IDENTIFICATION: Something, or No thing? Part Four

[EXCERPTS from the soon-to-be-released book FROM THE ABSOLUTE TO THE NOTHINGNESS. The pointers in this book are only for the most advanced seekers. The reading of this book should follow a reading and an understanding of the pointers in FROM THE I TO THE ABSOLUTE and CONSCIOUSNESS/AWARENESS]

FROM A SITE VISITOR: No identity at all? Everybody is SOMETHING, and whatever that SOMETHING is, is our identity.

F.: In response to the pointer that

“advanced” seekers can reach a “state” of zero concepts and thereby understand that “Absolute,” “THAT,” “Brahman,” “God,” “energy,” “energy-matter,” “Consciousness,” “Awareness,” and “SOMETHING” are nothing more than man-made labels

and that

since Awareness is not even aware of awareness, then there is no reason to be “concerned” with any labels at all

some will say, “How dare you discount spirituality.” Others will ask, “How can you dare to minimize the Pure Absolute that I AM?” Some will exclaim, “How dare you close the door to immortality by suggesting that there is no eternal reward…or punshment,” or “How dare you suggest that all of my good works here will not be rewarded there.”

Even among those who claim to be “Advaitins” and who claim to have “cast aside their ideas and concepts,” many begin to cling to their newly-discovered Advaita concepts. They refuse to cast aside the thorn called “the Advaita Teachings” even after all other thorns have been removed.

The pointer has been offered that “to look to the universe and to focus on the concept of ‘SOMETHING’ prevents seeing ‘The Reality of the Emptiness,’ ‘The Reality of the Void,’ ‘The Reality of the Nothingness’.”

In fact, "the entire universe"—no different at all from "this world"—is contained in consciousness as well. Many will reject the no-concept, no duality, no identity pointers being offered in this book. Some will claim that to even discuss “emptiness” is an affirmation of consciousness (and proof that consciousness is their true identity).

Those making that claim will suggest that denying consciousness as one’s ultimate identity requires consciousness to be a true identity because the refutation itself proves that consciousness is present to make the denial. At the conceptual level, their argument is accepted.

Yet what of the “no concept” level? For a philosophy that invites seekers to find out all that they are not, an inordinate amount of energy is being expended in seeking the answer to “Who am I?” instead (even though the ones asking the question—or answering the question—are still assuming false identities: “The Spiritual Giant,” “The Seeker,” “The Religious One,” “The Advaitin,” “The Realized One,” “The Guru,” “The non-Doer,” ad infinitum).

The question ignores the simple fact that “there is no who to discuss or to find anything.” At best, only a “what” can be legitimately discussed, and it could be asked, “Why discuss even that?”

[INSERT: At the seminar this week, seekers asked such questions as the following:

“So who am I, really?” and “What is love?” and “What is permanent?” Another made the comment, “I’m sick of trying to ‘get this.’ I understand that I’m not those roles I’ve played all my life. Why is that not enough?”

The consideration was offered: "Maybe it is enough. If you were never to find the answer to questions regarding who you are, but you were able to discover everything that you are not, then the course of events in your relative existence would turn 180 degrees. If you were never to find the answer to questions regarding what love is, but you were able to discover everything that love is not but that is driving you nevertheless, then the course of events in your relative existence would turn 180 degrees.]

Persons are driven by what they are not. That Which They Are will have no effect whatsoever on the only existence that they will ever be cognizant of, namely, the relative existence. (Again, the post-manifestation Awareness has no awareness of itself.)

Maharaj predicted that only one in a million will ever Realize That Which They Are. That miniscule percentage has never impacted the planet, has never "made the world a better place," and it never will. However, were all of the non-Realized on the planet to abandon belief in all of the personas which they have assumed as identities...(continued in the book)

To order your copy of FROM THE ABSOLUTE TO THE NOTHINGNESS ($16.99+ S&H) go to http://floydhenderson.com/order.htm, complete all of the information, and in the “Special Message” box, type in FROM THE ABSOLUTE TO THE NOTHINGNESS.

Please enter the silence of contemplation. (To be continued)

MAKE YOUR OWN PACKAGE (FOR A LIMITED TIME): 10% OFF if two books are ordered at the same time; 15% OFF if three books are ordered at the same time; 20% OFF if four or more books are ordered at the same time. Visit: http://www.floydhenderson.com/

THE USE OF THE FIRST PERSON, SINGULAR, NOMINATIVE CASE (SUBJECTIVE) PRONOUN BY REALIZED ADVAITINS, Part One

FROM SITE VISITOR GINNY: Still another question, Floyd. I have trouble getting past; "I am" ...."human". The deer does not say "I am deer", But I say, or am left with, I am human and harbor feelings and emotions despite my best efforts living in this condition. How do you get around that concept?

FROM SITE VISITOR RONALD: Advaita is new to me. Can you clarify the I AM that I see discussed on a lot of the sites?

F.: Both questions dealing with the "I Am" will be addresssed, starting with Ronald's. The first person, singular, nominative case (subject) pronoun is “I.” Literally, in Latin, that is synonymous with “ego,” and “ego” is synonymous with “mask” or “false ‘I’ or “false self.” Figuratively or idiomatically, ego in some translations can point to “a consciousness of one's own identity,” but that refers to one's assigned or assumed identity/identities.

More frequently in some other translations, ego "I," is a word used to describe a person's conscious self—the false self that persons think they are aware of—as opposed to the Realized that are conscious of the True Self, the beingness, the non-beingness, and that which is even beyond the non-beingness.

As far as Advaita teaching are concerned, the goal is to be free of the “I,” yet the “I AM” is, ironically, the starting place. In all cultures, persons are programmed to follow the “I Am” with hundreds of words during a "lifetime": “I am a boy/girl”; “I am a good boy/good girl”; “I am a student”; “I am a graduate”; “I am an employee”; “I am a spouse,” "I am a seeker"; "I am a spiritual person," etc.

Any word that follows “I Am” will lead you further away from finding the answer to “Who/What Am I, Really?” Thus, a tool that can be used along the “path” to Realization is “I Am,” period. For some, it is a mantra. Follow that phrase with no word or thought. To be free of false identities, a shift away from old beliefs about who you are must happen. The phrase “I Am” is the tool that can begin that process for novices. Never follow "I Am" with any word. Fixate there only, and then the "journey" can continue.

Now, to “ginny.” First, you are wise to look at the “standard,” the deer, to test the degree to which natural living is happening in the relative existence. The deer never fails as a model for applying the principles of Nisarga Yoga:

the deer lives naturally, does not accumulate, has no identity, engages in no destructive or self-destructive behaviors, avoids conflict whenever possible, follows a minimalist lifestyle, avoids excess in all ways, might have a mate and offspring or might not, adheres strictly to the principle of non-attachment, stays aware and conscious of his surroundings rather than walking about as if asleep, etc.

As for “getting around that concept,” there is no getting around any concept. That suggests that the concept remains and that there is a “you” that is going to "move around it" and continue the seven-step “journey” to Reality. Such is not the case.

Only the abandonment of all concepts can provide freedom, including freedom from belief in the lie that "I am a human." “Human” deals with steps one and two—that is, with body and "mind" identification. You have been (and seemingly remain) more attracted to Neo-Vedanta than to Advaita or to Advaita Vedanta. You have followed that watered down, westernized "path" for years.

You have followed a "path" that encourages the accumulation of concepts rather than the abandonment of concepts, so of course you still cling to "I am a human." You have followed a "path" that has not led to Full Realization after years and years of listening to the words of the proponents of that "path."

You have done the "doingness" they recommend, but look at the facts: after all of that, they have not guided you beyond even the first two steps of a seven-step "journey" to Reality. If their teaching method happened to be working for you, the recommendation would be to continue with that method, but their course has not even moved you away from body (or "human") identification.

As for the question about "floyd's" path, the effort to try to "get around" any concepts ended when the total abandonment of concepts happened. The consciousness spoke and said to focus on the I AM until even that I AM goes. Then that nothingness set the stage for AS IF Living wherein even the consciousness is transcended and abidance as the Absolute happens.

As noted, the deer does not think it is a deer. That's a name made up and applied to it with no input from the deer at all nor any recognition by the deer of the applied label. So it was with "ginny": who told you that you are a human? You had no input at all. Why do you continue to recognize that applied label? Why do you give any credibility to people who have told you that you are "this" or "that" or anything else that they used to classifed you?

To the contrary, what do you know within? Why do you keep searching without and letting people tell you what they think they know when what you seek is already available within? Because their teachings for five years have reinforced your body-mind identification with their concepts. That is what they do. "Human." "Deer." "Guru." "Doing good." "Divine." "Special seasons." "Grace." "Holy scriptures." "Universal Mother." "Father Sky and Mother Earth." Etc., etc., etc., ad infinitum. All BS made up by people who "love" separation and "love" cataloguing and who haven't a clue about freedom from concepts or about abandonment of labeling or about guiding proteges to less and not to more or about the Oneness which is all that is Real.

Next, consider the words of Napoleon; “What is history but a fable agreed upon?” Then, apply that to what you would call “your life.” Is that not but a fable that "you" and "your society" and "your friends" and "your family" have all agreed upon?

They will say that “you were born”; that “you have lived ‘x’ number of years”; that "you did this"; that “you did that”; that "such and such was done to you." Of course, that is all claptrap...nothing more than an extended fable. There was no "you" (no do-er) to do anything. There is no "you" to do anything. Why accept such a limiting label as "human" when You Are That Which is without limit? Please enter the silence of contemplation. (To be continued)
FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION/READINGS ABOUT THIS POST:

Click WHAT HAPPENS WHEN I DIE?

Click THE ESSENCE OF THE TEACHINGS