take to be who you already are? The best anyone can do, is point back to your Being as directly as possible. The mind has butchered clear pointers in the 'past', and it continues to do so today. See past the mind's high threshold of BS, and know that you are the clarity itself. Oneness needs no second opinion.

Thursday, December 10, 2009

Just one last "me"

The nature of pretending to be a seperate self is, as Tony says, the greatest addiciton in the world. There can be an incessant clinging to these familiar yet limiting concepts. Who would choose to graps onto ideas that make for suffering? The real key is clarifying your ACTUAL identity, before the concepts kick in at all.

It's a matter of seeing that you are present, aware, and inherently free right now. There's no need for that one last "me" concept that needs resolution, the beingness is already established and doesn't need the last "hit" of whatever seems important.

The nature of reality (what you are) stands in the clear at all times, with no possibility of improvement or diminishment. See the concepts as concepts, and know that prior to all this mental jibberish, you are That already.

Monday, December 7, 2009

A message from Charlie

Here is a message from Charlie Hayes, on the subject of clear pointing. Much thanks for his no BS approach to all of this.

"Any sense of some identity with a problem (such as 'energetic contraction') or some need for an 'event' (such as some describe) keeps the seeker seeking. It took three years (after first talking with John and then traveling to Australia to be with 'Sailor' Bob) for me to really clarify this and to see that these "teachers" were not really delivering a pure, simple message. My standard (and this is my own and only my own standard) is represented in the five recent Podcasts on my site, with John Wheeler.

In the past I have interviewed (or been interviewed by) many others, some of who have great pointers to offer, but I find that after a few years of 'seasoning' (for want of a better term) that DAMN FEW ACTUALLY deliver the quality of pure message that Bob and John are offering. My message has been refined over the years (as Bob's was and is) to better mirror the reality of the FACT that your Being is already free and no event is needed to 'resolve any issue' nor is there any such real thing as a seeker with problems or issues ... IN ACTUAL FACT.

Bare Naked presence is simply NEVER missing! Until THAT gets clearly pointed to ... and finally 'noticed' ... well, the BS can go on for a very long time.

That said, there is NO 'problem as such' with ANY expression: There is gold in them there hills, even if the hills themselves are covered with dead trees (false concepts)... if one can learn how to dig the gold can be mined. BUT: Why would anyone endorse or promote a teacher type who has a 'professional spiritual teacher' game going? And who muddies the water with unnecessary conceptual "spiritual noise?"

I say that the original message of there being only already freedom, that who we are is that freedom and absolutely nothing is needed to "attain" what is ALREADY fully present here and now... for absolutely everyone.... that most usually gets distorted, in the typical "spiritual marketplace", not because there is malice aforethought, but because the 'teacher' does not REALLY understand what works, which is simple pointing devoid of conceptual baggage!

One last thing: to make the claim "there is no person THEREFORE there is nothing to be done is a flat contradiction to what the true sages (i.e. Ramana, Nisargadatta) have pointed out. What there IS to be done is a cogent investigation into what is REAL and the discarding of any and all concepts of identity. The cleaner the pointers the quicker that happens, in my experience.

Just my take. And none if it is to be believed, accepted, or taken on board as some 'truth'. The truth that is told is NOT The Real Truth full stop! The simpler the pointing the more potent and THAT is why so few expressions get linked at present on my site. Willy-nilly linking to any half-baked teaching is in this view (outside all viewpoints) a disservice. That said, again there ain't nothin’ wrong here there or anywhere. But I am a big fan of discrimination, in the vein of Adi Shankara and those of that ilk, currently Bob, and John Wheeler. Sorry to say, I find damn few others who stick to the real message with no baggage!

If the adherent to some ‘professional spiritual teachers’ really listen again to Podcast #5 I feel something one may still be a bit blind to can be recognized about all this... Anyway, being alive, awake, and the infinite possibility of communication, transformation and absolute freedom, I AM that I AM, and so are YOU... and THAT is ... LOVE!
Enough said. Let's pull the plug now."

Your friend in Freedom,


Clear or not clear? Who's the authority?

Is this a clear, uncompromising expression of nonduality? What about the other sites I've read? What about all the apparent discrepencies between teachers, teachings, or non-teachers and non-teachings? How can we know what's trustworthy and what isn't?

The whole dilemma and apparently problematic questions arise from not seeing clearly what we are, right now. The mind loves to categorize, compare, accept and reject. It doesn't matter who's clear, as long as what we are IS. The mind can debate its important issues forever.

As a seeker, I compared teachers and teachings and tried to find air-tight parameters as to who was clear and who was not. In the end, I just trusted my own intuitive knowing, as I had really done all along. What's the point of debating in duality, when we are already the uncompromising nondual reality itself? This message isn't clear, what you ARE is the clarity itself.

Sunday, December 6, 2009

Much Gratitude

This message is all about gratitude to those that shared the simple and obvious. It's only fair that I recognize those that told it to me straight. The following are clear and direct pointers to the divine love that we are.

Charlie Hayes-
Tony Parsons-
John Wheeler-
Jeff Foster-

Check out the bloglist at the bottom for more potent pointers.

Saturday, December 5, 2009

It's all too much

A common feeling for me as a seeker was simply the "too much-ness" of life. Waking up to another day was heavy and dreary at times, as I fought tooth and nail to make something happen to get my life working properly. Desperate seeking through whatever means I deemed "hopeful", including the dreaded and sought after enlightenment. I really never wanted enlightnemnet as it really is, only my version of it. The real deal was always too much for "me" to handle.

Life, as it is, is enlightenment. Sadly, there's no room for anyone seperate in it. So there are no enlightened people, but no unenlightened ones either. It's too much for the mind to handle, and it doesn't need to.

This is the big break for the mind. It breaks itself trying to understand this, and ultimately the seeing puts the brakes on the seeking. This is the case right now, in seeing that this is enough, but not "too much."

Thursday, December 3, 2009

Simple Experiments

Try to find your centre, right now. Is it in the head, or somewhere in the stomach or chest? Where, exactly? Look directly into the supposed central "me-ness," then look for the centre of that.

Close your eyes, and try to find what shape you are. Where do you end? Open your eyes, and do the same. Where does what you call "you" end, and the "other" begin? What about the point where they meet, who is there at that place?

Gaze into your eyes in the mirror. Who is seeing what, and what is the awareness that contains it all?

Find the most real thing in your experience, right now. What's the most stable, solid, and reliable "thing" where you are right now?

Look into that troublesome loop of thoughts and feelings, and see if there's anyone being tossed around in there. Notice that you are the sky, in which the maelstrom or the peaceful weather can occur.

Stop a moment and see the show, as the show. Thoughts, feelings, notions of self-hood or non-selfhood all appear and disappear. You don't.

True Believer

How many thoughts have you had in the last 5 seconds that were true? Which of your many complex and spiritualized belief systems can stand up to naked investigation? How much "you-ness" can survive a head on and direct look? This pointing is not meant to create believers, martyrs, fundamentalists, or arguments. It's meant to dismantle the notion that there is anyone, to have anything to do with anything, spiritual or otherwise. Primarily, it's a pointing to what is true, but beyond belief. What is, right now, is naked, invisible and can be sensed intuitively as real. It requires no belief, and no believ-er. What you are, is what is always being pointed to.

How many young kids need all these words to be what they are? What you are in deep sleep is exactly what you are now. See what comes and goes, and know that you are behind and beyond.

No one needs to still the mind or the emotions. Seeing that they come and go, it's obvious that You do not.

Wednesday, December 2, 2009

No blame, no excuse.

The human mind is very good at certain things. It can point the finger anywhere it wants, and be right, every time. It can excuse itself from all fault and wrongdoing, and justify every action. Or it can turn on itself and become a mechanism of self-loathing, collapsing into depression. The dysfunctional nature of the mind is seen through, by seeing that "you" are not a product of the mind at all. Who would choose all of the adverse effects that thought so readily spits out? Even to say "the mind" gives too much credence to a faculty that is completely dependent and subservient to what we really are. In seeing that I am the changless awareness in which thought happens, there's no longer anywhere to put the blame, even on "me". There's also no excuse for not seeing clearly, because there are no obstacles to what we are. During the search I would blame circumstances, people, and whatever I came across as to why I was still seeking and suffering. There's no fault in any of this, but the ball is in our court at all times. To see what we are, right now, or to suffer the effects of being what we are not.

Monday, November 30, 2009

Pointless Pointers

This is the bottom line. This is Beginingless, Endless Being-Aliveness. Feel it out, you know it already. If you’ve made it this far, then look no further. You are already That awareness that I am. Investigate what gives you the confidence to know you exist. By what means do I know? Thought, thought, thought. One at a time, who do they bother? Look in, even when the suffering is intense, just look for this suffer-er. Look, even if there’s no one to look.

Being a spiritual seeker isn’t going to lead to being an enlightened master. There are no seekers or masters, thank God. There’s no need to be different than you are, this is acceptance absolute.

As far as practices go, there’s absolutely nothing right or wrong with any of them. Deconstruction of the self that sees itself as separate is the only relevant thing here. Even that is too much, because what you are is completely free of the imagined self already. See this, and know that you can't help but BE This!

The Non-Duel

I was listening to a program by Paul Hedderman ( where he made the pun of all of these nondual perspectives clashing together into a "non-duel," where seemingly contradictory ideas and teachers oppose each other in "important" spiritual debates. This type of thing is apparently very important, but only to an imagined self. The "seeker" needs to get this stuff right. My version of nonduality has to be the correct one, and it needs to be defended against these opposing, "wrong" viewpoints.

The awareness that we are simply doesn't care what type of nonduality the imagined seeker is interested in. There aren't really different types of nonduality anyway, there isn't even anything called nonduality. You are the nondual awareness already, not the thoughts about it. See that you are already That which seems so important to think about. There is no need for duels, struggles, thought, or emotion to be what you already are, but of course all these things are allowed. See that you are the awareness right now, in which ridiculous notions in thought arise. See that these notions happen WITHIN what you are, not TO what you are. Clarify that you are the awareness itself, and put these notions to rest.

Saturday, November 28, 2009

Pointless joy

I want to be happy, I want to never feel sad or experience pain. I would like to live in a state of undifferentiated bliss, peace, and harmony with everything. I want to be in a stable, steady state. I can't have negative emotions or upheavals of any kind. I need to be the master of my experience, and have things go my way.

Enlightenment will give this to me, so I want to become enlightened. If I'm enlightened, I will live in a state of ease, grace, comfort, and pure joy and lightness where life can't get at me anymore.

This is a sort of exaggerated idea of what the seeker seems to want out of this whole thing, and we've all heard that there's no "me" to experience any of it. There is a joy about liberation, but it's pointless and without a claimer. There is joy here, but it's void of ownership. There is an ease and comfort, and a sense of ok-ness, but it isn't mind, and it won't be yours. See that there's no one to want or need, no one to do or have. See this, and freedom falls out into itself, as it always is doing anyway. The overlay of me isn't needed for life. See that you are life itself, right now, rather than a "me" with a messy, defective life.

Tuesday, November 24, 2009

Important Questions, No questioner.

There's no questioner to be asking questions. Who are you right now, that needs to have this "one last thing" resolved? Look and see, that the notion of a question-er just appears and disappears, while you just shine on as before. Spirituality can seem to be about important facts, debates, and meaningful discussion about various points. Anyone who is clear on this won't deviate from the basic truth of what we are, in the name of such fleeting notions.

How long have you been searching? Notice how the concept of time appears in what you are, as well as the concept of a search, and a seeker. Are you suffering or seeking right now? Any answer will be in thought, which is here now, and gone NOW. Have you looked and seen clearly that what you are is the changeless Being itself? What question will dismantle the questioner? Who am I, that cares to know the next answer? Which of these questions begs an answer, or are they just meant to expose the answer-er? All the while, Being Love is what you are.

Monday, November 23, 2009

A paradox for WHO?

One thing that seems to happen in the search is indulging in the mind's tendencies to try to get to a "safe side" of the nonduality coin. Charlie pointed out to me that there is a paradox in this, and that the paradox can dissolve, but never be re-solved. Really, the crux of the paradox is the notion that there's a self that needs to get to the bottom of something. It's MY important thoughts about what all this stuff is talking about, and it's ME that has to do something to get it right.

The end of seeking is not about coming to a mental interpretation and sticking with it. It's about seeing that I am THAT in which all the mental stuff happens in the first place, including the notion of being a mind-bound self. In seeing this, there is no-one to attach any parodox to, so the issue is moot. See that what you are is simple and without any need of thought whatsoever, even the important "nondual" thoughts. (An oxymoron if there ever was one!) You are singular. Thought cannot divide what you are.

Saturday, November 21, 2009

Resistance is Futile!

The Borg from Startrek were right after all. I thought I was pretty clever by resisting the simplicity of this. I thought I knew better than those that spoke from direct experience, as I hid cowering in my concepts. I was wrong. All I was good at was perpetuating needless suffering, all the while claiming that "I" was some righteous special person who was ahead of the game. Where did all this resistance happen in? Empty, blank awareness. What did the resistance accomplish? Nothing, it just came and went in awake space. Who was the resist-er? There wasn't one, just thoughts happening. Where's the resistance now? If you look, you won't even find it. There isn't even any resistance. That to is the loving awareness, pretending to fight itself. No escape, my friend, I hope "you" die before the end of this word.

Still here? Then keep looking into it, and see that what you are is deathless divinity itself.

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

"I'm me"- Fact or Fiction?

As we grow up, the concept of the self becomes seemingly more and more ingrained. Charlie Hayes summarized this idea with me by the simple loop of "I'm me, because I'm me." When he went to the root of the issue in this way, it seemed like a real threat, because of the contents of that loop that I had taken as important and real. It seemed important to see that this whole self-centred loop is a total fiction, otherwise we fall into the trap of "cherishing the illusion." As a kid, I so often wanted the stories I read to be real, but I never believed they actually were. The story of "me", on the other hand, I took to be so real and so important that it took some real honest, diligent looking to disprove it to myself.

If the whole thing is seen as a fiction right now, what's the problem in any of it? Look and see that you are the True, and the false will be seen for what it is. Everyone knows the difference between fact and fiction, but a lot of people are caught up in the make-believe of me-ing. Discern for yourself that what you are is changeless, real, and in no need of embellishments in stories. Use the deep sleep litmus test: It ain't real if it's gone in deep sleep. You are there in deep sleep, but not as any-thing. What you are in waking is the same, only now there are apparent "things" to identify with. Leave them all alone, you are the ever present behind-ness to the changing world.

Monday, November 16, 2009

"I" as opposed to what?

The mind would love to say "I am enlightened." The big prize seems so grand and noble. The only question there is for the self-proclaimed guru or enlightened master, is "who is enlightened, as opposed to what 'other?' In our game of awakening, we hear such grand stories. None of them are real, only YOU ARE. Why bother being enlightened, when what you really are is beyond all these silly concepts anyway? In saying beyond, it doesn't mean "better than." It's simply a pointing to the unmoving, unchanging awareness that we all are, in equanimity. There's no competition here, because there's nothing to compete with. No one to threaten, nothing to overcome, no victim and no perpetrator. There's no need for games or false claims. Just look as always, maybe close your eyes and stare deeply within what you've taken yourself to be, and see the unchanging-ness that you are, whether you do this exercise or not. Why not do a practice, if you're still seeking? It's better than sitting in needless suffering. Practice noticing that the idea of a practicer comes and goes in what you are- and see how much practice it takes to be what is already established and effortless. Who cares about nonduality, what you are is already beyond.

Look and see, get creative, experiment. Don't sit in suffering, just keep at it if there's still a search on. Settle for nothing less than the fullness of what you innately are, take this on board as your own thing, forget me, forget every sage that ever walked. You're the only one here, get used to your Self.

Thursday, November 12, 2009

Band-Aid Spirituality

If you're anything like me, you have probably spent time looking to make your life work, improve it, become happier, or whatever. Our spiritual ideas seem to offer this to us, and they seem so much loftier and far beyond the petty imaginings of mere mortals with thier cars, relationships, and world of instant gratification.

Looking more closely, we can see that our attempts at 'spirituality' are basically the same as our 'materialistic' attempts- I want to feel good, right now. I tried to meditate my pain away, attempted to chant myself into oblivion, and to pray my problems into solutions. I sought different masters with different ideas, pursued various philosophies, and changed my mind about all the 'important' spiritual issues over and over.

All of this was like trying to put a band-aid on a bottomless pit. Instant gratification moved into a new sort of realm, and my seeking continued. The trouble was, as always, a sort of compromising on my part, and a reluctance to get down and dirty with who I really was, and who I was really pretending to be. A short-lived meditation high comes and goes, but what I really am never has, and never will. I had to stop compromising what I really am, and stop chasing fleeting experiences, even if they are filled with bliss, spiritual fireworks, and awe from friends. Just looking right now, I see that I am the space in which things arise. The awareness behind the content, arising as the content. If you have a look, you'll see the same is true for you. Time to take off the band-aid, the blinders, and stop with the bullshit; no more seeking, just the Seeing.

Monday, November 9, 2009

Inquiry- Who would even start?

Self inquiry seems to be a popular idea, which was apparently started by Ramana Maharshi in the form of asking the question "Who am I?" The whole notion of this idea is that by asking this question, it will faciliate liberation, enlightenment, or whatever. At least, that was the notion that I had when it was suggested to ask and look into this question. The main "trap" that happened was, of course, a perversion in thought. The idea was that if I did enough self inquiry, that I would become free, or enlightened. This gave rise to a sort of superficial inquiry, where there was an assumed "I" doing an assumed inquiry, on a very mental level.

The real meat of this is of course to examine the pre-concieved notions of the "I" concept, not to give that assumed person some task to do, along a path. Who is there right now to even begin the inquiry? If we see that we are already this oneness or consciousness, then what is there to be seperate and in need of the inquiry? See that even the inquiry takes place in what you are. Look deeper into this, and expose the root of the whole production. If we see that we are already the stillness in which it all happens, then the inquiry is seen as just another passing phenomenon. Who would start the inquiry, and who would be there when it's over? All just appearance- see things for what they are, and know that you are the see-ing.

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

What's going to work?

From a young age, we're taught to try to make our lives work. When we begin to see that it's not working, maybe we stumble across someone claiming to know how to make it work better. After we try X, Y, and Z we may come across some "deep" spiritual tradition, or whatever the mind calls it. From my own experience, I thought of nonduality as the ultimate "thing" that would make my life work. I was given the pointer "Who am I?" from Charlie Hayes, and "I" figured that was the answer. The trouble was, there wasn't yet a real looking into the "I" notion that the question "Who am I?" is meant to root out.

Different teachers seem to suggest various methods, non-methods, or claim there is no method or whatever. The real question is, who is hearing these teachers, who is deliberating between what may or may not work? It's a simple matter of getting down to business, and bypassing the needless garbage of conceptual running around. Nothing's going to work, because what we are is ALREADY in perfect working order. It's just a matter of seeing that this is already the life we always wanted, except we don't get to have it. There's no "we" to have it or not. There is only THAT.

Monday, November 2, 2009

Copping out

Look, more meaningless concepts. If you're anything like me, you're likely very tired of hazily reading more words about something that already IS. A great podcast on Charlie's site with John Wheeler really emphasizes getting down to and investigating this for ourselves. It also exposes the whole trip about "there's no one to do that." If there really is no one to do that, it's game over, as John potently points out. This is just more food for thought, when what's being pointed to is the delicious buffet of life itself. Don't give up on this, if the issue isn't resolved. Just keep looking into this notion of the seperate self, and ignore all the needless conceptual jargon. This is so basic, I already regret this sentence. It's just a simple matter of seeing into this directly, right now. Where's any problematic self? Send me some evidence of a seperate self, and then we can see what we're dealing with. In the mean'time', all there is, is Oneness.

Thursday, October 29, 2009

How enlightened am "I" today?

Waking up in the morning as a 'seeker' wasn't pleasant. I had to deal with the whole enlightenment or liberation thing for another day, as well as deal with all 'my' day to day activities. Since nonduality had become my most important preoccupation, I had to make sure I had things lined up to make sure that my trek towards liberation was on course. The focus was always within this "me" idea, and my enlightenment happening or not happening, and what "I" could or should do about it. Scott Kiloby pointed this type of thing out quite nicely, how the focus always seems to be kept firmly in self centred notions, which create the idea of a search in the first place.

I set up little markers for my 'self' about where things were in terms of liberation happening or not happening. Good feelings generally meant good 'progress,' and bad feelings were indicative of losing presence, or enlightenment power, or some equally ridiculous notion, arising in thought. Of course, what I failed to really look into was the whole notion of the seperate self, it-self.

Instead of looking into the shaky platform of "me-hood", I wanted to reinforce the platform by throwing some cool ideas about nonduality on top of it, which actually made it shakier still. What I really failed to do, was get down and busy with looking into this directly. It isn't necessarily fun or pleasant to challenge these notions. Becoming enlightened sounds so much nicer than seeing through the self that would become enlightened. Unfortunately, there's no 'self' in any case, so the issue is rendered moot. If there is still a trace of a self, just look for it, instead of paying lip service to concepts in the way I did for months. Thanks for reading, you can check out my Kilologue with Scott at

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Good feelings for "me", please.

My modus operandi for most of my life was basically, "let's get good feelings for me, right now." Life was lived in a sort of unstable pendulum, where things were good if "I" felt good, and things were bad if "I" felt bad. What I didn't notice was the lack of contentment that was present even if the mind was judging something as "good." It seemed like even in the moments of peak pleasure, there was a knowing that it would end. This was true of both physical pleasure, and the much sought after "spiritual" pleasures as well. I didn't realize that what I really wanted, was not having to seek feeling better. Wanting to feel good seems to be just a natural part of conditioning, for humans and animals alike. Once this "me" notion gets going, feeling good becomes a sort of all-encompassing obsession, since the apparent seperation is experienced as quite unbearable. (At least that's how it was here!) Moments of pleasure seemed to be all that life was about, along with an insane and vague hope that one day I would "make it," and be alright forever.

Even in my field of counselling, I wanted to make myself feel better, by making others feel better. Everything came back to this sense of a seperate self, that wanted to suck something out of the situation for its own good. I felt sort of like a complex parasite, that went along looking for better food to keep itself going, even though I loathed my own existence a lot of the time.

Once the message started hitting home, and the investigation happened, I started to deconstruct the whole hedonistic attitude I'd been living under. "What's so important about feeling good?"
"Who am I that needs to feel good?"
"Who am I that feels bad?"

In getting right up close and personal with this stuff, it's seen that there are really just movements of energy, and thoughts happening. No self in the midst of the chaos, just the chaos happening in emptiness. It seemed like I had to get comfortable with being uncomfortable, and get down to the bottom of the "want-er." Just a simple and earnest looking reveals the absence of this irritating and irritable 'self' that always wanted something from the "other."

Monday, October 26, 2009

Nothing for you here

Hello, if there's someone reading this, then that someone will be disappointed. Any self that reads these words will undoubtedly be looking for something in them, a hidden meaning, something to grasp hold of, a new belief system. There are no such things here, the self reading and writing isn't even acknowledged as real. The SELF that we are, though, is being pointed to as ordinary basic awareness. It reads this before "you" are even there to monkey with the message. Love doesn't need a "you" or a "me", it does fine without us, thank you very much. All of this self-perpetuating craziness is just like an attempt to put an errupting volcano out with an ice cube. Love can be red hot and fierce, burning away all our feeble mind tricks and tired resistance patterns. The reason there's nothing for you here, is because there isn't a "you" here anyway. This isn't about being cruel or hateful, it's about love reclaiming what seems to have been obscured. In my arrogance, I thought I could win the game, beat the system. Love patiently wore me down, until I gave up what I never had anway. This isn't about you, me, or anyone else. There's nothing for you here, but there's nothing for "me" either. Love is an equal opportunity destroyer.

Sunday, October 25, 2009

Why am I me?!

My life was full of why questions, as I've discussed already. The core of this dilemma, is "why am I me, why am I seperate?" That was the question I wanted my parents to answer when I started to experience myself as an entity apart from What IS. Instead of seeing the root of it directly, I settled on asking more roundabout questions, like why is the sky blue, or why does daddy go to work. The answer I was really seeking, was why does it feel like paradise has been lost, in favour of "me being me." The concept of a seperate self seemed to become more apparent in experience, and I soon found myself in more complex versions of "why." The content doesn't matter, the root of it was always the same. Waking up in the morning sometimes had a terrible desperation about it, as if to say "Why am I still me?!" The experiential seperation was always the motivator for my actions, and all the actions were about making me feel better. The honest answer I could give anyone about why I did anything, was that "I want to feel good, and who cares about anything else?"

After meeting those who pointed clearly and directly, the whole dilemma of "why me" started to be investigated. There's no one that would benefit from the answering of another question, even the most profound spiritualized inquiry of "why is this so?" There's no 'me' to ask why, and no 'me' to obtain any benefit from the answer. Looking directly, there is simply wholeness, with none of the problems attributed to an imagined self. Of course, I also asked "why bother even looking into this?" A good answer might have been "why bother enduring needless suffering?" If there's suffering, it might as well be investigated, until the suffer-er is seen to be another dreamlike appearance. As one friend said: "Why? Because."

Saturday, October 24, 2009

How good is "your" nonduality?

The game of nonduality can become very petty and dogmatic. I compared where "I" was in my seeing with where others seemed to be, and compared the concepts about our various 'truths.' Like many different Christian sects, there seemed to be a splintering off into these different versions of the message. I tried to find the "proper" nondual platform to stand on. I disputed with others about their version of it, and tried to find a safe place for "me," in the correct version. This isn't about any of that stuff. I don't know Jesus, but I would speculate that he wouldn't have suggested that we construct a religion, let alone many religions, around what he was saying. When the words are heard from one who is "clear" on all this, the tendency is to put that one on a pedestal, and construct a set of concepts around the message they deliver. The intention, if there is one, is to deconstruct the pre-existing concepts.

Forget about nonduality. It's not even real, there's no such thing. Instead, check to see who believes in nonduality. Find that one that's so obsessed with this new "thing" called nonduality, or whatever the mind calls it. This has always been about what You and I really are, not about fancy concepts. I don't know what nonduality is, I never did. There's no need to know what this stuff is, because it doesn't mean anything anyway. It's just a matter of seeing into this for ourselves. Who am I, that needs all this crazy stuff? I carried a world of nondualisms, different teachers, points of view, and arguments with my 'self.' Who needs all that baggage? Who would choose to carry such a burden? Just look and see, no need for more jargon. Behind all this craziness the mind becomes obsessed with, I am empty awareness. Just take the "I" out of it.

Sunday, October 18, 2009

Who would choose to suffer?

Basically, the only reason I got into this nonduality thing was because I wanted to stop suffering. The things I had tried previously gave some relief from suffering: drugs, religion, therapy, and so on. Relief was experienced by an imagined entity, who seemed to need to work hard at keeping the suffering at bay. It seemed like even when these things were working well, there's was a storm cloud of personal suffering, just waiting to strike when my anesthesizing methods wore thin. Of course, what none of these things never got to the root of was the notion of a "me" who could suffer, and who seemed to be choosing to do all these various things. If I were this entity with so much power, control, and personal will, why would I choose to suffer so much, sometimes for no "external" reason? Jeff Foster speaks about how suffering IS the sufferer. I didn't want to let go of identity, so suffering seemed to be acceptable, as long as I could be a "someone." Charlie Hayes pointed out a sort of indulgence or payoff in suffering, which really struck home. The addiction to this misery is the epitome of insanity. Who would choose such a thing for him or herself? It came to the point where I would rather die than suffer anymore. Fortunately, the thing that thought it was born and could die was a total illusion, even calling it a "thing" is far too much substance. JD Hazlewood discusses the invalidity of this "I" notion, and undermines the suffering apparently generated from this conceptual spider web. Suffering is what started the apparent search, and a desire to stop suffering is what fueled it. When competent pointing was come across, the potency was always in throwing the looking back into the concepts, and revealing the absence of the suffering, defective "person." Who would choose to suffer? No one. Who's suffering right now? Check and see, if the suffer-er is found, email a detailed mug shot of it.

Saturday, October 17, 2009

Who is the authority?

As a seeker, I liked looking for people who had authority, in whatever form they showed up in. As a drug user, I liked people who knew how to live that lifestyle. As a religious person, I liked priests and holy men and women, who were serving God better than I was. In nonduality, I looked for the enlightened ones, that seemed so far beyond my petty existence. All the time, I constructed a mental wall between what I imagined as myself, and what I imagined as the other. The grand words of liberation were too much to bear, since I was quite sure I knew I was 'me', a defective and limited person who had a long way to go. When the idea of authority was looked into, it seemed like conditioned thinking was in charge of things, in determining every facet of what I called real. Investigating the authoritative claims of the mind started a revolution, and the false king was exposed for the fraud he is. Turning the consciousness upon itself, reveals that all comes from a singular source, rather than a fragmented world of conflict and confusion. Authority? Who is it, and who needs it?

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Why bother, or why not?

As a seeker, my life was filled with why bothers: "Why bother going to work, if there's no one to go to work? Why bother meditating, if there's no self to do it?" Everything was seen as a means to an end, and a sort of obligation or struggle. Even the pleasurable behaviours were embued with an addictive or striving quality, a necessity to try and feel better amidst suffering. The things enjoyed as a child were cast aside in order for "meaningful and important" things to be accomplished. Even when life was going well, by the mind's standards, there was a sort of low-grade desperation or yearning, a grim attempt to make things even better, or keep them stable.
Life was all about reasons, justifications, and struggling to make it. So much processing went into everything, to determine the possible outcomes for "me." Sponteneity took a back seat to a cold analytical self-seeking. Life was only really enjoyed when I was forgotten entirely, so my activities were about losing myself (on my own terms!) After being exposed to the message and seeing the investigation through to the end, life is a big why not. Like a giant play of possibilities, anything can happen. No-one needs to stand in the way of life with their petty concerns, things can happen as they will, because it's all a joyful meaningless dance of existence. Why not go to work, even though there's no one working. Why not meditate, even if there's no meditator? For a self, there's something to get out of writing this sentence. For no-one, there's just the joy of writing and reading this sentence.

Monday, October 12, 2009

Experiential and Real

The whole world seems to function in concepts. Ideas about religion, therapy, different self help and so on are based in different ideas of the mind. Nonduality seems to be a whole bunch of concepts as well, to be believed or not believed, argued or accepted. The actual SEEING of nonduality is experiential and real, it's what's reading these words. Before this word is read, the experience is present. It is what is there before there is someoneo who can believe or disbelieve anything. It's like the space in which these words were typed. Before I sat to type this, there was just an empty space. That space is like what we are. Blank, open, and empty, yet able to contain anything that comes upon it. It's important to point out that this nature is present and REAL in experience, rather than in concepts. You are that in which concepts and experiences happen. You are that in which personhood and the end of personhood happen. You are the end of the search, right now.
Toronto, Ontario, Canada,
feel free to contact me if there's interest in discussion/meetings

Thursday, October 8, 2009

The right way to speak about something that ain't real

During the search, I put a lot of importance on how people spoke about this "subject." I criticized certain ways of pointing, maybe using the classic advaita police mentality of "too many personal pronouns," or the opposite route of "too impersonal, not enough personality." It seemed like the mind could change gears and make anything that was presented wrong. Avoiding the potency of the aliveness became more and more difficult, and the mind appeared desperate in finding new and creative ways of discrediting the simple message being delivered. Since I believed myself to be a sort of language-based entity, I used words and concepts to defend myself, and blamed those pointing to the Changless for not letting me "get it" on my terms. The thing to recognize was that there's no correct way to speak about something that isn't real. What IS real doesn't need words, and what isn't real isn't even there without words. Right and wrong became vague concepts, and the beautiful aliveness was recognized to be a lot more juicy than my word wizardry. No ammount of language-ing satisfied my appetite. It's a lot easier to recognize reality than to quibble over concepts.

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

This is enough, but not for "me"

Basically, the "me" notion can be summarized by the idea that "This isn't it." Either there's not enough of one thing, or too much of another. What is, is somehow an obstacle for my happiness or well-being. Not even the most stubborn or self-deluded individual could deny the isness of what is. The focus is always on the imaginary "better for me" scenario, and what is currently happening is not seen in it's fullness and wonder. The trouble in trying to talk about this, is that it's just too simple. A summary of this could simply be that this is enough, but not for the "me" that wanted more. So this is fullness, but not for the seeker who felt they were lacking. There's no one here who managed to cram themselves full of what they wanted, and push away all the things they didn't. There's no-one here in any case, just fullness talking to itself. When there's suffering, the invitation is always to look back and see who it is that suffers. When it's seen that there isn't anyone there, then what is happening is more than enough. This is fulfillment, but there's no one that feels full. This is enough, because the one who was lacking wasn't real to begin with. This is it, if it's seen or not.

Saturday, October 3, 2009

Happiness, or not needing to seek it?

Along the way so to speak, there was a wanting for a constant state of happiness, or undifferentiated bliss. I wanted to feel good all the time, no questions asked! I tried to keep myself in states of emotional well being and resisted moving into what I deemed unpleasant states. It felt like I was an entity, moving towards something that I called "feeling better." I never felt good enough, or "right." I always wanted to tweak the way I felt, even when it was judged as good. When happiness arose, there was the fear that it would slip away, and an attempt to amplify it to get the most out of it while it lasted. Somtimes I felt guilty for being too happy or joyous, and then yearned to feel the joy that I thought I didn't deserve. If I said that liberation is a state of undifferentiated happiness or bliss, I would be lying. However, if I said that it is the end of trying to be happier, that would be more accurate. This feeling is fine, even if the mind would say otherwise. There's no need to try to feel better, since emotions are just part of the show anyway. What we are is far beyond the flux of happiness or unhappiness. Not needing to seek happiness isn't necessarily happiness, but it's a lot less work.

Thursday, October 1, 2009

Recognizing the Real, or feeling better for me?

Along the way, so to speak, it felt like being at a crossroads a lot of the 'time': Look deeper into myself, or act out in a selfish way to feel better temporarily. The latter was apparently chosen a lot, which was sort of like using a credit card: benefit now, suffer later. In addition, acting out selfishly to feel better created a sort of momentum, where it got easier to indulge suffering and act to abate it for a while, rather than get quiet and real with who I thought I was kidding. This sounds like a method, but it seems like Grace presented the opportunity at every moment, to either gaze within and see what's what, rather than follow the mind into the road of dead ends. In looking into this moment, the apparent power of the mind is seen for what it is: one thought, arising now. It felt like there was someone listening to the mind, an entity that was apparently enslaved to the stream of thinking and feeling. In looking for this entity, all that is found is thoughts and emotions happening in a vast emptiness. No mind to tell anything what to do, and no one to take orders. No self to need to feel better, just timeless, complete Being.

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

A response about Love

I recieved an email from someone who asked about love. This was probably the hardest thing to come to terms with, and indeed impossible for "me." The search damn well does not feel like love, or even "like." It feels like crap, most of the time. To hear people speak about unconditional love that embraces everything, including the search, is maddening. Unfortunately for me, these people were absolutely on the money. The love is always there, on the sidelines maybe, but still there. It wrote this sentence, and read it as well. It sought for itself, and found that it never left. It gave up on the inquiry, and got drunk instead. Love yells at the teacher who patiently points to Home. Love forgives the seeker, for it IS the seeker. There is nothing that it is not. This is yet another potentially frustrating message. All I can say is, "where is this one who doubts unconditional love?" Where is this seeker, who feels as though this is not the beloved? I was asked to look for this person, who feels so isolated, seperate, and unworthy of the Lover. It could not be found, and it was the lover who was looking, pretending, seeking, finding, and all the rest of it. There could only ever be That anyway, so perhaps some relaxation is in order.

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Advaita Paparazzi

During the search, I looked at those who expressed the message clearly as celebrities to be imitated. I saw my friend Charlie sharing on youtube and thought: "I wanna be just like him!" I went to a residential with Tony Parsons in Germany, and followed him around to try to absorb his enlightenment energy. It felt like being part of the advaita paparazzi, talking with others about how great this teacher was, telling tales of wonder about being with these people and trying to get a piece of their apparent "success."

When the spiritual search got started, all the previous conditioning went into it. So even when the message that "there is no one" came through, I turned that to mean, "I know there is no one, therefore I am enlightened." Those non-selves seemed so much happier than me, and overall just better, so I pretended to be like "them." I tried imitating the mannerisms of my favourite teachers, thinking about how they would react in certain situations. "How can I act enlightened in this scenario?" I sucked up to those that shared this message, trying to gain approval and encouragement on my path. "Please, Mr. Advaita Man, give me something I can call my own."
Those that were honest would have none of this crap. There were no celebrities to be made special by my paparazzi act, just honest expressions dedicated to dispelling my illusions. I thank them for their unwillingess to budge, and for not buying into my fanciful advaita stories.

Monday, September 28, 2009

Don't give up, just surrender

During the search, there were times when I just gave up. By this, I mean that I said "screw this, there's nothing I can do, I might as well..." (get drunk, mope around, kill myself) The spiritual concept of surrender, on the other hand, is a collapse of the one who could either give up, or keep going. Of course, the notion of surrender implies one who could surrender of their own volition. (And why wouldn't I have surrendered yesterday!) But rather than a volitionary thing, surrender merely points to what is, as it already is. Surrender is the seeing that what is, can't be meddled with. Giving up is being at war with what is, and trying to justify a miserable existance. The paradox of surrender is that it's the end of the one who thinks they could either choose, or not. Of course, if there's the belief in a "me", it will not want surrender, since that is the end of it. Giving up, on the other hand, is a great way to keep "me" going. Instead of listening to competent pointing, I indulged my suffering and my inability to do anything, "since there's no self to do it." Instead of looking within, I settled for moments of pleasure. Rather than earnestly inquire as was suggested, I hoped things would resolve themselves "someday." Suffering was the only honest teacher I had, when I rejected the pointers of the ones that I knew deep down were trustworthy. My suffering was directly proportional to the ammount of my own bullshit I believed. No bullshit=no suffering. Surrender is the natural state of what is, rather than a task to be undertaken. Giving up is a popular tactic of the "me-sense", and can keep the search going indefinitely.

No way out, no way in

When I started looking into this whole enlightenment business, I felt like a poor man looking for a way into the rich man's house. I saw these people speaking about liberation, and I wanted to join the club. In addition to that, I wanted OUT of my present circumstances. When I phoned my friend Charlie Hayes, he told me something like "you can't get into it, and you can't get out of it." This started to remove the idea of a special state for "me" to dwell in, with all the other enlightened people that I was sure existed. (lol, in retrospect!) It also facilitated the seeing that the state that was presently arising, (thoughts, emotions, or whatever,) was not something to get out of or be rid of. Again and again it was hammered into the brain that the trouble lies in the "me" concept, rather than not being in the correct state of consciousness or having the right circumstances present. In the search, I felt like Houdini, a sort of escape artist with all sorts of tricks up my sleeve. Everytime a pointer tried to hit home, the "me" seemingly built up a safe house for itself, and tried to lock itself in. When good times came, it tried to stay in them and keep the good times rolling. When bad times hit, it tried to run for the hills, and push everything away. It tried to get into "enlightenment" and away from "suffering" both of which were concepts that it seemingly defined for itself. Of course, to speak of this "me" as though it is an entity with self volition is erroneous. The process I described suggest a sort of enemy, the bad "me" who's running from the Truth. Actually, the 'me' is the truth in fancy clothes, parading for itself for its own enjoyment. Since there's no in, and no out, this right here is it. Houdini tried to hide, but he had locked himself up into what he was running from!

Friday, September 25, 2009

Meaninglessness- Depression or Freedom?

One day I woke up, and realized that my life was totally meaningless, and would never ammount to anything. Not surprisingly, this gave rise to a lot of depression and despair. My antidote to this was to create some meaning in my life to feel better in the short term. Unfortunately, the best meaning I found was to try to do more drugs in order to glaze over the sense of lack and limitation at the centre of my being. As was pointed out later by my first teacher Charlie Hayes, the trouble was that I had made it mean something that my life was meaningless. Furthermore, there was still a belief in "my life" as some sort of seperate thing that needed to be micro-managed and somehow dealt with properly. When distractions and sidetracking myself no longer worked, I began looking more deeply into my experience. Instead of trying to make myself feel better, I just kept staring into myself, and there was a deconstruction of the concepts that seemed so real before. Meaninglessness is actually absolute freedom. There's no longer the sense that things are going anywhere, my life is a sort of resting as what is. There's no reason I woke up today, and there's no reason for anything that gets done in the appearance of the world. What is, is enough, and it means nothing. Paradise is the end of an impossible search, which was never really happening. My life never meant anything, but life itself needs no meaning.

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

Love? That can't be it!

Growing up as a young man (apparently) I developed an aversion to the word "love," and what I thought it meant. I wanted to be tough, fearless, and self-sufficient, and in no need of something as tender and mysterious as love. When my seeking really got going, the last thing I would have thought to look for would be love, but I couldn't ignore the ache deep down, that no self-endeavour could fulfill. This turned me onto religion, and I sought the love of God, who I felt was withholding the full extent of his love for when I became worthier. The unconditional love that is pointed to here and in nonduality writings elsewhere is far simpler and far more frightening to the individual than any conception of it I had before. When this was first encountered, there was a seeing that this would be the end of "me", and everything I thought was important. There was no God to please, and no one to please him. No other to fulfill my needs, and no person here who needs fulfillment. All is this love, even the things I judged unworthy in my ignorance and arrogance. This love doesn't demand anything, nor does it bow to my every whim. It is not the clingy, watered-down version I was accustomed to, it is pure and open, like the blazing sun, yet tender as a warm breeze. It's the most cliched word in our culture, and yet we all yearn for it. I didn't find love, because I am love. There's nothing more to say about it, the lover is more obvious than the backs of my hands as they type this. I didn't think love could be it, now I don't know what love can't be!

Tuesday, September 22, 2009

Let's get my life working (please?)

Come on world, why aren't I happy? Do your job and make me feel better, already. Please, just let my life work. I'll tell you what, I'll give you this, this and this, if you make everything OK for me. No? Alright, now I'm mad, so I'm going to take those things away, until you make me whole again. Now I'm too tired and frustrated to deal with you, world, so I'm done with you. I don't need you to make things work, I can find the answer myself. I'll just shut myself away, and ignore that nagging feeling in the back of my mind. Damnit world, I said to leave me alone! Why are you still coming at me? I can't deal with you today, come back tomorrow. Who knew that the annoying, persistant world of circumstances was actually the lover in disguise? Who kept missing the pokes and jabs of the beloved, and mistaking them for some personal vendetta? Who am I, that needs to make my life work, if Life is already in perfect working order. (Despite what thoughts about "me" might say!)

So much goes into trying to make my life better, or get it working properly. With all that effort and struggle, we miss the perfect harmony that's already reading this word. I haven't missed my opportunity, I am the opportunity itself. The world doesn't have the answer, I am the world and need no answer to be who I am. There is no world coming at me, and no "me" to come at. All is seamless wonder, and I am That. No need to get life working, dont' fix what ain't broken.

Monday, September 21, 2009

What was that really important thing again?

For years, I had the sense that there was a really important thing I was forgetting. When walking out of a room, I would think I had left some important item behind, like my wallet. There was sometimes a nagging sense I had forgotten to do something important. The content of it shifted, but always I was left with a feeling that there was something vitally important that I was overlooking. When I became interested in religion and spirituality, the important thing was labelled as "God". This was broken down into things called "how to become closer to God." It became important to remember to pray, meditate, chant, and fellowship with other "believers," (of whatever doctrine was called "my truth" at the time!) It wasn't until later that it was pointed out that the important thing I was forgetting wasn't my lost wallet, or even God. It had nothing to do with words at all. It seemed like That which was forgotten was so near to me, that I kept it far away with concepts and distracting activities. That really important thing is simple Beingness, and it doesn't seem important to remember it anymore. Nothing seems important to remember, now that the forgotten has been recalled.

Friday, September 18, 2009

The Centre

I must be at the centre of this, without me, what's left? I must be in here, making it all happen. I'm the guy at the control centre, pulling the levers and turning the dials. I make things happen, it's my life, damnit! Things happen to me, so I have to be on my game to make sure those things work out. If I'm not here, all hell breaks loose, life wouldn't work too well without me. But what is the "me" anyway? Do I even know for sure what I am? How do I know that I'm at the centre?

Life's not working too well, even if I am at the centre, in control. Maybe I don't want to be the centre anymore. Can you be the centre of life for a while? Here, let's have life happen to someone else for a change. You be alive for me, maybe just for one day. Not working? Good thing there is no centre anyway. No one here, no one there. Life is just a big space, where complaining about life can happen. When the complainer is seen to be just a complaint, life doesn't need to complain about itself.

Thursday, September 17, 2009

It's THIS, not that

It's the reading of these words, not the next ones.
It isn't the end of this sentence, it's THIS word.

It's the space before these words, and the space between and after.

It's this! The mind always creates a better that, but the funny thing is, this is also that.

When will it happen?!

When listening to certain teachers, there may be an emphasis on special moments of enlightenment, complete with fireworks and deep insights. As a seeker, it seems like there is someone there who has had something special happen to them. If there is the notion suggested by the teacher that enlightenment has anything to do with the person, or any personal experience, the only advice would be to grab your wallet and walk briskly out of the room. As a seeker, I focused on certain experiences that seemed to indicate that "enlightenment was coming soon." The trouble was always the notion of time being brought into the equation. Even when practicing teachings like "Being in the Now," there was always the notion that by being in the now, I was accumulating "Presence points" towards my future enlightenment. I would try to be in the now, in order to make something happen. Time is an insidious belief, but just a belief nonetheless. When will it happen? It's happening now. When will it happen for me? It will never happen for me, because me isn't happening at all.

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

It MUST be special

When I heard people talk about the ordinariness of awakening, I didn't want to hear it. They said it was nothing special, and completely natural, and so on. I wanted my special awakened state, the glorious enlightenment for ME. I thought it would make me happy to be in a distant and far removed sort of space, and see all the poor suffering seekers, and take pity on them. I always tried to make ordinary Being into a special object. A glimpse of Being would be translated as a special milestone on my path to enlightenment. I figured the moments of clarity would add up to some big fireworks explosion, and people would turn their heads and say "I think that guy just got enlightened." Being ordinary is far easier than being a special enlightened person. I'm not sure how to be an enlightened person, but I'm sure it's quite hard work. I tried it for a while, and I could fool quite a few people. I could be enlightened for you, but I couldn't be an enlightened ME. Trying to be special, for myself, when I'm just alone. There's no one around, and yet I need to make myself into someone. Why be special? Being is enough.

What's wrong with not knowing?

In seeking, there was always something to be known. I needed to know if I was on the right track, if I had the right idea about these concepts, and what I would be like when the search was "all over." If there was the notion that I couldn't know something, I would feel very threatened. The things I knew, became belief systems. I believed in religious teachings, I believed "I'm not the doer," and I believed that I'm not here. Every time I "knew" something, life would come along to show me that I really don't know. Everything I took on board, was thrown out, since it wasn't mine to hang onto in the first place. Right now, I don't know what's happening. I never did, in fact, but my knowing created my suffering. I put my knowing against your knowing, and I knew that I had to know better! When I knew who I was, with the mind, I was always in danger of losing my precious self. I don't know who I am anymore, in the sense that I used to. There's no identity to cling to, and no identity to get rid of. I see children playing, and they don't need words to know who they are. I used to pity them, because they didn't know. Then I used to envy them, because I was tired of all my knowing. The mind "knows that it knows something," but it can never know happiness or peace. What's wrong with not knowing? The mind doesn't like it, but it never knew, anyway.

Relief for me, or relief FROM me?

In seeking, the main goal or aim is to feel relief from suffering. If I take myself to be this small, defective character then there is usually suffering, interspaced with small bits of Ok-ness or relief from suffering. The relief comes from getting something I wanted, or being free of something I didn't want. The strange thing is, that in looking deeper at these moments of being OK, the self isn't there. For a moment, the movement of self subsided, and there was a feeling of wholeness or being OK. Once the self-momentum begins again, there is an obsession with a particular experience to recreate the feeling of relief. The irony is, is that the self that wanted relief isn't actually there, and relief can only come in seeing through the false self, or in having it subside for a moment. The cycle is maintained when the self is taken to be real. A little investigation into the nature of this self reveals its ephemeral nature. The relief that is felt, doesn't belong to anyone, as there wasn't really anyone there to begin with. When the trouble maker is seen to be a ghost, the haunting is over.


Living as this assumed "me-identity" I find myself becoming addicted to things, in some form or another. These are interchangable and subject to constant fluctuation or revision, but always it is the same: More pleasure, for me, right now! Or the flipside, less pain, for me, right now! There is a desperation behind this, and a grim willingness to do whatever it takes to make myself feel better, at the expense of any other aspect of experience. (the wellbeing of others, future consequence, etc.) Of course, this experience can vary in degree or intensity, but the basic mechanism remains the same. In looking at addiction more closely, it is seen that "I am" the addiction. My own false sense of self, is an addiction unto itself. Once this primary addiction is seen through and "abstained from", all other addictions whither and die, as the addict has been found to be absent.

Fear and lack

As a "me", the general condition could be summarized as a state of fear, as I am always vulnerable and at the mercy of my larger, and seperate environment. Essentially, I could die at any moment, and so I am afraid for my very survival. As my identity becomes more complex, the fear of physical survival may also become a fear that is mental or emotional in nature- I need to protect my viewpoints, ideas, and beliefs about myself and how I see things. More subtly, there is a "feeling-sense" of myself in the body, that is taken to be a vulnerable centre, the thing to which things happen. This creates a very convincing illusion that there is an entity "in here" that has distinct and seperate properties from its environment, and is continually threatened by some "other." When I am not experiencing myself as afraid of something, I often focus on what I am missing. It feels as though there is a deep, dark, unfillable hole in the centre of myself, which I need to do something about. I attempt to take things from the outside, and put them into this hole, so that I may feel better for a moment. This sense persists, regardless of what I attempt to do about it. Upon investigating this whole mechanism or way of being, it begins to fall apart. Things are seen as they really are: thoughts moving, patterns of energy or emotions moving, and no central entity to whom they belong. Fear and lack do not apply, if there is no one home.

Saturday, September 12, 2009

It's real for ME

During the search, everything was so real. The suffering, the problems, the need for enlightenment. It was all real, because I took myself as real. If the tree is taken to be solid and real, the branches and leaves seem that way as well. When the tree itself began to die, everything else started going with it. The root of the tree was uprooted, and the whole thing began to whither away, because it wasn't there in the first place. None of it is real, in any case. It seems real for the "me" but if that concept isn't valid, what else could be? In looking for this "me" the whole conceptual structure collapses. If the one to have the problem isn't to be found, problems aren't really problematic. If the suffer-er isn't home, the suffering doesn't belong to anyone. All is resolved, whether this is seen or not. In looking deeply for this seperate entity, freedom meets itself in intimacy. The personal platform falls apart, and love explodes into Being, for no one. This is already the case, and the person is already the lover, wearing a pretty convincing costume. Whatever is seen, is it. Whoever is seeing it, is it. If there seems to be something that isn't it, what else could there be? Who would dare to claim to be other than totality? The "me" game is over, no winners or losers. No one was even playing.

Friday, September 11, 2009

I wanted it for ME

In the search, I was presented with the possibility of liberation from the false self, or ego identity. The trouble arose from the fact that who I WAS for myself, was the false self, or ego identity. It became about me, finding freedom, for myself. The movement was always a self trying to get away from its unsatisfactory life, into a better state for itself. The abiding sense was also, "I want it" and there was a desire to claim or own things, such as spiritual experiences or insights. The sense was always that there was a need to move somewhere that was better. When the notion came up that this "me" itself was the problem, and that it needed to disappear, I would then begin to start claiming my own level of dissapearance. "I have become more absent than most." I believed myself to be closer to enlightenment, because I was less of a "me".

It is very difficult to get past this idea that there is really no "me" to gain anything. The way I heard it initially was, "I will never get this, it will never happen to me, I won't find enlightenment." The message was continually pointed out that there simply was no "I" or "me" at all. It is a different paradigm entirely, to how I was viewing the whole thing. I was pointed back to the Being that was always there in the first place, before the Me-Sense even got going at all. Obviously, these words are simply not it, but the Beingness to which they point is more real than anything that could appear.

Thursday, September 10, 2009

Those that pointed to the clear and obvious

Charlie Hayes
John Wheeler
Scott Kiloby
Annette Nibley
Jeff Foster
Tony Parsons
Bob Adamson
John Greven
Stephen Wingate
Wayne Liquorman/Ramesh Belsekar
The Urban Guru Cafe
Conscious TV
Halina Pytlasinska
Mandi Solk
Eckhart Tolle
Ram Dass

The Dilemma of "Me"

Since about the age of 5, I remember experiencing myself as a limited, defective person with problems. More and more, I experienced the effects of time, and lived in a world of anticipation, dissapointment, hope, and fear. I took myself to be an entity who was limited by this body, a thinker of thoughts, a doer of deeds, and a fear-er of fears. As my ideas about who I am grew, the ways in which I dealt with my problematic identity also began to expand. I tried to get rid of myself by escaping into fantasy worlds, through relationships, and using drugs.

It seemed like there was always a problem, in one sense or another. Like the game "Whack-a-Mole," as soon as I had dealt with one problem, the next one popped up to be struggled with. Usually, the problem was projected onto a particular circumstance, person, or object. Later on, there was a realization that "I am a problem for myself." There was a seeing that who I took myself to be, was a problem for itself. This was around the time I began investigated more introspective, or spiritual methods for dealing with my dilemma.

I finally met a man called Charlie Hayes who pointed directly to the idea of a central "me" to be the cause of all this anguish. He also pointed out my true nature of Being, which is inherently free of concepts, problems, doubts, and so on. The dilemma was clearly exposed to be the "me" itself, rather than all the secondary issues I was trying to correct before. I spoke with Charlie and others like Tony Parsons, John Wheeler, John Greven, Annette Nibley, as well as a great therapist who is intersted in this as well The whole knot of "me" began to unravel and be seen for what it is, and the real nature of existance became apparent.

Wednesday, September 9, 2009

I sought, and I didn't find

For years, I sought something called enlightenment or self realization. Then I learned that there was no such thing as a person to attain such a thing. I then started seeking the end of the person I took myself to be. I tried to obliterate myself in meditation, self inquiry, and by being absorbed by spiritual teachings. I met a man named Charlie Hayes who encouraged a deep looking into the false centre. I fought tooth and nail against the simple message delivered by Charlie, Tony Parsons, John Wheeler, and many others. It seemed like there were two things happening: A false centre desperate to continue, and the unconditional lover, patiently waiting for "me" to give up.

A sort of earnestness took hold, and there was a sense of being willing to see this through to the end, even if it killed me. (And what do you know, it did!) It seemed like there was a turn around of my self, and I began to look into what I was, as I happened, moment by moment. There was a deep looking into direct experience, and an honesty and ruthless self authenticity to not let myself get away with anything. After meeting Tony Parsons in August, there was a collapse of the belief in the "me" concept as valid. I didn't find anything, because I was never real except as a character, in a dream (nightmare) called "my life." The true nature of what is revealed itself, to itself, as love, joy, peace, and stillness beyond all concepts. My email is Feel free to send a message.