You are hereForums / Non-Duality / Non Duality Riddle
Non Duality Riddle
(administer this "truth serum" about non-duality, see below)
By some strange and fortuitous circumstance you realize that you can take a break from your normal routine and be completely free for some months, maybe even longer.
You hear about a very wise person with whom you wish to visit, and when you go there and talk to him, you realize that there can be some kind of a service or helper position. He explains the terms of the work to which you agree, and he adds that initially you will not be paid anything, but then seeing your work, you will be paid accordingly. By the way, there is a monastery across the street. The monks don't talk, but they offer free meals every day, and staying on the compound is also free. You become very happy at this arrangement.
The next day you report at the agreed upon hour and he tells you that, "There is no work today, so please sit and relax. You can stand by in that room and please make mention if you have any needs. I will let you know if there is any work." So you sit down quietly. You sit there until evening but there is no call for service. On the way out you mention that "you did not give me any work today," for which the reply is, "Right, today there was no work. Please come again in the morning."
The next day you come and he says, "Let's see if there is any work for you." You are sitting in the corner for a long time with nothing to do, and eventually you ask, "Should I clean those lights?" "No, the lights were cleaned a short while ago, no need to clean them today." After another bit of time you ask, "Should I clean out that corner?" "No, that's not required now, it can be done at a later date." Each time you ask for work, there is really nothing that needs to be done. You again remain seated all day long.
In this way some days pass, and you think to ask, if while waiting is there some reading that can be helpful? You are told that it doesn't matter, if you have a book you can read and you don't need to. There are no books here.
After a couple of weeks, still with no work, you finally ask if there is a best way to wait, to stay alert, to keep in sync with the peace of the household, to breath in rhythm with the inhabitants, to quiet troubling thoughts. The answer is that, "it doesn't matter, just stand by and be comfortable. I will call you whenever needed." The month passes by in this manner, at the end of which you think to ask about your salary.
"Actually, you didn't work this entire month. So why would you be asking about salary?" Please come back tomorrow, and I will certainly call you the moment there is work to be done.
The riddle; what will you do tomorrow? Please write a very honest reply. If you find that non-duality is not as interesting as you thought, not to worry. Non-Duality is not everybody's 'cup of tea', and there are plenty of other categories to post in on this forum.
The wise person that you visited is also you, that which is your true self, and that which you are trying to gain a reflection of by visiting satsang, wise people and teachers, or a guru. The character who took the position of the volunteer is your mind. Or let it be that part of mind that knows how to improve upon this situation, and that flits around with judgments and distinctions. Let's say that your 'intuitive mind', that which breaths you and coordinates bodily functions, (it even moves you around the city and interacts with people) is in fine shape, very happy and resting, (as it always is).
- 604 reads
-
'I wonder, is it possible to reach out to more people (the ones who already seek resolution for their suffering) by changing the way the message is being brought?..'
I think about this a lot Arjen
I liked your post :)
Non-Duality Riddle
At the first reading of your suggestive riddle Richard I associated it with a kind of koan. I remembered a story of a monk who got a koan by his master. Every day he came back to the master with a new answer of course never the right one. One day he didn`t show up any more and after a while the master asked the monks where their fellow would be and they answered that he was still in his cell. When the master went to visit him the monk oppned the door and stood there silent.
Then the master bowed deeply down to the monk`s feet.
But then I read the three possible solutions you gave to the riddle and they seemed not fit to the monk story anymore.
Maybe it is a matter of hermeneutics which says that a text starts living it`s own life the moment it reaches the reader, who then interprets the text according to his understanding?
as for the availability of the message, if it was stripped of most of the clever, concepts and philosophies i think it would be, quite accesible. It is really an extremely simple message, the only thing stopping it from really being heard as soon as it is heard, is the belief that nothing is that simple. and that it will take time. It does not require time in fact it is not possible to "hear it" within the context of time.
The observer is the observed,
no experience or experiencer, just experiencing.
consciousness is and this is that, and that's that.
Identity is an invalid notion that's it
the fact of the matter is the choice of what to do is not done by what we take to be our self. what we take to be our self is the product of the "choices" which are made by life itself, or who we really are. we often recognize that there is no choser, yet if we take the the phrase i am that or i am everything or consciousness itself to be truth, rather than as a crude way of verbalizing/conceptualizing the "truth", we still feel like the choser. taking away the "list" is essentially just another way to make the organism notice it still exists even if its not making the choices. some teachers say just to love and accept or abide as what is, no matter what it is, which is to the same end. there are many ways to make the organism notice there is no operator so to speak. The fact is the show goes on without you and always has, you dont need to accept this or not because the idea of a you who could do this is invalid. i would suggest rather than saying all is one and i am that, to say all is one and this is that. all is one, identity is invalid other than for relative practical applications. saying i am the totality tends to make people attempt to marry the feeling of self/iam with the concept of everything. anyway thanks for this site Richard, amazing work your doing for us all/one.
I don't know where I saw this, but I like it. No answers to your questions. Seekers are and some are not.
This is It
And I am It
and You are It
and so is That
and He is It
and She is It
and It is It
and That is That.
I suspect that there can be 3 answers to the riddle's question.
- One, tomorrow I will be leaving the company of the wise man, even though I see that it is me. (That's my answer.)
- Two, tomorrow I am coming back, one month is nothing, I'm just enjoying.
- Three, I have lived with this man for several years now.
I suppose that there could be a Forth answer. "This story has nothing to do with non-duality, as a test it is bogus." But to my thinking such a story can evoke an unmistakeable feeling, that of an appealing situation or of an uncomfortable situation. If the reader is kind of what I have called, 'standing pat' in non-duality, but really on a concept, this feeling could be the dead give-away.
Why do I want people to admit that non-duality thought makes little difference in their life? It's because I do believe that the language of truth is at this point very limited. I am searching for 'partners' in the expansion of that vocabulary, and the vehicle to do that is this web site and this NeverNotHere.
We can be talking about no-mind, clear space, pure awareness, for ages, yet our mind is subtly reaching into our 'back pocket' of concepts and trying to fit it into some structured new and improved reality. This trick can last for decades.
I wonder if non-duality lacks the vocabulary to make itself clear to very many people, and to be grossly uninteresting to the vast majority.
I was at a conference on comparative religions tonight, and I thought that I said some very thought provoking statements. After a 'rapt' attention to what I was saying it was surprising how resilient the minds of the group were, as each of them plastered over the hole that I had created and fit it neatly into their preferred conceptual framework.
About religion. Perhaps in general (or by it´s nature) the purpose of religion is to comfort, to plaster over holes like you mentioned. I wonder if most people who are a member of a religion truly expect to find ultimate freedom in this lifetime (not just in the afterlife) with the help of their religion.
I think that the majority of people (at least 50% or so) are relative happy with the life they´re living. Sure, they suffer, but on the whole they experience enough pleasure (relaxation [stress release]) to not become a seeker. Good for them.
I believe that (at least initially, and perhaps all the time until someone is enlightened) the fuel on which a seeker lives is suffering of some sort. If that fuel just is not there (which in itself is not a bad thing of course) someone will not be pushed enough to get out of their comfort zone. Or maybe only temporary, as a nice intellectual game.
And the other half of the people. Well I guess, some find comfort in religion and some find it in spirituality, and some just dwell around, while others develop coping mechanisms like for instance black humor, etc...- and a very small percentage becomes a seeker for truth.
(From a certain point of view everyone is a ´seeker´ of course, but in this case when I say ´seeker´ I mean someone who knows [perhaps reluctantly] that the only thing that will bring ultimate relieve is true Freedom.)
I wonder, is it possible to reach out to more people (the ones who already seek resolution for their suffering) by changing the way the message is being brought?
I guess to some degree this already is being done as more and more ´regular´ westerners become awakened. I think Florian, Jeanni Zandi and so on, but also Richard C. Miller are examples of these kind of people.
As more and more teachers arise that each are so different in their own uniqueness, the way the messages is being communicated changes naturally.
And then people will feel drawn towards it, or they don´t (and that´s fine to.)
I am actually not really bothered about it.
Hy Richard,
if i understand you correctly, from an outside point of view, it looks for me like you rather are a guy for answer number three ;-)
You are constantly talking to several masters asking about there vision regarding doing or not-doing anything.
But thats only what it can look like - nothing serious.
Maybe all answers are unsatisfying because the question was misleading in the first place.
Because it presuppose a person (or mind) who can "do" or "not-do" anything at all.
I´m sure that´s not a new message for you, but you are asking for a language that is better capable of making a difference in people´s lifes.
And maybe you assume i am one of these standing pat´s like you call people who are stucking in a concept of non-dualism.
But once again - it doesn´t matter - because this point of view (like any other point of view) needs a person in the first place, to be stucked or who can speak with the right words to transfer some knowledge of self.
And that´s far too late ... the ghost is already on the balcony.
No hope for that guy at all my friend.
And no need for hope, too.
The last conclusion can only be made from seeing itself, which is as a function of "what is" anything that can be called as real.
AND ... it has no impact or influence on a Ghost or a phantasy of "what is not" (as Paul would like to say ;-)
Why should it? For whom?
So, in summary, i wrote a comment of your misleading question and therefore i am like you interested in a very clear way of speaking about the unspeakable. Why? I can´t help it - that´s what happened here (and there) brother. Would it be successfull some day? No way!
It´s not the question itself, that is misleading - it´s the feeling of a personal reader/listener who is trying to answer the question.
And for that reason an entity is created within the act of perception, which want to swim in the right direction in this ocean of duality, trying to reach the strand, imagining his lovely future resting in a sunlounger ;-)
No special question is able to avoid this identification of IT with the subject-object aspect (the feeling of i) of every perceived object.
But some communication maybe seems to point more directly to this dynamic funtioning.
So, let´s have fun together doing the impossible communication with no goal!
Best wishes and love
Andi
PS: please be kind to my art of writing ;-) english is not my native language; but german is not so bad also :-)
Greetings
Andi