From a site visitor: “I believe that happiness comes to those who do good.”
F.: So, go “do good” and then “be happy.”
Yet you can’t, can you? If you could, you wouldn’t have been searching for something and then found this site. The contented search for nothing. You are searching for something, so you’re not content, and you’re not content because all dissatisfaction arises via the consciousness and thrives via dualities (such as your “good” with its counterpart of “bad” and your “happiness” with its counterpart of “unhappiness”). So it shall be asked:
WHO is that “I” mentioned in the opening of your e-mail? And why are you repeating what someone told you instead of tapping into the inner resource and finding what You know? Why are you visiting a non-duality site that encourages freedom from concepts and then writing about dualities and concepts? Where is any factual evidence in this relative existence that those who “do good” are always happy and those who are “do bad” are always unhappy? Cite one example of anyone who can experience happiness without also experiencing unhappiness. That’s impossible. Consciousness, on the other hand, experiences nothing. Only persons have “experiences,” and persons—trapped as they are in duality—must necessarily experience unhappiness if they experience happiness. Furthermore, when did you start believing that you can define what is “good” and what is “bad” (or, more likely, when did you start believing that whoever you’re allowing to influence you can define what is “good” and what is “bad,” especially in your totally relative existence)?
The pointer about the search for happiness is this: the desires of any ego-state will never be met since the desires are based in illusion to begin with; therefore, ego-states will constantly seem to enjoy happiness but will suffer unhappiness as well since ego-states are constantly dreaming up wants and needs and desires. The unreal is always in flux, so change is guaranteed in the relative existence. With such impermanence, where is the opportunity for constant happiness, even if you’re always “doing good”?
Too, persons believe that their happiness is dependent upon or related to those who are willing to play a counterpart to an assumed role. No role can stand alone. It always requires another persona to play a codependent part, and the objective witness knows that any “friendship” lasts only as long as a person playing the role of “friend” is perceived to be helpful or useful. When perceived usefulness ends, so does the perceived friendship. All roles require a co-dependent counterpart, so therein lies a double-bind: (1) “Dependent” and “free” cannot exist side-by-side, and since “dependent” means “not being independent,” “happiness” cannot exist either. People who are not free are never happy. (2) Those who are playing roles do not know who they are. Eventually, all who don’t know Who/What They Are will experience the misery and unhappiness that accompany the sense of being separated from “Self.”
If you think that your happiness exists because you think you’re in love, unhappiness will manifest to that same degree. Why? Because the laws of physics apply to the misconceptions that persons have about “love.” Thus, the degree of “love” will, at some point, be acted upon by an unbalanced force (egotism) and an equal degree of “hatred” can manifest. A later capacity to “hate” will always be equal to an earlier capacity to “love” in the ever-fluctuating world of dualities. A 62% divorce rate in the U.S. (and a 50% murder rate among those undergoing separations or divorce) shows that what persons are “dying to get into” they can later be willing to kill to “get out of.” Persons are always unstable, so they can love light today but only love dark tomorrow. Similarly, since persons are always misperceiving, they will take something to be light today but will see it as dark tomorrow but might see it as light again on some other day. Such is the state of persons who experience constant fluctuation and chaos, the typical condition of those who assume roles and play games and think that they are doing good and finding happiness.
And all of that flux and angst and love and hate can be experienced only by persons, by those accepting ego-states to be real, by those who take their condition of emotional intoxication to be “normal,” and therefore by those who experience instability and chaos as a result of their dualistic beliefs (including “good” and “happiness”). Since there is no one to do good or bad, there is no one to be happy or unhappy.
F.: So, go “do good” and then “be happy.”
Yet you can’t, can you? If you could, you wouldn’t have been searching for something and then found this site. The contented search for nothing. You are searching for something, so you’re not content, and you’re not content because all dissatisfaction arises via the consciousness and thrives via dualities (such as your “good” with its counterpart of “bad” and your “happiness” with its counterpart of “unhappiness”). So it shall be asked:
WHO is that “I” mentioned in the opening of your e-mail? And why are you repeating what someone told you instead of tapping into the inner resource and finding what You know? Why are you visiting a non-duality site that encourages freedom from concepts and then writing about dualities and concepts? Where is any factual evidence in this relative existence that those who “do good” are always happy and those who are “do bad” are always unhappy? Cite one example of anyone who can experience happiness without also experiencing unhappiness. That’s impossible. Consciousness, on the other hand, experiences nothing. Only persons have “experiences,” and persons—trapped as they are in duality—must necessarily experience unhappiness if they experience happiness. Furthermore, when did you start believing that you can define what is “good” and what is “bad” (or, more likely, when did you start believing that whoever you’re allowing to influence you can define what is “good” and what is “bad,” especially in your totally relative existence)?
The pointer about the search for happiness is this: the desires of any ego-state will never be met since the desires are based in illusion to begin with; therefore, ego-states will constantly seem to enjoy happiness but will suffer unhappiness as well since ego-states are constantly dreaming up wants and needs and desires. The unreal is always in flux, so change is guaranteed in the relative existence. With such impermanence, where is the opportunity for constant happiness, even if you’re always “doing good”?
Too, persons believe that their happiness is dependent upon or related to those who are willing to play a counterpart to an assumed role. No role can stand alone. It always requires another persona to play a codependent part, and the objective witness knows that any “friendship” lasts only as long as a person playing the role of “friend” is perceived to be helpful or useful. When perceived usefulness ends, so does the perceived friendship. All roles require a co-dependent counterpart, so therein lies a double-bind: (1) “Dependent” and “free” cannot exist side-by-side, and since “dependent” means “not being independent,” “happiness” cannot exist either. People who are not free are never happy. (2) Those who are playing roles do not know who they are. Eventually, all who don’t know Who/What They Are will experience the misery and unhappiness that accompany the sense of being separated from “Self.”
If you think that your happiness exists because you think you’re in love, unhappiness will manifest to that same degree. Why? Because the laws of physics apply to the misconceptions that persons have about “love.” Thus, the degree of “love” will, at some point, be acted upon by an unbalanced force (egotism) and an equal degree of “hatred” can manifest. A later capacity to “hate” will always be equal to an earlier capacity to “love” in the ever-fluctuating world of dualities. A 62% divorce rate in the U.S. (and a 50% murder rate among those undergoing separations or divorce) shows that what persons are “dying to get into” they can later be willing to kill to “get out of.” Persons are always unstable, so they can love light today but only love dark tomorrow. Similarly, since persons are always misperceiving, they will take something to be light today but will see it as dark tomorrow but might see it as light again on some other day. Such is the state of persons who experience constant fluctuation and chaos, the typical condition of those who assume roles and play games and think that they are doing good and finding happiness.
And all of that flux and angst and love and hate can be experienced only by persons, by those accepting ego-states to be real, by those who take their condition of emotional intoxication to be “normal,” and therefore by those who experience instability and chaos as a result of their dualistic beliefs (including “good” and “happiness”). Since there is no one to do good or bad, there is no one to be happy or unhappy.
Finally, a rash of e-mails recently, coming from those assuming religious and spiritual roles, are containing comments and pontifications instead of questions, reinforcing past pointers on this site. It has been shown that when persons fixate in one of those roles, then they believe that their most recently-acquired beliefs are the right ones, that only they have found "the final truth," and that all people should adopt their beliefs. Believing they have found all the answers, they stop the search for truth. Then, they want to try to control others and influence them to adopt their beliefs and behaviors and thinking patterns and ideas and attitudes. In reality, it is beliefs and behaviors and thinking patterns and ideas and attitudes that must be discarded in order for seekers to move beyond that level and then Realize Fully. Please enter the silence of contemplation.
[TOMORROW: “Came across your site--read some old sections. In April, you say masturbation is good on what is supposed to be a spiritual website. After enlightenment, we reach new heights of spirituality…we live a moral life I’m abstinence…if your enlightened, you wouldn’t have any body identication and be a slave to masturbation and body activities your still practicing. Maybe your not as pure as you try to make people think.”]
[TOMORROW: “Came across your site--read some old sections. In April, you say masturbation is good on what is supposed to be a spiritual website. After enlightenment, we reach new heights of spirituality…we live a moral life I’m abstinence…if your enlightened, you wouldn’t have any body identication and be a slave to masturbation and body activities your still practicing. Maybe your not as pure as you try to make people think.”]
