You are hereSam Blight
Our first guest from Australia, Sam Blight is keen on sharing the Headless Way (http://www.headless.org), a revolutionary and direct approach to self realisation pioneered by Douglas Harding. Sam has found this Way extremely helpful in actualising the non-dual vision in his own life as well as a superbly effective means of directly sharing the "stateless state".
All attempts to share non-duality verbally are bedevilled by what wobbly and treacherous pointers words and concepts tend to be. The Headless Way provides a superb, noetic "end run" around the mire of conceptual confusion by using perceptual experiments (http://www.headless.org/experiments.htm) as direct pointers. Sam is a close friend of Headless Way teacher Richard Lang (from whom he caught the bug) and helps out with the Headless Way website as well as other Shollond Trust (http://www.headless.org/Contact/shollond.htm) publishing ventures.
He and his wife Navi are also active members of the Gurukula community (http://www.peterspearls.com.au/about-gurukula.htm) in Fremantle, Western Australia -- a loose fellowship of friends with a common interest in non-dual teachings, hosted by Peter and Pearl Sumner. Gurukula has hosted many wonderful teachers over the years, including Richard Lang, Adyashanti, Isaac Shapiro, Unmani, Nirmala and Catherine Ingram.
Sam facilitates a Headless Gathering (http://www.peterspearls.com.au/headless-way.htm) at Gurukula on the second Saturday of each month.
From a conversation with Kit Baker:
We're so used to being identified with our various roles in life, not to mention every thought and feeling that arises, it's hardly surprising that this habit continues with the only aspect of experience we don't have to identify with (because we already are That). So even when we See who we really are, the mind might say "Oh, right -- that's who I am". It's not wrong in a way, it's just good to be alert so as not to be distracted too much by the fascinating stories the mind can then start to spin, based on this nugget of "truth". The stories of identity are not a problem per se as long as there is also Seeing -- ie being aware as well of the Awake Space in which they are arising.
Some teachings give the impression that somehow all the mind's story-telling ceases forever when we see Who we really are. My experience is that the thought/feeling generator has a lot of momentum. Wanting it to stop is just another story but Seeing in Whom the thoughts and feelings are happening is tremendously liberating and transformative, while the Seeing lasts. We're then experiencing it all from a Place where nothing ever happens and nothing needs fixing, identifying or dis-identifying with.
The Experiments of the Headless Way are a perfect compliment to the wonderful words of all the great non-dualist teachers on this site. They provide a marvelous way to encounter the Awake Emptiness often invoked as the basis and source of all true spirituality.
Actually doing the Experiments (at least a couple of them) is crucial though. Just reading or hearing about them and imagining what they'de be like to perform is like going to the beach and reading a book about surfing without waxing up and getting wet. It also risks giving the thinking mind an opportunity to erect subtle barriers to really Seeing. The invitation is to use the Experiments to do a "perceptual end run" around the mind, not to provide it with more food for thought.
This site provides a dazzling array of wise teachers and Seers, but as the Buddha said: "Be a light unto yourself". In other words, become a Seer and verify for yourself what is being pointed to here.
The Experiments of the Headless Way provide a profoundly direct and simple way to do just that: http://www.headless.org/experiments.htm
Our thinking has evolved to deal with a world of apparently separate "things" and the relationships between them. Classical physics reflects this with its atoms like billiard balls and the forces pushing them around like a vast clockwork. Our own "common sense" view of the world seems to confirm this. How amazing then, that when "things" are looked into at very small scales, they start lose their "thingness" and the consciousness of the experimenter can no longer be quarantined from the experiment (if it ever could).
So the scientist's account of reality matches what we find when we cease to reference our thinking as a "guide to what's real" and encounter the suchness of our experience directly. Our personal "thingness" is then seen through as an act of creative (and functionally necessary) imagination. It's not who we really are though: the awake nothing/everything on display here at zero distance, where Seeing is Being.
Do we really need to "become" or "merge into" this? Only mistaking ourselves for some sort of high falutin', physical/mental/emotional "thing" in the first place makes the question possible.
Sam's Skype video froze, but the audio quality is good. I never asked him to try to remedy the vid, not wanting to risk the audio.