MAHARAJ: “I Talk to You from the Perspective of the Universal Consciousness,” Part Forty-One

Today's Considerations

If the case is that billions of humans require the different perspective which Maharaj spoke of regularly - and which much has been written about here in books for twenty-seven years and which much has been written about on this site for nearly eleven years - then why did Maharaj advise his visitors not to share outside the loft any of non-duality's challenges to the belief systems being clung to by the masses? Why would that same advice eventually be shared here after certain experiences showed first-hand the wisdom of that counsel?

As noted last week, the masses are not the least bit interested in non-duality or truth or a different perspective because all of that would directly contradict and debunk the most cherished, but totally false, beliefs which they cling to because of their blind faith; which they have never questioned at all; which they do not want to hear you or me question at all; and which are so firmly and protectively-held among the masses that if you do question those beliefs, they will either walk away from you or charge head-long at you.  

As shared before on this site, a woman in a “spirituality-based recovery group” near St. Louis angrily questioned the point that “if all is energy-matter, and if energy-matter cannot be created or destroyed, then there cannot possibly have ever been a creator of anything, much less a 'Creator'.” Regular visitors will recall she yelled: “Floyd, millions of people cannot be wrong about there being a god!” The reply: “Agreed. Millions of people have not been wrong. Actually, billions and trillions of people have been wrong.” Some profanities . . . then, end of discussion . . . then, end of contact.

See from that exchange what happens so frequently: there is no better example of a commonly-held belief which – if questioned – has the ability to offend billions of persons than the questioning of their belief in the God of Abraham (which became the god of all Jews and the same god of all Christians and the same god of all Muslims all over the planet). That god-shared-in-common has not deterred them in the least from killing each other for millennia.

When Maharaj used the word "god" in the talks in I AM THAT, he was on the “approved-wise-guru list” of many seekers. When he began to report that God is a concept dreamed up by humans who want someone to give them the things they want and that people should stop reading his earlier talks that referenced "god" or "spirituality," then his name was removed from many of those “approved-wise-guru” lists.

As always, examples - as is the case with those above - are offered here to illustrate pointers. Many more of the experiences here over the years are available which confirmed Maharaj’s wisdom about avoiding public disclosures regarding persons’ nonsensical beliefs about the god of Abraham. Such experiences are abundant regarding the effects of trying earlier to broadcast widely such examples of nonsense, but that happens no more.

(For example, a high-traffic day on this site might involve 450 people and a typical-traffic day much less, so there is no “wide broadcasting” here. Yes, books with the message have been selling for twenty-seven years, but none of those ever made any “best seller” list, and so many other more current examples of the types of continuing repercussions are available.)

As an older example, Christ was killed for several reasons, mainly political but also religious, after he began sharing non-dual pointers in public, but here are some more current examples:

Consider Irish comedian Stephen Fry whose words caused quite a stir last year when he denounced God as "utterly evil, capricious and monstrous, if he were to exist."

Instances in which Fry challenged the very notion of a deity are regularly attacked from pulpits all across England, Ireland, Wales and Scotland as well as on Irish and British religious affairs programs on Sunday night. Fry, on the RTE television show “The Meaning of Life” was said to have “caused a storm,” and when an excerpt was posted on YouTube even before the show was broadcast, it drew two million hits even before the talk reached the airways. (Much ado about nothing, huh?)

On the short clip, Fry was asked by veteran Irish TV presenter Gay Byrne what he would say to God if he died and had to confront him. In his imaginary conversation with God, Fry says he would tell him: “How dare you create a world in which there is such misery? It’s utterly, utterly evil. Why should I respect a capricious, mean-minded, stupid God who creates a world which is so full of injustice and pain?”

Pressed by Byrne over how he would react if he were locked outside the pearly gates, Fry says: “I would say: 'Bone cancer in children? What’s that about?'”

Fry said, “If this universe was created by God, he is quite clearly a maniac. Totally selfish. We have to spend our life on our knees thanking him?! What kind of god would do that?”

On how to explain the wonders of the world, Fry said, “Yes, the world is very splendid but it also has in it insects whose whole life cycle is to burrow into the eyes of children and make them blind. They eat outwards from the eyes. Why? Why did you do that to us? You could easily have made a creation in which that didn’t exist. It is simply not acceptable. It’s perfectly apparent that he is monstrous. Utterly monstrous and deserves no respect whatsoever. The moment you banish him, life becomes simpler, purer, cleaner, more worth living, in my opinion.”

The verbal attacks on Fry’s are relentless. But as with modern-day Christian soldiers and as with ISIS and other sectarian Muslims and as with the Jewish forces of Netanyahu, the assaults are not always limited to the verbal.

A few years ago, Australian comedian Jim Jefferies was attacked on stage when he shared some observations about god which paralleled those offered later by Fry.

[As so common for so many millennia, the message has been, "In the name of the God of Peace and in the name of His Son (or His Prophet) who is the Prince of Peace, I smote you!"]

When Steven James Baldwin’s anti-religion routine bombed and led to his being banned from a comedy club, he returned and attacked Comedian Dylan Avila on stage with an aluminum baseball bat, hospitalizing Avila with two skull fractures. Pro-religion. Anti-religion. Just more of the insanity rooted in dualistic beliefs, but certainly also the greatest source of the destroyer of peace.

The pointers from the examples of what happened with those comedians illustrate the fact that fanatics of any kind are far too serious and have no sense of humor; yet the "serious" fact is that the religious wars which began thousands of years ago and which continue to this very day certainly involve differing religious beliefs (but may, admittedly, also involve humanity’s addiction to control and power just about as much).

Here, because peace now trumps fighting and arguing and desiring control and wanting power, pointers are offered only to seekers who are interested but never anymore to non-seekers who are not interested because they believe that their dogma is providing them with every answer to any question asked. 

If one comes this way and asks, of course there is no avoidance of offering direct answers regarding any dreamed up concepts, including the religious and spiritual ones which generate the highest levels of fanaticism and which are most responsible for infecting with emotional intoxication the 97% among the masses who claim to have an affiliation with one organized religion or another.

However, charges about "Floyd" being “an atheist” or “an agnostic” are dismissed as just more assigning of false identifications. There is no word ever used here after the term “I am” which would suggest that there is any assumed identity at all, including "I am an atheist" or "I am an agnostic." That pointer is made clear in the book below entitled FREEDOM FROM BELIEFS (Believers, Non-Believers, and “No Belief-ers”), this is offered for consideration:

In the absence of blocked consciousness, there could not be any "Believer" vs. "Non-Believer" duality, and there could be no notion among any "Believer" that she or he is better than and smarter than and holier than any "Non-Believer." Furthermore, there could be no impressions and no misperceived memories and no "mind" and no attachment to "doing things a certain way because they have always been done that way"; there could be no remaining learned ignorance and there could be is no mental intoxication or emotional intoxication or spiritual intoxication. There could be nothing unnatural and there could be nothing considered to be "supernatural."
 
There could be no assumed personas so there could be neither ego nor egotism. There would be no thinking, so there would most assuredly be no magical thinking of the type that assigns "supernatural cause" to naturally-occurring events. There could be no attachment to chaos or to trying to control.

Thus, here, there is no “Believer" and there is no "Non-Believer." The closest that people needing to put it into words could come when describing the condition that Maharaj finally reached and which was finally reached here would be to point to it as “a ‘No-Belief-er’ or ‘no beliefs’ condition,” just like Maharaj’s eventual “no-mind” and “zero concepts” condition.

That said, consider: seven steps are shared here, laying out a "path" by which one can shift from identification with the body to understanding the Absolute and to understanding the functioning of the totality. On that "path" are seven steps which Maharaj did not enumerate but which he did reference as steps on the "path" by which a seeker can follow a “going back the same way you came in“ process for reaching the understanding which comes after finally being freed of all of the nonsense being clung to as a result of nonsensical programming, conditioning, domestication, acculturation, brainwashing and indoctrination.

Next, consider: there is a time and place for the playing of religious and / or spiritual roles, that being the third of seven steps. The time should be short, but seldom is. The place is that third step of seven steps, but it is a place for passing through, not for abiding in. (Consider the ancient word which is now translated in English as “the wilderness” which originally referred to "a place to be passed through.” Yet 97% of the 7+ billion humans currently on the planet do abide in the wilderness . . . in the darkness of dreamed up, nonsensical concepts about things deemed to be "supernatural").

Now even to most seekers, that no-mind, no-belief condition sounds like something that would be impossible for them to reach, yet it is not impossible; in fact, 

1. the different perspectives about "a God" (as expressed by comedians Fry and Jefferies and by others who have been labeled “atheists” such as the Advaitin Shakespeare and Marlowe and Milton and Shelley and Shaw and Vidal and Hitchens and Dawkins and Hawkings and Randi, et. al.) 

all combine with 

2. the declining percentages of those who currently believe in a Creator-Sustainer-Destroyer god or gods and goddesses 

and then confirm the fact that some changes in humankind's fixed beliefs are happening because changes in perspectives are happening first.

And if those – and all beliefs – were to continue to be burned away by the hot light of awareness, then one might conclude that more peace (not less) will necessarily have to result. Why?

Because the facts would show that more people have been killed during the last 5,000 years in the name of religion and in the name one god or another than by any other single source except for natural causes. Were persons to tally the numbers and witness the total honestly and objectively, then their beliefs about what can bring peace vs. what is most likely to destroy any chance for peace would have to change.

Will anyone alive today be around long enough to witness that? No. With 97% holding firmly to their concept-based perspectives, the odds are overwhelming in favor of the continuance of the symptoms of the Ultimate Sickness (identified by Maharaj as “ignorance, stupidity, and insanity”). 

But for those that do reach the different perspective discussed here, the peace (which has been deceitfully promised for thousands of years by those aligned with the very institution which has been the most responsible for preventing peace) might well manifest for some.

 
To be continued.

Please enter into the silence of contemplation.

[NOTE: The four most recent posts follow. You may access all of the posts in this series and in the previous series and several thousand other posts as well by clicking on the links in the "Recent Posts and Archives" section.]