15th May 2003
The Path is a lie.
For that affirmation to be true, you need to define what is not a lie.
And that definition, whatever you come up with, ...would that not be a lie?
It is perhaps the single greatest fallacy of the
spiritual journey that there is some imagined path that needs to be
trekked in order to arrive at "enlightenment".
The fallacy is not the Path.
The fallacy is there is someone to traverse the path and arrive anywhere, let alone "Enlightenment".
The Path does exist,
I thought you said it is a lie, a "greatest fallacy"
and it can be undertaken at great frustration, decades (perhaps) of
discouragement and disillusionment. There is no goal that lies outside of the relationship of you, the soul, and the Source you stem from.
And I suggest for consideration, there is no "you" to relate to any Source.
There is only the Source, pretending to be "DCV".(so to speak)
To seek, or stumble along this Path, is to look everywhere for the answer, when the answer is where you are presently at. All of the great mystics know this. They all repeat a similar claim
having found it:
Any claim, the mystic is a clown.
Not that clowns are not manifested as part of the beauty of Totality.
If you know something, you don't get it. If you feel something,
you don't get it. If you describe something, you don't get it.
All emanating descriptions, no matter from whose mouth, from whose eyes, through whose abused fingers,.........are signatures on flowing waters.
Concepts which arise and cease in the same moment.
That they are all conceptual, does not hinder their occurrence in phenomenality.
Phenomenality, itself is a concept.
"Enlightenment" isn't a thing. The word itself should be discarded for it's very outdatedness and limitation.
Discard the word.
And discard, whatever you replace it with.
There is no such thing as a singular goal named "enlightenment".
There is no such thing as a"goal", per se.
Whether material or spiritual, whether profound or profane.
The term "goal" typically connotes, a static event in time, a much desired static event in time, whose happening is the objective of a goal oriented activity, isn't it?
Whether we are talking about the arena of spirituality or material, that's the connotation, isn't it?
But there are no specific discrete static events in Life.
There is "eventing", no events.
And like flowing waters of a river, ......in the very occurrence of an event, is its ebbing, .......in the very flash of the lightening in the summer sky, is its dissappearing.
Life, whether expressing itself through a clown or through a sage, is movement, is "eventing".
There being no staticity in Life, there cannot be any goals in Life and thus no one to achieve them either.
That loaded word comes with six and a half billion varieties. There is a state of being, that once discovered, leaves you complete, filled, connected, empty ~ all things, because you are a cell of all things. It isn't words that you are acquiring. It is silence. It is inflow. It is relationship. It is internal communication.
Relationship, communication,... is not silence.
Silence, is when there is none to cognize even the silence.
Your ability to memorize other's writings, and to intellectually conceptualize them will have you no more soul aware than the kid
pumping gas out by the freeway thinking about the next titillation in his life.
However see that "rote-ing", as well as the kid burning rubber on the freeway,.......if they are occuring, both are nuances of the perfection of functioning, in the moment, as so.
Both of your heads are going to be full of things. Your's may appear more advanced, but that gas jockey is standing in the same
space as you are in context to Source. Source for both of you is here/now.
Source is definitely the here/now.
However "you" do not exist in the here/now,.. to grab the Source by its gonads.
He can come to this realization perhaps quicker, because he doesn't have the hindrance of ego's other best friend ~ intellect.
Soul awareness is always a potential within this moment. As long as you seek it, you keep pushing it yet another step ahead of you. The way to become soul aware is not to seek, but to allow. If you have arrived at the fact that Source contains All, and that there are some folks who have emerged with communication and relationship with this Source, and that they all saying the same thing as a mantra: "be still, and know", then you have no business bitching about how long it is taking you.
Do you think it is you, which bitches, anyway?
Be still and know,....yes a famous bromide.
Stillness cannot be "become".
It's not a state which is distinct, discrete, such that there is a path to it and thus can be achieved, if somehow the right path, the right Guru, the right methodlogy could be latched on.
Seeking stillness,....... is the very disturbance, that you wish to still.
And is thus a round and round the mulberry bush, ...game.
And then there is none left to "know", or "not to know".
The very issue of having to know, is no more.
And that "no more", is conceptually defined as stillness.
Since there is no one to cognize this stillness, in expressing so as above, it becomes a concept.
The mystics often took the long way home only to share the epiphany that they knew nothing in the end.
They knew nothing?
or there was none to know anything?
A whole world is created in the distinction between the two.
If their end experience was emptiness, then doesn't it seem like you are building a brick wall ahead of yourself that you will likely hit head on, by filling your emptiness with lots of words and disciplines and ontologies?
Because a dance to be the Dance of Totality, has to have the infinite colours, the myriad hues, of all nuances.
And thus you must have clowns to build brick walls and bigger clowns to show you how is it done, in order for the hoopla to be a Grand Cosmic Circus of Noumenal proportions.
What else are you DCV doing in this post?
The urging to cease to build brick walls, ........is evidently the affirmation of an entity,.... that is supposed to have the independent volition to actually cease building brick walls.
A biggie of a brick wall, if there was one.
Source sent them back to everyone to tell them that they were going the wrong way.
Suggest for consideration,.......there is nothing which is "wrong" in phenomenality.
And ergo, nothing that is "right" either.
There is, in the phenomenal sense (which itself is a conceptual conjecture), ......just the functioning in the moment, .......through appropriately conditioned manifest objects,......... the
conditioning which "fashions" the functioning, to appear as so, in the moment.
Thus the poet laments for his Beloved,......
..........spiritual seekers, believing that Truth, Enlightenment, Moksha, Awareness, Realization is an object, which can be experienced, known, obtained, achieved and this belief
"drives" the particular seeking,.........
....99% of sentient manifest objects, labeled "humans", who could not be bothered with such spiritual nanny-panny,.......(the firm conviction that only losers get into spiritual mumbo-jumbo)
......the rare few objects in whom apperception has happened, labeled by surrounding society as "sages"....
........and a whole infinite array of manifest objects, to which the issue itself is not an issue.
.........All perfectly manifested instruments, being danced in perfect rhythmn, in perfect harmony, to make up the shimmering mosaic of awesome grandeur.
Ego is incapable of hearing an idea that isn't it's own. It will lay claim to it (note how fiercely we defend our intellectual turf), even
if it knows it wasn't an original thought.
Is there any original thought, ever?
Ego never comes to the understanding that everything it knows it got from somewhere. The greatest intellectuals of our times admit that the epiphanies seem to be arrived at, not created.
Source expends a lot of production trying to communicate through the external world to a soul that is drunk in its unconsciousness. The goal of this communication, according to all of the mystic literature
handed down to us is that "hey dummy, I'm inside of you, stop looking out there!"
As if the outer is not I.