Satsang with Nome - Sahaja Samadhi - Question 2

[Guest guest]

Another Q.: My nature is steady. That nature is bliss. Sometimes this

is so direct that there is nothing else other than that. At other

times, it seems that there is someone experiencing that, and it has a

quality of two. It is subtle, but it seems as if there is one who is

slightly removed from it, thinking, figuring or musing about it. The

duality seems to exists when I don't look at it and stop looking at

what my nature is.

 

N.: What do you want?

 

Q.: If I look, I already have it

 

N.: (after a pause) Are there alternative states for you?

 

Q.: There appears to be.

 

N.: So, then, what do you want?

 

Q.: I don't want to change states.

 

N.: Based on what seed does a change of state occur? What starts the

change of state?

 

Q.: This may come later, but it is that somebody is not in that state

anymore.

 

N.: What composes the " somebody " ?

 

Q.: (after a pause) I make up the " somebody. "

 

N.: What goes into that " I " ? You should discern this. Whatever makes

up the " I " becomes the " somebody. " The moment that there is somebody,

Bliss-Being-Consciousness seems as if removed from you. Then, they

are viewed as objective, even though the Reality of Being-

Consciousness-Bliss is nonobjective. The " somebody, " which is, in the

relative scheme of things, objective, is taken to be the subject.

That which is the Self is assumed to not be the Self, and that which

is not the Self is assumed to be the Self.

 

When you say that you have it when you look implies that you do not

have it when you do not look. Who is the " I " in that statement.?

 

Q.: When I look at what it is made of, it seems to be made only

of " I. " That is the only part that is actually real. At the moment, I

cannot see anything more to it than that. If I look at what appears

to be a second " I, " it is the same.

 

N.: The same primary " I. "

 

Q.: I would need to make something else up that is not " I. " That goes

away as soon as I…

 

N.: And who is the maker?

 

Q.: There is either no maker or it is " I. " When it is clearly " I, "

there is no maker. (laughing happily)

 

N.: It means the same.

 

Q.: If I examine it closely, it is inescapable.

 

N.: So, there is only you experiencing yourself at all times. Even

ignorance is such, but, if we know this, there is no more ignorance.

Thus, Sahaja is said to be the Knowledge that is beyond ignorance and

knowledge. Everything is absorbed and actually is only the single,

undifferentiated Being. This Being is Consciousness. The idea of

consciousness is delusory. It is illusory and completely false.

 

Q.: It is a great relief.

 

N.: If bliss appears to be reduced at any point, you have only to

know what your Being is. The tendency to develop an idea about Being,

or to treat Being as if it were an objective state, into which you

enter and from which you depart, which you see at some times and at

other times do not, should be abandoned.

 

In addition, as auxiliary support: whatever attributes

that " somebody " possesses should be thoroughly examined. His

tendencies, whatever they are, should be destroyed. The same inquiry

that determines what is real and who you are will accomplish that. If

you can question the validity of the basic assumption of " I " and find

the substrate of real Being, certainly you can do so with every

manifested tendency. They are all the forms or guises that " I " takes

on.

 

------------------------------

Not two,

Richard