Monday, August 14, 2006

“HOW CAN I HANDLE LOSS?” Part Three

Table of Contents

Today's Considerations
Recent Posts and Archives
Tools for Realization
Author's eBooks
Author's Paperback Books
Free eBooks
F.: The key pointer is that the concept of “loss” is based in the concept of “ownership.” The next pointer is, “WHO is there to own anything?” There is energy which is real and there are assumed personas (ego-states, false identities, images, etc.) that are not real. First, see that energy can own nothing, then see that an image can own nothing. Can a mirage in a desert own the sand or the desert or a stretch of highway or the mountains in the distance? Since "personas" and "ownership" and "loss" are merely concepts, and since all concepts are lies, WHO thinks he/she has lost something?

Because “loss” is a concept (and since concepts are illusions and since illusions are always upheld by other concepts) see the illusory concepts that support any false sense of “loss”: (1) wanting to be comfortable, (2) claiming ownership (3) desiring continued ownership, and (4) experiencing the fear of “losing comfort” or “losing ownership.” Persons, as a result of that which drives them most—fears, wants and desires—will try to cling to the co-dependent counterparts that each ego-state requires in order to sustain the illusion that some false identity is real. For example, “The Spouse” must hang onto a spouse to continue to “exist”; “The Homeowner” must hang onto a house to continue to “exist”; “The One Who Has Worked for His Possessions” must hang onto the contents of an apartment or home in order to continue to “exist.” “Loss” is perceived by persons to be so dreadful not because of what is being "lost"—such as a spouse or house or possessions—but because “self” (some false identity) is seemingly being lost along with each “thing” or co-dependent counterpart that was sustaining that ego-state. “Loss” is never about a person that someone lost or about "stuff" that someone lost. It is, instead, about the perception that it is one’s very self that is being lost. It is the sense of losing one's identity (though the identity was a lie) that drives whatever pain persons claim to feel around "loss."
Next, consider how “the desire for comfort” affects persons who feel they've lost something or someone. Perceived loss is exacerbated when one’s “comfort level” is interrupted. That which “seems” most comfortable to persons is that which is most familiar. When two social workers arrived to take an abused child away from the mother who had used cigarettes to burn the child from head to toe, the child fought with all her strength to prevent the workers from taking her out of her mother’s arms. As painful as it was to be with that mother, it was familiar, so the false sense of “comfort” that came with "familiarity" overrode even the sane drive for survival or for avoidance of those who inflict pain. Similarly with persons all across the globe, when certain roles they were playing come to an end, they hate not having that which was “familiar” and that which they thought was providing the comfort they wanted. Even when certain ego-states had been generating levels of suffering that were beyond description, people mourn when their false (but familiar) roles can no longer be played. Persons love the phony roles they play because they believe those roles define who they are; therefore, a repetition compulsion will typically drive them to find another person to play the co-dependent counterpart that is required to re-establish their illusory roles.

Next, the effects of a perceived loss are also exacerbated when one’s belief in the concept of “ownership” is challenged. Energy can own nothing, and the realized do not use possessives such as “my,” “mine,” etc. How could manifested energy own a house or have something called “my spouse”? Ownership is the stuff of ego-states. The indigenous peoples of the Americas had no word for “ownership.” The land was for all to use. It was the Europeans who brought to the Americans the Aryan notion of “owning.” If you own nothing, you can lose nothing, but you must know the difference in “the false you” and “the Real You” to reach that understanding. Please enter the silence of contemplation. [To be continued]

Recent Posts and Archives

Tools Used by Other Seekers of Realization

WATCHING an Advaita Vedanta Retreat: Watch a Downloadable computer file version of the Four-Day Advaita Retreat (Downloadable on PC only, not Apple.)

ENROLLING in the Online Advaita Classes For information, visit Information on the Advaita Classes on the Internet To enroll visit Enroll in the Advaita Internet Course

ATTENDING an Advaitin retreat with Floyd and being guided through all seven steps. For details of the retreats offered, please visit the retreat information site.

ARRANGING a one-hour session via Skype or telephone with Floyd. (Skype is a free service.) Click the button to pay and you will be contacted to arrange a date and time for the call.

Five Free eBooks

Compliments of Andy Gugar, Jr.,
the following eBooks are available without charge for you or for friends:

I.
"GOOD vs. EVIL?" or "IGNORANCE, STUPIDITY, and INSANITY?"

The content of this eBook deals with one of the most common but erroneous beliefs that the non-Realized masses cling to and which they will fight about (and even kill over), namely, that there is a planet-wide duel going on between “the forces of good and evil” in the universe.

Either (1) the ancient view is spot on: that the "ills of the planet" are rooted in evil people, in people not being religious enough or spiritual enough, and are caused solely by bad morality; or, (2) the "ills of the planet" are rooted in ignorance, stupidity and insanity and "being good" or "being moral" does not put an end to ignorance, does not eliminate stupidity, and does not treat insanity in any way.

II.
"THE VISION"

Comments regarding the free eBook entitled “THE VISION”:

“My thanks to you and Andy.” – Andrew “Mac” McMaster

“Thanks so much for the book! And, by the way, it is brilliant and the most effective pointing that you have done. It has served to help clear the remaining blockages.” – Stan Cross

“Greatly appreciate having “THE VISION” added to my Henderson resource library that is situated on the right side of my bed for easy access! Eternally grateful for what was received and what was given.” – Robert Rigby

“‘THE VISION’ is such a well-written, condensed version of the Nisarga Yoga approach to understanding and enjoying Reality that I feel it can serve as a must-read ‘meditation guide’ for all earnest seekers.” – Andy Gugar, Jr.

III.
"Sapolsky, Maharaj, and the Non-Dual Teachings"

Dr. Robert Maurice Sapolsky is an American neuroendocrinologist; a professor of biology, neuroscience, and neurosurgery at Stanford University; a researcher; an author; and a Research Associate at the National Museums of Kenya.

There is much that a non-dualist or Advaitin or Nisargan can relate to by comparing and contrasting what Sapolsky reveals about the way certain troops of baboons live in Africa with the way that humans abide all around the globe.

This 152-page eBook catalogues the common, non-dual message shared by Sapolsky and Maharaj and reveals the ways that Sapolsky’s scientific research supports the non-dual pointers offered by Maharaj.

IV.
Seeking

In “PART ONE” it will be seen that most persons on the planet are not seeking, and most will never seek, but for those who are seeking, most will face several obstacles:

In “PART TWO” of this book, it will be seen why many criticized Maharaj for “changing his message in his later talks.” It will be seen that the changes were not about changing the message per se as much as about changing his methodology as he experimented with one version of the Ultimate Medicine after another in order to try to find an effective means for addressing the Ultimate Sickness.

He tried a religious version of the Medicine, a Spiritual version of the Medicine, and finally settled on a version which addressed to Sickness at its core . . . at the mental and emotional level.

V.
"THE MOST DANGEROUS BELIEF OF ALL"

“Dangerous” is a term that can only apply during the relative existence, but of those who do commit suicide, for example, how many shoot themselves in the foot over and over until they “bleed out”? None. They shoot themselves in the head. Why? In order to try to stop the noise - to try to stop the chatter of a thousand monkeys – to stop the noisy mind which is the area that stores the ideas, notions, concepts, mind-stuff, etc. which drives them into the depths of insanity.

And what are those ideas, notions, concepts, etc. called, collectively? "Their beliefs." The irony? They are not their beliefs at all. They are the beliefs of “others” that were set in place via programming, conditioning, etc. and which persons then think are their own.

And what are those beliefs rooted in, and what reinforces those beliefs and convinces persons that they are sacred and worth fighting over and even sometimes worth dying for? Blind faith.

This 337-page eBook discusses those issues in detail.

To read any or all of the free eBooks, please double-click the "FREEBIES" link at the top of this page