Friday, 11 June 2010

Solidity Is Boundless Space

There is no referent of your experience.

There is no back wall, no solid entity, no nugget of you-ness, which experience 'hits'.

Every sensation that appears solid is actually pure space. Choose a sensation, the one which seems to be most intimately associated with you and you will soon discover that there is nothing solid or tangible about it. All of your sensations are in flux and that flux is itself empty. Really, there is nothing happening.

Experience happens to no-body and the only referent is empty space.

10 comments:

tom sullivan said...

"Who" is there to "refer to" "empty space?" And "when" could this "occur?"

Mike said...

Hi Tom,

I really appreciate your total uncompromising directness here. Its blade cuts through to the space behind any ideas or concepts.

It has actually provoked in me a concern about the whole nature of this blog. So we'll see what happens with that...

Ultimately there is only This. It's as direct as I can get to it. But, i'm also a writer and I love words. I also enjoy the attempt to translate 'insights' or 'pointers' into an easy communication. Not that this succeeds.

So yes, I agree with you, Who? When? How? But I would say that your question comes from a clear understanding whereas this post is aimed at basic misconceptions.

Directness is just another (more laconic) way of answering the question for someone. You tell them there is no-one. I agree with this, but also enjoy the expansion of this answer. Even if you tell someone 'This is it' you then need to start explaining WHY 'This is it'.

The answer needs to MEAN something to the seeker for it to have an effect. To say 'This is it' is not a magical formula like 'Abracadabra'. The seeker needs to know why 'This is it' for it to translate into their own obvious experience.

Directness starts at the answer and works back, deconstructing the questions, whereas pointers, insights or investigation, begin with the questions which are undone to reveal the ever-present answer.

I love writing this blog just because 'This' is my passion. I am in Love with This, wherever 'This' takes me. It's always changing, expanding, deepening, and yet I know that any understanding I have is completely nieve.

I know nothing. It's such an irony that although I love writing and expressing this, whatever comes out always ALWAYS misses the mark. Life doesn't need me to speak for it. Just look around, it's speaking for itself, perfectly and beautifully.

So, This is all there is. And This is happening to nobody. Even this is too much.

Thanks again Tom,

I'd be interested in any response you may have :-)

Ben said...

Dear Mike and Tom: There is no "you", there is no "there", there is no "is". But one must use these words to convey to other people the thoughts that occur within our brains. There you see, I just used "one" and "our" and implied that "our" thoughts are "ours". We could spend a lifetime apologising for refering to something we know to be an idea or a concept as a fact. But these are the only words we have. They are really rather insufficient.

It is unfortunate that the only way we have to communicate usually requires that a distinction is made between things. As in "me and you" or "this and that". Now, if "I" say "[You] need to understand that [I] had this thought yesterday" how else could I convey this without using these words to distinguish between "I" and "You". If these concepts of "no I" are put forward to try to spark that moment in peoples minds where they go "ahhh, hmm I see, that is intersting, I'd never thought of it like that" kind of like a Zen koan or some kind of teaching like that then maybe less words would be more efficient?

All of what you are trying to say could probably be said something like "There is no I, There is no You, So who wrote this and who is reading it?"
There is a reason that koans where used and Mike knows this. He told me that he is afraid that if he wrote things like that it would be cliched. Cliches exist for a reason, and sometimes the best way of doing something has already been discovered. We need to avoid the trap of thinking that a new way is needed. Originality is not always necessary. Every thought has already occured. I see nothing wrong with reminding people of the greatest teachings that all who have passed before have left us. Is it not vanity to think that we have better ideas?

Ok, I have fallen fowl of the same problem!! I guess my point is that the harder you try to avoid this issue the closer you get to it and end up falling fowl of your own arguement.

Ben said...

Nonduality and duality cannot be seperated. They are both part of the whole and that of itself is a dualism.

"Nothing is Black and White. Look no further than that staple of culture and art, the Black and White photograph. Yes, it contains Black and White, but also every shade of Grey inbetween!"

tom sullivan said...

Hi Mike, I'm afraid I was a bit "hasty", as Treebeard might say, in my comment yesterday.

I really like the first two sentences.

The only part of your post I was adressing was the phrase "the only referent is empty space."

I seem to have developed a pet peeve regarding pointers that deconstruct every thing BUT one.

Now I CAN see how this may be a very useful "beginner's" ponter, but you started out THIS post with the sentence, "There is no referent to your experience." Therefore, it did seem warranted to question the use of the aforementioned closing phrase.

Please forgive the lamentable "hastiness of Men." I do enjoy your "presence" in cyberspace!

Rizal Affif - The Soul Sanctuary said...

People said if you keep splitting atoms, you can only find emptiness.

The flux is empty indeed--but the fun is where this emptiness divides into experiencer and the experienced.

How beauty life is--what a beauty! :)

Mike said...

@Ben- Thanks for your comments! Yes nonduality includes the appearance of duality. All is really one, one in Awareness.

Yet, "nonduality" is just a label for what IS. We could call it "life" or "This" or "God". The entire universe only exists within awareness, and yet something called "awareness" can't be found. Blows my mind anyway....:-)

@Tom - Thanks Tom! Treebeard is from Lord of The Rings, right? :-)ah yes, the wisdom of the trees! I'm in agreement with you here, on a closer reading I can see that I have indeed said that "there is no referent of your experience" and that "the only referent is empty space".

We must beware of "empty space" for no such thing actually exists. Empty space or aware emptiness is actually full of creation, yet this fullness is itself empty (!?!)

I like the word "This" to describe awareness, as it doesn't lead you on to search for anything other than 'This', whereas emptiness etc, can lead you to go looking for it. I did this for 10 years and couldn't find it.

Perhaps it would have been better to say: "The only referent is empty space, and empty space is only ever This...this....this..."

:-)


@Rizal - Hello again! Thanks for your insight, yes! Fun Fun Fun! Why is all of this emptiness so incredibly full? Life is a miracle. A friend of mine once said that Mind itself is a Siddhi (or supernatural power) and since all only exists in Mind, all is Magic.

What a beauty indeed!

:-)

herenow said...

what about the empty space in my wallet ???

herenow said...

Also here is a simple way to find out if you are telling the truth....

http://realisingherenow.blogspot.com/2010/07/how-to-tell-truth.html

herenow said...

pps


PLEASE

don't stop or curtail the nonsense of

effing the ineffable


it is a favourite passtime of mine

and i love to see other experts wasting their time.

love and respect keith