“Why is it that, Master Kaccana, that ascetics fight with ascetics?”
“It is, brahmins, because of attachment to views, adherence to views , fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.”
Anguttara Nikaya
Today’s spiritual scene is in many ways the same as it has always been: while some people wake up to things as they are and go beyond words and scripture, others stay fixed in their views, cling to their scriptures and concepts, and in doing so remain stuck in suffering and samsara.
So, why are so many spiritual people arguing with each other? Master Kaccana was one of the Buddha’s main disciples and was said to be the most skilled in espousing the dhamma (the teaching). He says it simply: people are wedded to their concepts, their views, their scriptures and their ideas, and that is why they fight with each other.
The true dhamma cannot be spoken. The true teacher knows their words are ultimately untrue and that words are merely conceptual pointers, indicators, and not descriptions of what is. The true teacher is not wedded to a particular teaching method, or a particular form of words, and naturally adapts the teaching to the situation at hand. A single word, a prescription for practice, a gesture, a glance, a lecture: the teaching comes to us in many forms.
If we truly listen, the living teacher constantly teaches the living teaching. The teaching is inseparable from our hearts and the life we find ourselves living: it is none other than daily life.
In my recent interview on Buddha at the Gas Pump, Rick asked me about Turiya, the 4th state of consciousness.
According to Vedanta, Turiya is that state of consciousness which lies beyond the 3 states of consciousness that we all ordinarily experience, namely the waking state, the dream state and the deep sleep state. In experiencing Turiya directly there is the possibility of liberation.
You can listen to our exchange on the video below. After the interview I decided to see what Ramana Maharshi had said about Turiya and was relieved to find that he agreed with me 🙂 😛 (at least on this occasion – he probably agrees with Rick on other occasions!)
Here is what Ramana had to say about Turiya:
From Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, Talk 353:
Questioner: What is turiya?
Ramana Maharshi: There are three states only, the waking, dream and sleep. Turiya is not a fourth one; it is what underlies these three. But people do not readily understand it. Therefore it is said that this is the fourth state and the only Reality. In fact it is not apart from anything, for it forms the substratum of all happenings; it is the only Truth; it is your very Being. The three states appear as fleeting phenomena on it and then sink into it alone. Therefore they are unreal.
This view is also the traditional view of Turiya in vendanta as expounded by Gaupada in his Mandukya Karika.
So does this mean that Rick’s view is wrong? I don’t think so. His view is also a useful view, but in a slightly different way. Thinking of Turiya as a 4th state distinct from the others can also be a beneficial teaching when used in the teachings of a skilled teacher with a genuine realisation. Rick’s notion of entering a (nirvikalpa) samadhi and this having a purifying effect on the waking state is also a valid way of approaching this realisation/freedom.
It’s important to note that these teachings are ways of describing our experience. They are concepts, and form conceptual ways of carving up our experience with the intended effect of leading the seeker to liberation. They are not intended to be based in physiology or ‘science’ in my view.
The point of these specific teachings/concepts is to point out the awareness-consciousness that does not come and go, regardless of what is happening. Whether or not they are successful in achieving that end is the test of how good the teaching is, not how well it is based in human physiology or scientific observations. It is therefore impossible to say one teaching is better than the other – the teaching that works is the ‘best’ teaching for that situation (this is the notion of expedient means in Buddhism)
Eventually, when you realise that consciousness is the essence of you, and remain as that, unidentified as body or mind, the illusory sense of doership is eventually destroyed. With it, the dualistic notion of a consciousness that is in some way distinct, underlying and permanent is also destroyed. What you are left with is what is already here: this, nameless, beyond words (and inclusive of words).
For a more detailed discussion of Turiya please see here:
The following is Chapter 27 from Commentaries on Living: First Series by Jiddu Krishnamurti
The Radio and Music
It is obvious that radio music is a marvellous escape. Next door, they kept the thing going all day long and far into the night. The father went off to his office fairly early. The mother and daughter worked in the house or in the garden; and when they worked in the garden the radio blared louder. Apparently the son also enjoyed the music and the commercials, for when he was at home the radio went on just the same. By means of the radio one can listen endlessly to every kind of music, from the classical to the very latest; one can hear mystery plays, news, and all the things that are constantly being broadcast. There need be no conversation, no exchange of thought, for the radio does almost everything for you. The radio, they say, helps students to study; and there is more milk if at milking time the cows have music.
There need be no conversation, no exchange of thought, for the radio does almost everything for you.
The odd part about all this is that the radio seems to alter so little the course of life. It may make some things a little more convenient; we may have global news more quickly and hear murders described most vividly; but information is not going to make us intelligent. The thin layer of information about the horrors of atomic bombing, about international alliances, research into chlorophyll, and so on, does not seem to make any fundamental difference in our lives. We are as war-minded as ever, we hate some other group of people, we despise this political leader and support that, we are duped by organized religions, we are nationalistic, and our miseries continue; and we are intent on escapes, the more respectable and organized the better. To escape collectively is the highest form of security. In facing what is, we can do something about it; but to take flight from what is inevitably makes us stupid and dull, slaves to sensation and confusion.
…we may have global news more quickly and hear murders described most vividly; but information is not going to make us intelligent.
Does not music offer us, in a very subtle way, a happy release from what is? Good music takes us away from ourselves, from our daily sorrows, pettiness and anxieties, it makes us forget; or it gives us strength to face life, it inspires, invigorates and pacifies us. It becomes a necessity in either case, whether as a means of forgetting ourselves or as a source of inspiration. Dependence on beauty and avoidance of the ugly is an escape which becomes a torturing issue when our escape is cut off. When beauty becomes necessary to our well-being, then experiencing ceases and sensation begins. The moment of experiencing is totally different from the pursuit of sensation. In experiencing there is no awareness of the experiencer and his sensations. When experiencing comes to an end, then begin the sensations of the experiencer; and it is these sensations that the experiencer demands and pursues. When sensations become a necessity, then music, the river, the painting are only a means to further sensation. Sensations become all-dominant, and not experiencing. The longing to repeat an experience is the demand for sensation; and while sensations can be repeated, experiencing cannot.
The moment of experiencing is totally different from the pursuit of sensation.
It is the desire for sensation that makes us cling to music, possess beauty. Dependence on outward line and form only indicates the emptiness of our own being, which we fill with music, with art, with deliberate silence. It is because this unvarying emptiness is filled or covered over with sensations that there is the everlasting fear of what is, of what we are. Sensations have a beginning and an end, they can be repeated and expanded; but experiencing is not within the limits of time. What is essential is experiencing, which is denied in the pursuit of sensation. Sensations are limited, personal, they cause conflict and misery; but experiencing, which is wholly different from the repetition of an experience, is without continuity. Only in experiencing is there renewal, transformation.
Sensations have a beginning and an end, they can be repeated and expanded; but experiencing is not within the limits of time. What is essential is experiencing, which is denied in the pursuit of sensation.
When the ego is seen through, all there is is what is. This is actually love, this is the real love.
Q. What is the relationship between love and non-duality?
A. Non-duality, as you call it, when it is fully seen, has nothing to do with trying to become more loving. But when the intrinsic-Freedom-that-already-exists is recognised, there is a tendency to become more loving, more open. Not that that actually matters. Openness and love are just what tend to happen when the illusion of a separate doer-entity is seen to be illusory. They are side effects.
Q. If in seeing this Freedom one tends to become more loving, then why do you say non-duality has nothing to do with being more loving?
A. This is about what is true, not what you want to be true. You may want to be more loving, more ethical or more whatever, but so-called ‘non-duality’ is about seeing what already is, right now. It is the ego or person that wants to become more loving, more ethical, more radiant, more popular, and so on. So the desire to be more loving is actually a subtle form of ego. ‘Non-duality’, or whatever you want to call it, is not about a continuation of the ego, but seeing that this ego is a fiction, that the sense of doership is an imagined belief without any evidence to underpin it.
It is the ego or person that wants to become more loving, more ethical, more radiant, more popular, and so on.
Who cares about love? Who cares about being ethical? It’s the ego of course. The ego cares, the doer-entity cares and it is the ego that wants to improve itself and therefore perpetuate itself. Ask yourself, ‘what is this entity that cares about being loving, being ethical?’. If you really are interested and you look, then it can become obvious that there is no ego there, it was all just a belief all along, a false belief. The story of doership is false.
Then all there is is what’s happening. Nobody doing anything, just what’s happening. I call this Freedom, but it doesn’t really have a name. It is simply what’s happening. It is simply the way things actually are, not they way you want things to be based on your projection which is in turn based on beliefs and concepts. It is the simplicity of life stripped clean of false notions and narratives, in which false notions are seen through as they arise.
I call this Freedom, but it doesn’t really have a name. It is simply what’s happening.
In Freedom, you don’t care about love, or any other projected ideal. You don’t try to be more ethical. Maybe you are more loving, maybe you are not. That’s why this automatically tends towards love – because there is no motive, because the ego is not at play. It may go against intuition but love does not care about love. Love just is when things are seen for what they are. To put it more poetically, in seeing truth (of no-self), love is.
In seeing truth, love is
Q. What about happiness?
A. Again, who cares about happiness? It’s the ego! The ego cares, and the ego is a fiction. Relax your mind and look for the ego – where is it? It is just empty thoughts, there is no entity there! But you have to really want to know the truth to see this: by that I mean that you have to be willing to drop all your ideas and concepts about yourself and your life. Then you really have to actually look – at least most people do. Some people just see this spontaneously, but all you have to do is notice what is already true.
When this is seen, that there is no ‘self-entity’, the neurotic drive for happiness naturally dissipates, and then Joy naturally arises. Why? Because the (neurotic) drive for happiness is actually a form of suffering. When there is no concern for happiness, then Joy naturally tends to manifest. A feeling of wellbeing may not always be there, but who cares? That’s just the way things are. No feeling-state or mind-state is permanent. Everything changes. Nothing lasts forever. Who cares? That’s the freedom.
Investigate the present reality instead of chasing a future projection.
When you are trying to get somewhere, you are chasing a projected ideal, something conceptual, not something actual. Instead of chasing the conceptual, why not remain with the actual, with what is actually happening now? Investigate the present reality instead of chasing a future projection. When the ego is seen through, all there is is what is. This is actually love, this is the real love. The lack of a centre, the lack of a doer, that’s what love really is. It’s not an emotion at all. It’s not necessarily even feeling loving, although that may happen when it’s appropriate.
When the ego is seen through, all there is is what is. This is actually love, this is the real love.
Without the ego at play, all there is is natural functioning. Emotions then act accordingly when they are required. It’s not healthy to be happy all the time, nor is it likely to be physiologically possible. Our varied emotions, fears and mental states are there to guide us as we navigate the world.
So, when the ego is seen through, this is what we could call love, although love is just a label for this as it actually is. This ‘love’ is not what most people mean by ‘love’. It is not an emotion, it includes everything that is happening, and it is not dependent on what is happening. It is un-conditional you could say. It is always here because it is none other that what is here. It is universal motion seeing through illusion. It is what is recognising what actually is.
If you say “spiritual enlightenment does not exist”,
You have denied yourself, and anyone who believes you, a route to end suffering:
“Suffering can end”, thus the wise ones have proclaimed.
If you say “you can be enlightened”, “your suffering can end”
Then by saying ‘you’, you are perpetuating the false concept of self.
In the mind made clear by practice,
(naturally resting,
empty of thought,
self-shining and luminous,
effortlessly present)
a phrase uttered can reveal the transcendent,
as can a gesture, glance, object or experience. Continue reading →
So I’ve been reading ‘Absorption in the Treasury of Light’ by Ejo (1198-1290) and to put it simply, it has blown my mind. The way Ejo expresses both the so-called ‘path’ and ‘state’ of realisation is astounding. I love how he speaks from his direct experience but also draws from scripture. His interspersed scriptural excepts sometimes seem to contradict each other, but the way he juxtaposes them, and in the context of his writing…well the combination results in a potent pointer to the Ultimate. Continue reading →
A few years ago I read some of the earliest Buddhist texts that we currently know of and was shocked at how different they are to what is generally taught as being Buddhism today. Even Theravada Buddhism, which has the claim of being the oldest surviving school of Buddhism, often presents its teachings in very different ways. These early teachings were direct, forceful and devoid of complexities and lengthy philosophising. They reminded me much more of the pithy statements of Zen and Dzogchen Buddhism, which is surprising as these Buddhist schools are chronologically much later developments that occurred roughly 1000 years after the Buddha’s time. Continue reading →
Being,
Tom Das 