Guest guest Posted March 6, 2001 Report Share Posted March 6, 2001 14 APPEARANCE AND THE REALITY PG39 Q: Repeatedly you have been saying that events are causeless, a thing just happens and no cause can be assigned to it. Surely everything has a cause, or several causes. How am I to understand the cause-less- ness of things? M: From the highest point of view the world has no cause. Q: But what is your own experience? M: Everything is uncaused. The world has no cause. Q: I am not inquiring about the causes that led to the creation of the world. Who has seen the creation of the world? It may even be without a beginning, always existing. But I am not talking of the world. I take the world to exist – somehow. It contains so many things. Surely, each must have a cause, or several causes. M: Once you create for yourself a world in time and space, governed by causality, you are bound to search for and find causes for everything. You put the question and impose an answer. Q: My question is very simple: I see all kinds of things and I understand that each must have a cause, or a number of causes. You say they are uncaused - from your point of view. But, to you nothing has being and, therefore, the question of causation does not arise. Yet you seem to admit the existence of things, but deny them causation. This is what I cannot grasp. Once you accept the existence of things, why reject their causes? M: I see only consciousness, and know everything to be but consciousness, as you know the picture on the cinema screen to be but light. Q: Still, the movements of light have a cause. M: The light does not move at all. You know very well that the movement is illusory, a sequence of interceptions and coloring in the film. What moves is the film – which is the mind. Q: This does not make the picture causeless. The film is there, and the actors with the technicians, the director, the producer, the various manufacturers. The world is governed by causality. Everything is inter-linked. M: Of course, everything is inter-linked. And therefore everything has numberless causes. The entire universe contributes to the least thing. A thing is as it is, because the world is as it is. You see, you deal in gold ornaments and I – in gold. Between the different ornaments there is no causal relation. When you re-melt an ornament to make another, there is no causal relation between the two. The common factor is the gold. But you cannot say gold is the cause. It cannot be called a caused, for it causes nothing by itself. It is reflected in the mind as `I am', as the ornament's particular name and shape. Yet all is only gold. In the same way reality makes everything possible and yet nothing that makes a thing what it is, its name and form, comes from reality. But why worry so much about causation? What do causes matter, when things themselves are transient? Let come what comes and let go what goes – why catch hold of things and inquire about their causes? Q: From the relative point of view, everything must have a cause. M: Of what use is the relative view to you? You are able to look from the absolute point of view – why go back to the relative? Are you afraid of the absolute? Q: I am afraid. I am afraid of falling asleep over my so-called absolute certainties. For living a life decently absolutes don't help. When you need a shirt, you buy cloth, call a tailor and so on. M: All this talk shows ignorance. Q: And what is the knower's view? M: There is only light and the light is all. Everything else is but a picture made of light. The picture is in the light and the light is in the picture. Life and death, self and not-self – abandon all these ideals. They are no use to you. Q: From what point of view you deny causation? From the relative – the universe is the cause of everything. From the absolute – there is no thing at all. M: From which state are you asking? Q: From the daily waking state, in which alone all these discussions take place. M: In the waking state all these problems arise, for such is its nature. But, you are not always in that state. What good can you do in a state into which you fall and from which you emerge, helplessly. In what way does it help you to know that things are causally related – as they may appear to be in your waking state? Q: The world and the waking state emerge and subside together. M: When the mind is still, absolutely silent, the waking state is no more. Q: Words like God, universe, the total, absolute, supreme are just noises in the air, because no action can be taken on them. M: You are bringing up questions which you alone can answer. Q: Don't brush me off like this! You are so quick to speak for the totality, the universe and such imaginary things! They cannot come and forbid you to talk on their behalf. I have those irresponsible generalizations! And you are so prone to personalize them. Without causality there will be no order; nor purposeful action will be possible. M: Do you want to know all the causes of each event? Is it possible? Q: I know it is not possible!! All I want to know is if there are causes for everything and the causes can be influenced, thereby affecting the events? M: To influence events, you need not know the causes. What a roundabout way of doing things! Are you not the source and the end of every event? Control it at the source itself. Q: Every morning I pick up the newspaper and read with dismay that the world's sorrows – poverty, hatred and wars – continue unabated. My questions are concerning the fact of sorrow, the cause, the remedy. Don't brush me off saying that it is Buddhism! Don't label me. Your insistence on cause-less-ness removes all hope of the world ever changing. M: You are confused, because you believe that you are in the world, not the world in you. Who come first? – you or your parents? You imagine that you were born at a certain time and place, that you have a father and a mother, a body and a name. This is your sin and your calamity! Surely you can change your world if you work at it. By all means, work. Who stops you? I have never discouraged you. Causes or no causes, you have made this world and you can change it. Q: A causeless world is entirely beyond my control. M: On the contrary, a world of which you are the only source and ground is fully within your power to change. What is created can be always dissolved and re-created. All will happen as you want it, provided you really want it. Q: All I want to know is how to heal with the world's sorrows. M: You have created them out of your own desires and fears, you deal with them. All is due to your having forgotten your own being. Having given reality to the picture on the screen, you love its people and suffer for them and seek to save them. It is just not so. You must begin with yourself. There is no other way. Work, of course. There is no harm in working. Q: Your universe seems to contain every possible experience. The individual traces a line through it and experiences pleasant and unpleasant states. This gives rise to questioning and seeking, which broaden the outlook and enable the individual to go beyond his narrow and self-created world, limited and self-centered. This personal world can be changed - in time. The universe is timeless and perfect. M: To take appearance for reality is a grievous sin and the cause of all calamities. You are the all-pervading, eternal and infinitely creative awareness – consciousness. All else is local and temporal. Don't forget what you are. In the meantime work to your heart's content. Work and knowledge should go hand in hand. Q: My own feeling is that my spiritual development is not in my hands. Making one's own plans and carrying them out leads nowhere. I just run in circles round myself. When God considers the fruit to be ripe, he will pluck it and eat it. Whichever fruit seems green to HIM will remain on the world's tree for another day. M: You think God knows you? Even the world HE does not know. Q: Yours is a different God. Mine is different. Mine is merciful. He suffers along with us. M: You pray to save one, while thousands die. And if all stop dying, there will be no space on earth. Q: I am not afraid of death. My concern is with sorrow and suffering. My God is a simple God and rather helpless. He has no power to compel us to be wise. He can only stand and wait. M: If you and your God are both helpless, does it not imply that the world is accidental? And if it is, the only thing you can do is to go beyond it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 6, 2001 Report Share Posted March 6, 2001 Hiya, Playing an amusing game, by having some of the same questions posed to Sandeep ------------------------ Q: Repeatedly you have been saying that events are causeless, a thing just happens and no cause can be assigned to it. Surely everything has a cause, or several causes. How am I to understand the cause-less- ness of things? S: There is an appearance of the cause-effect continum, because of the presence of the notion of time. If cause and resultant effect is simultaneously existing, thereby dispelling the notion of sequential time, then is there a cause producing an effect? The recent experiments at the University of Princeton, where the speed of light was breached, indicate the simulatenous existence of cause and effect, the existance of the total Picture. Anticipating your next question, " then why does time come into the picture, bringing with it, the sense of sequential happening? " It does, because of the way you are " wired " . As one of my disciples, Ramesh will later on go on to prattle, imagine a painting 20 mile long by 20 mile wide and 20 mile high. You, the observer of this picture, can only see a frame of it, at a time, depending on the scope of your eye-sight. And thus to see the full picture, you will travel, frame by frame, bringing about a sense of " happening " to you, with the previous frame appearing to be the cause of the next frame, as effect, which in turn is the cause of the next one. Such a sequential " happening " in turn needs a sense of " time " and " space " , for the " happenings " to be cognised. However, the 20 mile X 20 mile X 20 mile Picture was always there, beyond space and beyond time. It is thus, that you produce the " world " , the world of causality, the world of space and time, the world of " happenings " , both joyfuls and sorrowfuls. And since you your self are part of that frame being cognised, the cognised frame, in turn making " you the cogniser " possible, both not having an independent existence of it's own, it is in that sense that we speak of the illusoriness of it all. Q: But what is your own experience? Ladeeee Daaaa Deeeee Q: Don't you Ladeee Daaa Deee me. I am not inquiring about the causes that led to the creation of the world. Who has seen the creation of the world? It may even be without a beginning, always existing. But I am not talking of the world. I take the world to exist - somehow. It contains so many things. Surely, each must have a cause, or several causes. S: It seems to contain so many things, so many " happenings " , occurring in sequential time, becuase of the way you are " wired " , as prattled just now. Q: My question is very simple: I see all kinds of things and I understand that each must have a cause, or a number of causes. You say they are uncaused - from your point of view. But, to you nothing has being and, therefore, the question of causation does not arise. Yet you seem to admit the existence of things, but deny them causation. This is what I cannot grasp. Once you accept the existence of things, why reject their causes? S:There is neither admittance of anything, neither denial of anything. Q: Still, the movements of light have a cause.(referring to the cinema-light-projector-screen example) The film is there, and the actors with the technicians, the director, the producer, the various manufacturers. The world is governed by causality. Everything is inter-linked. S: Cannot better the dude's prattling: " The entire universe contributes to the least thing. " Pull a grass, and the Universe shakes. " A thing is as it is, because the world is as it is. " The frame cognised by your vision, is SO, because the total Picture IS SO, as the " cogniser " itself is part of that frame. <SNIP> Q: From the relative point of view, everything must have a cause. M: Of what use is the relative view to you? You are able to look from the absolute point of view - why go back to the relative? Are you afraid of the absolute? Q: I am afraid. I am afraid of falling asleep over my so-called absolute certainties. For living a life decently absolutes don't help. When you need a shirt, you buy cloth, call a tailor and so on. S: Do that. Buy the best shirt you can afford and work to make that affording happen. In the world and all that being " in " , entails and yet not " of " the world. Your fear is that, if you start diving into all this spiritual mumbo-jumbo, you will become dysfunctional, as measured against societal norms. Your fear is that diving into all this spiritual mumbo-jumbo, you might end up like one of these starving beggars which teem the streets of India. If you, as a conceptual entity, have to become a dysfunctional bum on the street, whether you dive into the Advaitic cess pool, or remain in the current cesspool protecting your stocks options, it will make no difference and that particular " frame " WILL be sighted by you. <SNIP> Q: Words like God, universe, the total, absolute, supreme are just noises in the air, because no action can be taken on them. S: Correct. Have you examined, what action can be taken at all, by you, on what you consider is not-God, not-Universe, not-total, not-absolute, not-supreme? And what are these things? Q: Don't brush me off like this! You are so quick to speak for the totality, the universe and such imaginary things! They cannot come and forbid you to talk on their behalf. I have those irresponsible generalizations! And you are so prone to personalize them. Without causality there will be no order; nor purposeful action will be possible. S: The brushing off, was your vision of the frame, as per your wiring.<s> You say, there will be no order. To whom is order relevant? How do you define order? Is destruction, death, part of your definition of order? Is " disorder " part of your definition of order? If not, you are not yet ready to run the Universe. <LOL> M: Do you want to know all the causes of each event? Is it possible? Q: I know it is not possible!! All I want to know is if there are causes for everything and the causes can be influenced, thereby affecting the events? S: Who is this " entity " who wants to know the methodology to alter events? Present that entity, and I will teach it, the methodology. Q: Every morning I pick up the newspaper and read with dismay that the world's sorrows - poverty, hatred and wars - continue unabated. S: So what do you wish to do about it? Do it. What stops you? Q My questions are concerning the fact of sorrow, the cause, the remedy. S: The fact of the sorrow does not exist, for it to be tackled. The fact of sorrow arises only with a sense of loss. A sense of loss, pre-supposes a sense of ownership. What do you, truly have, posses, on whose loss, you grieve? Yes, destruction and death are the facts within a phenomenality, which itself is a concept. You are dismayed at the large scale destruction in the outer world. In your inner world of your human body, at the cellular level, millions of cells " die " every moment and are replaced by a million new cells, all for the apparent purpose of maintaining you as you are, for you to get dismayed at the outer destruction.<s> At the consciousness level of that individulal " dying " cell, it is very dismayed, as it had big plans to change the way things were being run in the neighbourhood. To that " dying " cell, you are no less that Hitler/Stalin/IdiAmin combined. Q: Don't brush me off saying that! Don't label me. Your insistence on cause-less-ness removes all hope of the world ever changing. S: All hope arises from the assumption, that things as they are in the moment, are " bad " and that something else has to be the new order. There must be change. Look into that assumption. Do you have hopes that things would be different if you had a beautiful blonde next to you, panting away to fullfill any expressed wish? <SNIP> Q: A causeless world is entirely beyond my control. S: What is in your control? Who is that who worries on having control or not? Q: All I want to know is how to heal with the world's sorrows. Heal your own sorrows. Know who is it, to whom the sorrow appears as sorrow and why. What is the stake for you, in this wish to heal? And whether, all this undersatnding will occur or not, is not in your hands. So in the meantime, do whatsover, you think will heal the world's sorrow, if that is what is most significant for you. <SNIP> Q: Your universe seems to contain every possible experience. The individual traces a line through it and experiences pleasant and unpleasant states. This gives rise to questioning and seeking, which broaden the outlook and enable the individual to go beyond his narrow and self-created world, limited and self-centered. This personal world can be changed - in time. The universe is timeless and perfect. S: This personal world that you speak of, is nothing but your perception of the vision that you have of one frame at a time of the total Picture. The Universe of timeless and perfection, is also a perception, maybe heard from someone, read in a book. For if the apperception of timlessness and perfection had occurred in the body-mind complex in front of me, there could not have been any other perception of a personal world. The personal world itself would have been timeless and perfect. To simply put it.... The presence of the question, presupposes the presence of the " questioner " The presence of the sense of disturbance, presupposes the presence of the " entity " which can be disturbed. Q: My own feeling is that my spiritual development is not in my hands. Making one's own plans and carrying them out leads nowhere. I just run in circles round myself. When God considers the fruit to be ripe, he will pluck it and eat it. Whichever fruit seems green to HIM will remain on the world's tree for another day. S: Then why bother? From where does the disquitetitude arise? It arises, because, you want to take matters in your hand, the fictitious God that you envisage, is failing you, all in your perception. Q: Yours is a different God. Mine is different. Mine is merciful. He suffers along with us. S: Then where is your problem? Let HIM/HER/IT suffer. Q: I am not afraid of death. My concern is with sorrow and suffering. My God is a simple God and rather helpless. He has no power to compel us to be wise. He can only stand and wait. S: Not being afraid for death, implies that there is a " you " who will be around to experience death, whether in fear or in defiance. While alive, can you present to me, this 'you'? A God, which as per you, creates the individual and has no power to compel wisdom in his creations, can only stand and wait for the individual to stumble, fall and learn from the fall, having itself being the architect of the " wiring " , which is lacking and thus vulnerable to falling, and creates the environ within which a fall will occur, such a God cannot be all merciful, all loving, all complete God, can it? Such a God, is only your conception, your deepest hope, that no matter what happens to me, there will be the loving hands which will pick me up, finally, in the end. It is that hope of " waiting loving hands " which conceives that God, nothing else. There are no hands, loving or cruel, for the simple reason that the soft, vunerable and weak falling body and the hard, uncompromising, cold ground on which the hurt of the fall is experienced, both are part of the Duet of One. Hmm, most entertaining.. Dobeeeee Dobeeee Doooooooooo Cheers Sandeep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.