Q. Some teachers (eg. Bentinho Massaro, Anadi, Adi Da Samraj) claim to have surpassed the traditional notion of enlightenment and say co-creation is the next evolutionary step…any thoughts?

Questioner: How does this relate to the stream of Spirituality that says we are co-creators of reality & thus can manifest what we wish?

What of Anadi who says he has gone beyond traditional Realizers including Nisargadatta Maharaj (who has Realized the Absolute but only in one axis), & who criticizes the “no doership” of traditional spiritual teaching as only for the mediocre masses of spiritual aspirants & that co- creatorship goes beyond the “no doer” teaching…

Bentinho Massaro, who also claims to be in never before Realization territory, also says co-creation is the evolutionary next step beyond the mere non-resistant acceptance of what is…if Anadi & Bentinho are onto something in this, what of all the Buddhist monk humorous memes of “don’t worry, nothing is in your control”, will they become passé?

Opinions?

Tom: Hi _____, in response to your first question (re co-creators, etc), what I share and traditional spirituality is not in opposition to this. In fact this notion of co-creation and what is now often called the Law of Attraction is present throughout the Vedic tradition.

Regarding your second point, there have always been those who claim to be special and advanced in some way, and the scriptures comment on these stating this is a false view which is essentially egoic and about spiritual attainment for a separate individual (even if this is an expanded notion of individuality).

There is no enlightened individual – you could say there is only enlightenment, but no separate person who is enlightened. Enlightenment itself is an illusion, a part of the dream of an ego that is trying to find security and happiness.

To put it differently, you are already That, fully, or as the scriptures state ‘Tat Tvam Asi’.

The scriptures are powerful as they are not the work of any single individual, but their truth has been verified by many people over many centuries and in different places, rather like the body of scientific knowledge.

Another way of looking into this is not to listen to me or anyone else but to allow your mind to become quiet and still and ask this question to yourself and allow your inner wisdom to give you the answer. You will see, I hope, that emphasis on a separate (albeit expanded) notion of an enlightened individual with a special super-realisation is essentially egoic and based on greed, ego-inflation, a thirst for pleasure and thirst for experience and accumulation rather than the love, peace, humility, egolessness and simplicity that shine forth from genuine teachings.

You will see, I hope, that while this kind of spirituality seems attractive, it is still within the confines of Separation, Ego and Samsara. This means suffering is still very much present and it is this suffering that motivates the thirst for better more pleasurable experiences and further fuels the ego, perpetuating it. This thirst prevents The Simple and The Ever-Present Divine from being Realised, and so also prevents suffering from ending, and it is the end of suffering that we are really looking for, not special experiences or special powers.

One traditional text that in particular goes into this topic and illustrates with many wonderful stories how this is a wrong path is the wonderful Yoga Vasistha. The Buddhist scriptures also talk about this topic too – as I said, this kind of notion of a supremely special enlightened person with a focus on their special powers (co-creation, for example) is not new, and is often very attractive to naive spiritual seekers who are innocently and earnestly just trying to find a way to end their suffering.

I should add that I am not commenting directly on the teachers you mention as I am not very familiar with them, but I am just responding to what you describe in your question.

Questioner: take a look… Google Anadi & Betinho Massaro…these aren’t at all lightweights to be dismissed…your quick criticisms of them is a bit facile… I sure they’re very familiar with your views as they are classic ones,…these guys are way beyond the Realization space normally referred by yourself & others…

In fact Adi Da Samraj commented on the classical Realizers & while in appreciation of them, explains that they are 6th stage Realizers which formerly was felt to be the ultimate Realization but that the 7th level that he demonstrated wasn’t an additional stage as a progressive evolution but an entirely new stage beyond the traditional “path of return” spoken of in the classic literature…

I would like to see you learn more about & thus engage a more profound consideration of these heavyweights, Spiritual geniuses…to have the view that there is nowhere to go from the classic descriptions is untenable…even Ken Wilber, the “Einstein of comparative spirituality” declares that new spaces of Awakening are evolving & that classic Realizers were great but certain depths just weren’t available to them. Let’s get up on this!

Tom: I find what you write very interesting…however in general this kind of stuff doesn’t really interest me to be honest – not that you or anyone else shouldn’t be interested. I was primarily interested in ending suffering, nothing more, and whilst I have actually explored lots of the other ‘fancy stuff’ too, such as psychic powers/siddhis and co-creation, etc, I don’t tend to talk about it much as it’s actually not that relevant to ending suffering in my view, which is where the focus of my sharing lies, and what I think most people are actually looking for when they are looking for stage 8 or stage 9 or stage 100 of enlightenment, etc, etc.

You state that ‘these guys are way beyond the Realisation space…etc’, but I would posit that this is faith on your part – how do you know this is true? Perhaps the entire paradigm is baloney? Are you open to this also being wrong? And you refer to ‘heavyweights’ – again, that is your view, which is fine with me.

I’m sure there is much I do not know, like there are many languages that I do not know how to speak and many things I have not experienced, but that’s ok! I don’t need a better supercharged enlightenment, so to speak, and I would suggest that neither do you! Hope that makes sense, thanks.

Questioner: I’m certainly open to being wrong…after all isn’t it far more exciting to find the truth rather than the mediocre thrill of being right?

Tom: yes, same with me 🙂 Well do keep in touch, I’d be interested in hearing from you as to how your journey is going and happy to learn from you too 🙏🙏🙏

Ramana Maharshi: Silent power

ramana maharshi

Ramana Maharshi rarely left Arunachala for over 50 years and did not seek crowds of people to teach. One time someone asked him:

Question: Why does not Bhagavan [Ramana Maharshi] go about and preach the Truth to the people at large?
Ramana Maharshi: How do you know I am not doing it?*

Another time Ramana was asked:

Question: How can silence be so powerful?
Ramana Maharshi: A realised one sends out waves of spiritual influence, which draw many people towards him. Yet he may sit in a cave and maintain complete silence. We may listen to lectures upon truth and come away with hardly any grasp of the subject, but to come into contact with a realised one, though he speaks nothing, will give much more grasp of the subject. He never needs to go out among the public. If necessary he can use others as instruments.**

❤️   ❤️

*quote taken from Maharshi’s gospel
**quote taken from Conscious Immortality

In seeing truth, love is

mountain valley light

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.

The above is an excerpt from the article Love, Happiness and Non-duality

Tom Das – the value of emotional work (recent quotes from my Facebook page)

Here are some of my recent posts from Facebook page relating to the value of emotional/psychological work (my account is http://www.facebook.com/tomdas.nd)


I think there is a relationship between self-development and realisation of freedom, although they are certainly not the same thing.

Developing a peaceful, happy and emotionally intelligent mind can aid realisation. It is also often a side effect of realisation.

Far from being new age gibberish, this is the received wisdom of most genuine traditions aiming at liberation


When I first started teaching I tended towards just direct pointing. I quickly realised there are a whole host of reasons why people were not getting it, or if they were ‘getting it’, they quickly ‘lost it’.

I began to understand the value of emotional work, of heart opening, of regular spiritual practices, of becoming more sattvic – ie. the value of the progressive path (as well as the negatives too, eg. the reinforcement of a sense of doership/ego).

Remember that consciousness/awareness, if you want to use that concept, doesn’t need any teachings. Freedom is already here, totally and completely. It is only the mind that needs teachings.

A relatively uncluttered mind in need of little emotional work may respond to direct pointing, whereas sometimes some decluttering needs to occur first.


The basic point is not to suppress/run away from/escape from emotions and feelings, but to allow them to come and go, and to understand any underlying false assumptions that may be present and fueling them.


Meet your emotions with light and love


Basically, there is usefulness and skill in feeling emotions without labels, but there is also a usefulness in labelling feelings too.

Both these skills contribute towards emotional intelligence and healing, none of which is necessarily required for Freedom to be realised, but which is useful nonetheless

If emotions are not deeply felt, there is risk of emotional bypassing.
Emotional work may need to be done either prior to or after awakening, otherwise unnecessary suffering and destructive tendencies will continue on a relative level with the body-mind in question.

We need to learn to feel without labelling feelings, so we can genuinely contact our emotional reality.

We also need to be able to accurately label our feelings and understand what we are feeling and why.

We also need to see how all feelings come and go and do not define us.

Freedom is already present.


Emotional intelligence is a useful skill for the body-mind, both prior to and following realisation of freedom.

Awareness needs no teachings, only the body-mind caught in ignorance needs these corrective teachings.


These teachings are only for those who take themselves to be a doer-entity. If that is seen through, then the teachings are unnecessary.

Having said that, emotional intelligence is a useful skill for the body-mind regardless of whether Freedom has been realised or not.


Even when the doer-entiry is seen to be non-existent, old emotional patterns of responding may still persist due to their past momentum/habit.


afraid-of-a-sensation


Tom Das – pointing at the unspeakable (recent quotes from my Facebook page)

Here are some of my recent posts from Facebook page (my account is http://www.facebook.com/tomdas.nd)


Everything you see is yourself, calling you back to yourself.


May your ever-seeking mind be engulfed and consumed by the warm smouldering embers of surrender.


Sometimes insight alone is enough. Sometimes practice is required.


Relax, let go & enjoy.
Freedom is already fully & completely present.
No need to pay too much attention to thoughts & feelings that say otherwise.


Notice all the ways you try to avoid THIS.


How can THIS be spoken of? How can THIS be taught? In the ‘final analysis’, what is there to teach?


The freedom that we are looking for is wholly verifiable in our experience right now. We do not necessarily need to have a special experience or to obtain a special knowledge for this freedom to become apparent. Nor is belief of any kind required. Stay true to what you know directly. Don’t pretend to know something you don’t and don’t take on someone else’s beliefs.

Simply quieten your mind and notice what is happening. Examine how suffering is created and the notice the myriad of beliefs that underlie it. Notice the non-existence of an entity (‘you’) that is the author of thoughts and actions. This ‘you’/author is just an imagined product of throught.

Notice fulfillment is not to be gained through either objects, accumulative knowledge or specific/certain experiences, all of which come and go. See this for yourself. Don’t take my word for it.

Dare to seek and know what is true for yourself, and stay true to your own direct experience, even if it means you are contradicting a supposed authority in the matter.

Good luck!


When I first started teaching I tended towards just direct pointing. I quickly realised there are a whole host of reasons why people were not getting it, or if they were ‘getting it’, they quickly ‘lost it’.

I began to understand the value of emotional work, of heart opening, of regular spiritual practices, of becoming more sattvic – ie. the value of the progressive path (as well as the negatives too, eg. the reinforcement of a sense of doership/ego).

Remember that consciousness/awareness, if you want to use that concept, doesn’t need any teachings. Freedom is already here, totally and completely. It is only the mind that needs teachings.

A relatively uncluttered mind in need of little emotional work may respond to direct pointing, whereas sometimes some decluttering needs to occur first.


If emotions are not deeply felt, there is risk of emotional bypassing.
Emotional work may need to be done either prior to or after awakening, otherwise unnecessary suffering and destructive tendencies will continue on a relative level with the body-mind in question.

If you observe, you can learn the apparent mechanics of suffering and awakening, which when understood makes the teachings much more potent.

This has immense value in my experience to an apparent someone who is struggling in their belief in separation.


If you have come this far then you will also realise that ‘awareness’ is just another way of saying ‘presence/appearance of objects’. Here the subject-object distinction falls away.


The idea of a subject/awareness that is aware of objects is just that – an idea or concept.

When this is seen one can no longer even talk of awareness, as that implies a subject and object, a perceiver and perceived, and this is now just seen to be an assumption, a imagined creation of throught.

There is only ‘what-is’.

Simple, direct, unspeakable.

The concepts of the teaching, such as a ‘pure awareness’, were useful tools on the journey to remove the basic ignorance, but can now also be dispensed with once their ‘job has been done’.


wp-1481063300583.jpg