A friend of mine sent me the following in response to my article on the Adyashanti Retreat I recently attended:
Still chewing on your premise of not knowing that 2 + 2 will be 4 tomorrow. I have had some discussions with people who seem to be on the path but take it to a ridiculous extreme. For example, a friend of mine claimed the same kind of premise. I said o.k., let me light this lighter next to your arm. I believe based upon past experience and the rules of the world of illusion that you will burn. He said he couldn’t agree that he would burn. He couldn’t agree that the lighter would light. Conceded that may happen but given the fact we’ve both seen the lighter work, just worked and is not empty, it most likely will light. If it does light and placed next to your arm, your arm will most likely burn. One does not ‘know’ the future but can make reasonable predictions as to consequences of the world of illusion.
The world of the formless and the world of form are the same. One arises from another. They are connected. We should resist nothing and be open to everything but ignoring basic principles and observations that repeatedly occur could be done to an extreme and at one’s peril.
First, let me say that I completely agree that there are many people on the spiritual path who take things to ridiculous extremes. I have been one of them. Anything can be taken too far, and it is amazing the forms of trouble we can get ourselves into in spirituality. (Remind me to write about the time 18 years ago when I tried to live on sprouts and sunflower seeds!)
Let’s look, though, at the statement I made that my friend mentions. Here it is in its entirety:
I’ve had various discussions about thoughts with others on the path, and my experience at this retreat reinforced a viewpoint (or more appropriately, a knowingness) I have been taking more and more. And that is that all thoughts are untrue. Even the ones that have a semblance of truth, such as 2+2=4, are still not true. Oh, sure, 2+2=4 is useful, but even a “law” of nature could change tomorrow.Everything in the world of form changes, or at the very least can change. If you ask me, “Will 2 plus 2 equal 4 tomorrow?” in all honesty I have to answer “I don’t know.” How can I know? The future is always The Unknown.
The Future
I’m going to answer my friend in two slightly unrelated ways. Let’s start by looking at the future. I think everyone will agree that we cannot know the future. Even people who seem to be able to predict the future via some psychic means are rarely so accurate that you would ever take them to the race track and bet on horses with your life savings. The future is the great unknown. As a matter of fact, we can even go so far as to say that the future doesn’t even exist.
credit: How can I say the future doesn’t exist? Simple. Can you see it? Can you hear it? Can you touch it, smell it, taste it? No, not at all. So where is the future? Ah, it is only a thought in the mind. There is no future other than as a thought. It can’t be experienced. Only what is here right now can ever be experienced. That’s why Eckhart Tolle called it The Power of Now. Because Now is all there is to time (you can follow the same line of argument to demolish the idea of a real, solid past).
Do you see, then, that it is literally conceivable that anything can happen? If the future is not only completely unknown, but moreover can never even be known because it doesn’t exist, then it becomes impossible to say that what I remember happening yesterday, or what I’m experiencing now, will continue to happen. As crazy as it sounds, gravity could stop working tomorrow. It might be pretty wild, pretty wacky, and almost surely the death of my human existence (and then again, maybe not!), but that is still a possibility. And not just an abstract, remote one. Anything can happen.
I know saying things like gravity may not work tomorrow or 2 + 2 may not equal 4 are extreme examples, but they are used to illustrate a point. We take for absolute certainty even far more mundane things than the laws of mathematics and science. For instance, every time you worry about what your spouse will say to you about the things you haven’t done, every time you feel fear about the shrinking of your bank account or the security of your job, you are accepting as true a thought about a future that is absolutely unreal because there is no future and no way to know what it would bring if it were real.
Actually, this truth that there is no future is the quickest, easiest way to undo fear. Without a future, you cannot be afraid. Fear is thinking that something is going to happen to you and the response in your body to that thought. Fear is sometimes referred to as a projection of our past (memories, which are more thoughts) onto the supposed future creating yet more thoughts. The body then responds to all this nervous system excitement by releasing adrenaline and a hundred other molecules into the blood. A very familiar process to most of us. But when you drop the notion of the future, you drop your fear. It really can be that simple.
Daily Life
So let me anticipate my friend’s next question: “Okay, Tom, that’s all well and good, there is no future and no way to know if down will be up tomorrow. But how can one function in the world without believing in ‘basic principles and observations that repeatedly occur?’ You haven’t answered that yet. How can you not believe in 2 + 2 = 4 and still do math, balance your checkbook, etc.?” Alright, give me a second, I’m just warming-up!
While it is true that, as I stated, I can’t really believe anymore that 2 + 2 will always equal 4, the key point is that I’m losing all my belief in my thoughts as containing a single iota of truth. As has been said so many times, things like 2 + 2 = 4 are just concepts, simply thoughts that are removed from not only direct experience but also removed from the formless truth. Thoughts are ever changing, part of the world of form. Not bad, not good, just completely unreal.
It is my experience that as you open yourself to consciousness, as you become aware of your true identity as awareness itself, you quit believing in the contents of your mind. All this mental stuff, from the more mundane to the laws of the universe, begin to seem only to serve one primary function: to keep you believing that you literally are the contents of your mind. “I am what I think I am,” says the mind.
But as you awaken you begin to realize that you are not your thoughts. All of this mental stuff is simply the fairly random bursts of energy flowing through your body-mind. You begin to realize that you are the very awareness itself that has been always looking out of your eyes and listening through your ears.
As for daily living, it seems that I can function just fine without believing so strongly in the truth of things. To use my friends example, while I may not believe it is true that the flame from a lighter will burn me, I’m still not going to stick my hand in it. Why not? Because I have a memory that says it will burn me. And nothing inside me really has any interest in being burned. Not because it is afraid of the burning, but because it chooses not to be burned.
Moreover, having a memory of hot things burning me no longer produces the extreme fear or psychic drama that it used to produce. It seems just like a simple “fact” with which I can play along. The laws of the world thus become interesting thoughts with which to play. Without the drama, without my identity tied up in my thoughts, all of these thoughts become tools, at times useful, for existing in the world of form.
Another example of how this seems to work: I woke-up in the middle of the night and had this strong image in my mind of being drowned (I recalled a movie in which someone’s head was held underwater for a few minutes). I felt fear arise about it, but as I went with the image and experience, I could feel myself relaxing into the idea of drowning, feeling myself experiencing the body gasping for air, the last big of consciousness fading away and then dying, and all of this occurring with a sense of acceptance and peace.
As I sit typing these words, I can feel the same type of thing with regard to being burned by a flame. Intensely painful, yet unreal, too. I suppose I’m reacting this way because at a deeper level I realize that this body is not what I truly am. The thought crosses my mind that this burning is, too, a part of the One expressing itself in the world of form. Nothing is separate.
It may be the world of form and change and seemingly unreal, but my body-mind functions in it. The system seems to have some rules, and I seem to be following those rules. But I’m not really thinking about it. So much of this type of thing is just getting done without much, if any conscious thought. Which is cool. And, to be certain, I still have times when I get completely caught-up in the world of form and the thoughts that go through my mind. At times they seem very real and true. But then I recall the truth, something shifts, and all is well again.
To be honest, this not knowing if anything is true has left me to confront the startling truth that I really and truly do not know anything. I don’t know. That is my answer to so many things anymore. I guess it could have been the answer to my friend’s question, but I must confess it is more fun to play around with all these words and ideas and formulate an answer.
And the best thing is that as I’ve admitted more and more that I don’t know, I’ve begun to feel more peaceful than I ever have in my life. A fantastic peace is settling in that is most welcome. And there is a wordless, silent Presence that I have begun to truly, one that I am knowing more and more each day.
All of this seems to be the trajectory of spiritual awakening. There are moments of great opening to truth, experiences of formless bliss (or for some, formless terror), when lots of illusions fall from our minds and consciousness becomes aware of itself. And then there are times of going back and forth, from knowing what you are to getting somewhat lost again in thoughts and feelings and the world. And on and on it goes. Until it finally ceases entirely. Or maybe not.
You really never know, do you? Even ideas on spiritual awakening cannot be known with certainty . No matter who says them or how “enlightened” they are. But that is a different discussion for another day.
You are right, Tom. Here is something else your friend might not have considered.
More often than not, the questions themselves are not understood or even seen because one has their own idea of the answer. Even your friend that asked the question; if he didn’t already have his own solution, his idea of the solution, he would clearly see the answer.
(These questions arise from the answers we already have. But don’t take my word for it. Wink, wink.)
There are facts in this universe it would seem. Fire burns, ice chills, 4 = 2 + 2. But why in the world do we need to believe it? It is a fact. It is there. I can disbelieve or believe in the sun all I want, but it changes nothing.
If I stick my hand in the fire, it will burn, end of story. But here is where it may seem confusing. I do not believe or expect that it will.
This is all newness; aliveness. Takuin is not capable of believing in or expecting the result, no matter how obvious. This is not something that is done, as in an action one takes in order to stop believing. It is simply life as it is lived within this organism.
Are all thoughts untrue? Yes, but only if you believe them.
I imagine there will be many comments on this post.
But I don’t believe it.
Takuin Minamoto’s last blog post..The Truth in His Face
Actually, I just meditated on my above statement. I can only imagine that it will burn, but it sits very heavily in my head. It is only a conjured image. It isn’t real in any way, whatsoever.
The only truth is: There is no way of knowing.
The only way I’ll know if it will burn is when I see it on fire. It might sound strange, but that seems to be what is.
I am now very curious to find out. Haha. I’ll do my best to stay my hand.
Takuin Minamoto’s last blog post..The Truth in His Face
Hi Tom,
There are a number of problems with the case you make. I’d be happy to argue about them (the agreements on conventions are not the same kind of knowledge as memory of past experiences, and these are perhaps different again to ‘laws’ of nature), I quite enjoy intellectual investigation.
The big problem though is the self-contradiction (not paradox, contradiction). If mind doesn’t participate in truth at all then what is the status of the words. And yet has one of the most extensive collection of sacred texts of all the religions. Are all these people just stupid? They’ve produced lots of words. Were they all unenlightened. If not there words bear some relation to truth it seems to me.
The problem is the absoluteness. Not one iota of truth in our thoughts? I doubt it. This is way too grand (albeit in a negative direction). We have (imperfect) glimpses of truth. And we can use the social conventions of languages (maths, English etc) with subtlety and beauty (are these really unrelated to truth?).
It seems to me that communication is a fundamentally human activity (even for the enlightened – who did after all preach). This means that our words can be related to truth (perhaps not in a simple one-to-one way but related nonetheless).
In brief: I disagree and prove it thus: you understand what I write.
Evan’s last blog post..If You’re a Therapist (or you know someone who is)
@Takuin Yes, yes, that is truly it: there is no way of knowing. No way. As you say, you feel no movement to stick you hand in the fire, but then again, you might, and you might be surprised. I suspect that had Jesus listened to his thoughts he would have heard “no way a blind man can see again.” But he said “you can see” and the man saw! You might feel a movement that guides your hand into the flame and it comes out unscathed.
Maybe there are facts to the Universe. It seems that way, doesn’t it? But you never know.
@Evan I love a good debate! Let’s jump in…. I will take your comment point by point.
1. What is the status of words? The best description I’ve heard comes from Zen: pointers at truth. There have been many, many enlightened ones who spoke similarly. Ramana spoke of all thoughts arising from the “fundamental thought”, the I-thought as he called it. And he time and time urged people to look beyond the I-thought to what we really are. The I-thought, the thought of me as a separate self, is thoroughly untrue in Ramana’s view, and thus all other thoughts that follow are untrue. Great teachers therefore use words only to point consciousness in the direction of truth. But ultimately, truth can only be revealed, never spoken (or written).
2. Yes, I know, I took a very absolute stand. By my own admission, everything I wrote is not true as in the Truth. Again, merely pointers at the truth. I agree, way too grand in many respects. But, nonetheless, so far as I’ve sat with any thought that arises, the un-Truth of it becomes apparent and I can’t help but conclude that the next thought will be untrue, too. Maybe it won’t. But so far, so good.
3. I agree, words are very useful in the world of form, given that it is the only way that so many people are able or willing to experience the pointing at truth. I wouldn’t get rid of words for anything. But they aren’t true, nonetheless!
4. I love your last line: “In brief: I disagree and prove it thus: you understand what I write.” Here is a possibly true story: A man went to hear one of the great philosophers speak on the immateriality of the world. He was so incensed by what he heard that he walked out and said, “I refute him thus.” and then kicked a barrel to prove it was real. He broke his toe from doing so. Don’t break your toe, Evan!
Lastly, let me say this: in the view I’m taking, the words we speak and the thoughts we think are very similar to an actors lines in a movie. Keanu Reeves knows he’s not Neo, and he knows that he can’t fly, but he puts on the sunglasses and leather coat and pretends with everything he’s got that it is all true, he is Neo, and he can fly through the air. But all the pretending in the world won’t make it true.
Same for you and me: we are Consciousness, pure awareness, pretending in a movie or our own creation. All the parts of the movie are in no way separate from who we are. They are literally us. We are one with them. But we play around as if they aren’t. How fun! I play with words, using them like a good tool. Thoughts arise in my mind, and when I don’t get lost in them, I see them as just thoughts. Finally, I will end with this statement from a spiritual teacher I know: Your thoughts aren’t true, they aren’t you, and you can let them go.
@Evan Oh, one more point: I’m sort of forced into the “No thoughts are true” perspective by the evidence of my experience. You see, when I completely believed my thoughts, I was miserable. Now, every time I notice that I’m believing a thought, and then drop the belief in it, I get happier. I lose a chunk of fear. I get lighter, freer, more peaceful. So far, ending belief in thinking is the surest path to ending suffering for me. It is purely empirical in a sense: the more I drop thinking, the happier I become and the more amazing life is. I need to write more about this one, too.
And, by the way, thanks, Evan. I’m always best able to explain myself in response to others. I love to dialogue. It is where I most truly feel at home. Must be why I love working with others. Be well….
O.k. I’ve chewed on your article.
I want to set the paradigm for my reply. This reply applies only to me. I say that because for too long I mistakenly believed everyone thought and received information the same as I. It took me a long time to realize the “untruth” in that principle.
I agree with the premise that there is no future. Only “now”. I also agree it is possible that the “rule” that 2 + 2 = 4 may not be real tomorrow. However, today, it does. In the world of illusion.
Now, taken literally, your statement sounds absurd to me and doesn’t do the job of pointing to the truth to me. Maybe others follow the sign post and are helped by the analogy. But not me.
I respectfully disagree that all thoughts are untrue. If I think that 2 + 2 = 4, I am thinking that “now” not in the future. It is a ‘truth’ “now” of the world of form.
And I guess, I should talk in the terms of ‘probability’ versus ‘truth’. If asked if 2 + 2 = 4 will be true tomorrow, my answer: “I don’t know. Probably.” It is just as much a “probability” that fire will burn your arm.
For me, I agree that once we break the identification with thought we are able to see our true essence as consciousness. I sense that is what your point is and that the inherent flaw of the use of words has created the confusion. You use the term ‘truth’ whereas I am applying the term in the form of ‘probability’.
My children (8 and 6)have taught me so much about the flaw in words. They were once talking to each and I wanted to interrupt for a moment to share with them our plan for when we arrived home in a few seconds so they were prepared. I asked them: “May I interject for a second?” They both responded: “yes”. Then, immediately began talking to each again. I just laughed and waited until they finished their conversation. I then asked them: “Do you know what ‘interject’ means?” Complete silence for 10 seconds before they said “no”. It was a beautiful reminder for me of the inherent potential flaw in the use of words.
Lastly Tom, I would point out, I believe we are both right.
Thanks for the article Tom.
@Takuin
Nicely put – there is facts and there is belief about facts. What is vs what we believe about it. One is true, the other false.
However even what is true cannot be known absolutely as what knows it changes. Ergo, nothing is absolutely true. As Tom observes, once we let go of the idea that this or that is truth, we release the need to be right and begin to fall into a clarity that transcends all that.
Davidya’s last blog post..Bab’Aziz
Tom – you raised so many points. The extreme positions of keeners, etc. My mate and I were just remembering some of that, like my ‘fruitarian’ phase & when I felt I was on a “jet plane” to enlightenment. Well – I suppose I was, but the journey was a little longer than expected and the flight had more turbulence than I “planned”.
Tom – The future does exist, but not separately. It is only now. When awareness curves back on itself and becomes aware of itself, this creates the principle of space. The flow of awareness within Itself then gives rise to time. But time remains only now. There is no other time. When we see the future and past as other, that is the illusion. Thus the apparent causality of a separate past is an illusion. When we break the ‘nodes’ of the illusion, the false causality collapses and the true causality is revealed, beyond time.
Can I see the future? Yes, it is now. If we fully see now, this becomes apparent. This is where those images from the east arise of figures with many arms and heads. They express the many possibilities, all concurrently. Norman Mclaren’s film Pas de Deux illustrates it well, in the second half.
Theres a whole process to how this plays out. This little space is not really enough to explore it. (laughs)
Tom – that said, I do agree that seeing through the illusions is the key to the loss of fear. It is the ego’s holding to illusion, trying to control the illusion, and making things right and wrong that keeps us in a pointless fear.
Tom – OK, the bigger question – are thoughts true? In tune with the tone of your post, I’d say that depends. (laughs) Theres a couple of ways of looking at this. First we have to ask to Whom are they true?
When we are in what might be called Tribal perspective, we live relative to our social group. We are driven by outside agencies. The idea of “a thought” can be meaningless. Inside is unconsidered and irrelevant.
When ego becomes stronger, ‘my’ takes over and we become aware of my thoughts. They are keenly true. As we begin to open, we discover that some thoughts are true and some, less so.
After awakening, we are no longer associated with the body and mind, so thoughts are now part of the ‘other’ and come to have less and less hold on us. After a series of further openings, the entire illusion is transcended and thoughts now apparently arise within the one. The one is not an illusion, so the thoughts are real. But a different real.
Secondly, if we want to ask are thoughts real, we have to ask from whence thoughts arise and do they all arise from the same place? To the second part, no. We can look at it a few ways but basically, thoughts typically arise in one of 3 ways.
- background processing. The brain integrating experiences and sensations. Low level and fairly constant.
- illusion supporting. These are thoughts arising from the ego’s attempts to support its reality and judge things right and wrong. They typically carry an emotional charge. This is the noise most people want to silence and what mental control people focus on. These are the thoughts that are not true as they are based on illusion.
- thoughts from the flow. These arise as pure ideas from silence. Quiet but strong thoughts, occasional, not noisy. Some call this intuition. These are the thoughts that drive you to write an article like this. Still, the arise through the filters of our individuality, so their truth is relative. But there is value.
Tom – OK, this is supposed to be your post, so I’ll stop. (laughs) I think your post is a beautiful expression of where you are on the journey. The growing sense of not knowing as an allowing that releases fear. For someone deeply rooted in the ego, not knowing has the reverse effect. Very fearful.
Someone approaching or coming into this place will find such expositions are very valuable. They can help confirm and clarify what this new place is all about. That is the beauty of sharing.
Davidya’s last blog post..Bab’Aziz
Comin’ back atcha.
Some words point to the truth and some don’t (eg. “the black snow is white” isn’t a useful ski report but may point to other truths – that words sometimes don’t point to the truth.).
When you testify to your experience of dropping attachment to your thoughts does this bear no relation to truth.
The assertion that words aren’t true is just too absolute and simplistic.
Evan’s last blog post..If You’re a Therapist (or you know someone who is)
Dugg!
Great article Tom. You sounded like Morpheus from the Matrix movie with this post
RJ’s last blog post..Promises, Promises.
Tom, you did it again.You started a conversation.:)
Evan I agree with your final sentence in your last comment.”The assertion that words aren’t true is just too absolute and simplistic.” I believe that words can be true and they can be false.” It’s in what context we use them. That makes them so.For example if I say it is snowing and it is. Is that true? How can you make that false? I’m justa asking!
Mark Krusen’s last blog post..Not justa nother boring Saturday!
One more thing Tom.
You said “when I completely believed my thought, I was miserable.” I contend Tom that you need to merely wait for your thought to change to one of a more positive bent. Could it be true that given time,Your thoughts would have to change.
You may have to wait a while. But in time I believe your thoughts could change. Especially with help of music.
Mark Krusen’s last blog post..Not justa nother boring Saturday!
There may be some confusion about the word and the truth, and I’ll let Tom get into all of that.
I’ll just take a small bite from the sandwich.
The problem is not the thought. The problem is the belief in the thought. It anchors the believer, makes it heavy and real, gives it something to fight and die for.
The belief in the thought causes suffering. It is devilish and subtle, because the perceived problems seem real and we want to get away from them. But we can never get away because they only exist in our minds. And besides, who is it that wishes to escape? The believer that believes in the perceived problem.
It is the old game of thought trying to escape from itself.
The movement of the believer making real the thoughts that are important is the illusion. Not necessarily the thought. Thoughts come and go, but when we reach out, grabbing for that brass ring, trying to keep it and own it, difficulties arise.
And what about a fact? Thought may or may not be important to understanding the fact, but belief has nothing to do with it. If something is a fact, why should one waste the energy needed to believe it? That energy, building up a ghost world around the idea, giving importance to an imagined better than your side mentality, has nothing to do with the sum of a mathematical problem.
Of course, I may have missed everyone’s points entirely. If that is true, just look at this as a separate conversation; a one-on-one with oneself.
Takuin Minamoto’s last blog post..The Truth in His Face
Hi Takuin,
I like your distinction between thought and belief in it (attachment and so forth).
It seems to me that facts are perceived by us. And it is possible for our perceptions to be educated, so that the subtlety of perception increases. Words probably play a small part in this though I believe that the education comes from practice with the reality being engaged with.
It still seems to me that some thoughts are better indicators than others. That some point in exactly the wrong direction eg material acquisitions bring lasting happiness.
So it seems to me there is a relation between words and facts and truth.
Evan’s last blog post..If You’re a Therapist (or you know someone who is)
That is well said, Evan.
Of course, that all depends upon what you mean by the word Truth. Perhaps that is where we should start when we go into this sort of thing.
Takuin Minamoto’s last blog post..The Truth in His Face
Mark – Takuin I think clarifies the point. And he asks what is truth, just as I earlier asked what is real – more or less the same thing.
A statement it is snowing may superficially be true but what if the person perceives the snowing takes place in an illusion? In what way would words about an illusion be true? Its not unlike describing a dream.
Also, the problem with waiting for your thoughts to become happy is that your happiness is then dependent on your thoughts. They will then get sad again. Soon enough, people get fed up with transitory happiness that is at the mercy of mind. Hence the seeker arises.
Davidya’s last blog post..Eckhart on Oprah 9
I’m going to reiterate what I said earlier as its key to understanding this debate. People do NOT see the world the same way. Due to conditioning (what Ruiz calls domestication), we come to apparent agreement on ‘how it is’. Our beliefs if you will. We tend to discount our own ideas that don’t match this. But peoples inner lives and perceptions are still completely different. One lives in hell, another heaven. Only when we get close to someone can we discover this. What comes to mind as an example is the Dreamhealer’s story about playing childhood games. He found hide and seek pointless as he could see peoples auras peeking out.
Truth is in the eye of the beholder and is thus relative. Reality in far more amorphous and flowing than we typically recognize. Tom is describing his developing experience of stepping out of mind and the changes in perception that follow. How what was real has ceased to be.
This is a textbook example of this stage of opening. He has expressed it very clearly. Debating truth is certainly fun, but don’t miss the point of this. When your reality turns upside down, it can be very valuable to read about someone who has gone before.
Tom – your changed relationship with daily experience is interesting. A friend of mine said that he knew it had all changed when he almost had a head on collision on the highway. There was no fear, indeed no reaction at all. He simply observed the events taking place and laughed about how close that was.
Davidya, I hope your friend doesn’t drive the roads of upstate Ny.
Mark Krusen’s last blog post..Not justa nother boring Saturday!
@Thomas Glad to see you here! I love the example of your kids. I had the same experience with mine today. You know, I really do see your points about this subject. And everyone elses. More in a moment.
@RJ Thanks for the Digg! I’m always happy to see a Digg. Hey, you picked up on the fact that I was wearing sunglasses and a long leather trench coat while writing this article. Very perceptive!
Yes, that was a joke. But I must get the coat. Great to see you hear and joining the conversation.
Okay, I’ve commented a bit for the new people around here, but you “old hands” are really going to town without me. Takuin, Mark, Davidya, Evan, I’m loving the conversation.
So, here’s what I want to do. You guys are firing off “thoughts” (too funny, really), faster than I can respond. I’m going to print out your comments, and do a new post with short little responses to various things you’ve said and new thoughts that have formed in my mind. I’ll post it by Monday evening (USA). Sound good?
I think it is really hilarious that we are discussing thoughts by referring to more thoughts, etc. That crazy God, she’s got one hell of a sense of humor!
I love the idea Tom.
I think Takuin is really onto something about it being about Truth.
Are truth and reality the same? Perhaps not; as truth is also talked about in relation to how we talk about what is. What we say about reality is assessed for its truthfulness. In this sense truth is secondary to reality but more inclusive. This starts to look really tricky.
A simple correspondence theory of truth doesn’t take account of our perceptions. But the notion that truth is subjective, ‘it’s all relative’, doesn’t take account of our ability to communicate. If you come up with a way forward in all this I’d love to see it.
I think I have found the starting point: we are social-individual people not individual-individuals, but I’m not sure what the next step from this is.
Looking forward to your post.
Evan’s last blog post..If You’re a Therapist (or you know someone who is)
Evan – hmmm. Interesting re: truth and reality.
I guess I would say reality is dependent on our level or value of consciousness. Truth is then the facts or knowledge we derive from that sense of reality.
As truth is dependent on our perception of reality and reality is dependent on our awareness, both are relative. Tom’s post illustrates this.
I guess it leads to the question- is there an ultimate truth or reality? In some ways yes, but the question then arises – can a human nervous system/ mind reflect enough of that ultimate reality to know it?
I’ve certainly seen Ultimate described a number of ways. A study of “higher states” of consciousness allows us to put some of those descriptions onto tiers or levels relative to each other. But some very evolved teachers I’ve met say it never ends. There is always greater awareness possible. Every time I’ve thought “ah – this is the ultimate”, it has proved not to be.
On the other hand, they have also said that at a certain point, there is no longer “states” of consciousness. One becomes consciousness itself and everything is found to be That. This implies that an ultimate reality/truth could then be known but the values and knowledge of it would continue to grow.
Davidya’s last blog post..Eckhart on Oprah 9
Let’s not move too quickly.
Are there levels of consciousness, or just consciousness? If there are different levels, who is it that makes the distinction? And why is the distinction necessary? Does that movement – the idea of higher and lesser levels – unify, or create even more division?
Before deciding it is a level or value of consciousness, one must go into the very core of what is consciousness.
There are far too many questions here, haha.
Is truth dependent upon anything? Is reality dependent upon anything? Pay attention to how you answer the question; how the movement strikes you.
Can reality be known? Known in the sense of owning it, reciting it, living a sense of self based on what has come before. Is reality dependent upon the past? If it is, then reality is far too limiting to be of any consequence. Would one really want reality to reflect their own limited view, their prejudice and suffering? In a perceived reality sure, and if we look into the world, we can easily see that this is happening. But why continue with it? As I have said before, can we not finally admit the emperor has no clothes?
One might say there are billions of realities, projected from billions of beings. I am not saying this is not so, that this movement does not take place, but I question if it is in any way real at all.
If reality is perceived by the perceiver, isn’t it also believed by the believer? Is reality dependent upon any of this? What happens when another challenges my belief in MY reality? How deep will I stab at you to protect MY point of view?
I am not saying this is right or wrong. It is all so interesting, it would be a shame to come to a conclusion.
Takuin Minamoto’s last blog post..The Truth in His Face
Takuin – yes many questions indeed.
OK- once again the answer depends on the perspective. Best way to respond is to offer an overview. We could say that there is silence, unmanifest expression. “Within” that is awareness, the silence moves in alertness. Within that is what we might call the mind of God, the liveliness. Within that is what we might call the dream of God, the Maya. Within that the dream of the universe. Within that, the dream of the individual.
Of course, these are arbitrary values to divide what is undivided, but they help the mind grasp what is. The steps I chose correspond roughly to stages of awakening as described by Adya and others.
If we are standing in the role of individual, there are a series of levels or states of consciousness to be achieved. If we are standing in the role of the one awareness, there are no levels as its all within, there is only consciousness.
While there is some value in speaking from a higher perspective, there is also value in speaking to the listener and showing the steps they can take. This is not unlike how people may go through layers of forgiveness in clearing their heart, only to find there was nothing to forgive. The forgiveness process may have been necessary for them to get to its transcendence. When one arrives, the distinctions loose meaning but to get there, the steps may still be needed.
Truth is dependent, yes, as outlined above. In silence, even truth is meaningless. Many of life’s paradoxes are resolved in transcendence. The free will vs determinism debate is an example. As we step up the ladder, it seems to alternate until they become the same thing – what determines is the will of Self.
Perhaps all this is mental noise for you. The path through the head is not everyones path by any means.
Pay attention? It is not the ‘I’ who writes. I simply observe what flows out. Sometimes it surprises me (laughs)
——–
One knows reality by being it. So yes, reality can be known. Any experience is of the mind. Mind is a more superficial knowing, seen through the lens of the illusion we may carry. It cannot be owned or recited. That is of the mind, the dream. So yes much too limited. The past has no reality. Interestingly its not actually even causal, in spite of appearances.
Yes, the emperor has no clothes. It is all Lela, the play. But there is a purpose for us to be in the play, in the dream. That is why it is. When we know the play for what it is and we know who we are, we can finally play our role and not make a drama on the stage, delaying the show.
(hint – its a comedy musical, not a drama)
I think it better to say there are billions, quadrillions, of dreams but one ‘true’ reality. But remember that all of those dreams are within the one reality. Maya is the illusion when the energy is rajas. It is the covering when energy is tamas. But when energy becomes more sattva, Maya becomes the ladder, no longer the illusion.
MY is the ego speaking here, the ego that must be right. But it is never real, though it appears so. As you began, it is not right until we are beyond MY, beyond Thou, and become One. (Yep – Thou means even God experienced is in the play, to be stepped beyond)
In One there is no right or wrong, so there is no conclusion (laughs).
Davidya’s last blog post..I don’t believe I do
Sorry to go on, Tom, but he did ask a lot of questions (laughs)
Davidya’s last blog post..I don’t believe I do
Ah, I see it now. We use the word reality in different ways.
For you, and please set me straight if I am incorrect, reality is dependent upon the person, i.e., dependent upon perspective, reality can be known, truth is relative, etc.
In Takuin it is used to indicate the world as it is, beyond thought. Or one could also say, beyond the image, beyond the concept, beyond what is already known. Quite simply, what is.
Is that, in itself, a concept? Only if it is believed by the believer. Only if it is solidified into an answer to be shot from the hip each time the appropriate question is asked. In that case, reality is always missed. One can only faintly smell the sweetness of what is, but cannot come close to tasting it.
Very nice reply, by the way, It is always interesting to read and go into these things as they are posed by others.
On the outside, it may seem to be troublesome to answer such questions. Whenever a question is posed, one has to go into it, as if it is an entirely new question (and rightfully, it is). There are no answers here, so when the question appears, one has to take it to the core to find out.
The energy needed for such an undertaking is enormous, but it has a “brightness,” or “luminescent” quality.
You may have noticed this for yourself; someone asks a question, and immediately, through knowledge, the answer is retrieved. For facts, basic information, for knowledge in its right place, that is perfect. But problems arise when knowledge spills over, if that is the right phrase, into areas where it doesn’t belong. Usually because there is a self that is putting it there.
If that particular movement of thought, of self to belief, belief to action, is not there, how is the question approached? It is absolutely beautiful. It is difficult to see if the energy there is a physical, anticipatory movement, or if it is the result of sitting with the question devoid of a self that answers. It hits this organism in different ways at different times, but it seems to be ever available.
Isn’t it lovely to live in this world?
Takuin Minamoto’s last blog post..The Truth in His Face
Takuin – ah I see. Perhaps this is like self and Self. I could say reality and Reality. But saying that silence is ultimate reality is ‘really’ meaningless. How can you describe something without characteristics, beyond even awareness and being?
One could say that even what is, beyond thought, is not ultimate reality. Its just about the last thing we could call Reality because it is. Before Is, what could we say? Yes, as soon as its a concept it no longer is, the flavour lost.
Enlightenment is like that. Sounds like a great goal. But when you get there, you see its just a concept, so meaningless. Beyond any idea of it.
I don’t find a response troublesome. Only that there is just so many moments for the attention to be on this. I enjoy the question as it may draw out what is not yet known or bring a new variation in shade of meaning. Thank you for that, and the feedback. This is the essence of the play. Expressing the light. When we touch the depths, there is no bottom to the reserves.
Yes, a teacher told me the answer will simply be there now. I would not say thats 100%, but in many areas it is. Not always what I want to hear (laughs). Not sure I know what you mean about spilling over, but I think I get it.
Your last paragraph is quite beautiful. I call that the flow. It moves through us in whatever way is needed. We are the vessel. But it takes some practice to get out of the way (laughs)
Living in the play of the world is quite remarkable indeed! I am in the kindergarten of heaven.
Davidya’s last blog post..In the wings
Pingback: The Magic Word « In 2 Deep
Pingback: Time « In 2 Deep
Pingback: What is True? « In 2 Deep
Hi Tom,
When you first posted this article a couple weeks ago, I read the title and had two immediate answers.
I read on and then began on the comments. You guys have a lot to say!
I’ve been back a few times to read the follow up articles, too. In all that, I still have my two rather simplistic answers to your question, which are similar but not quite the same. I decided to share them.
All thoughts are possibly untrue.
All thoughts can be untrue.
To me, it’s just not so absolute and I’d rather it not be.
@Barbara
To me, the question really is who is seeing what is real? From one place, thoughts are a meaningless idea. In another, they are real. In another they may or may not be. In another, they are all unreal. In another, they are like the wind. In another, they are the world, speaking through us. Same thoughts (more or less). Different perspective.
Asking if thoughts are true does prompt us to consider it. And considering what is real helps us to see who is asking. Who is Barbara? Know that and know.
Davidya’s last blog post..The Real Dream
@Barbara I know, this stance I’m taking is pretty harsh, isn’t it? No thought is true. It is even too harsh for me. You know, maybe it would be better if I said: I have yet to find a thought in my mind that is true. True means some variation on real, absolute, permanent, valid yesterday, today and tomorrow. That kind of true. And it has simply been amazing to discover that nothing I think has proven to be true in that sense. It has been the most stupendous RELIEF. Like being on death row and finding your sentence commuted.
So, I think your ideas are quite likely valid. Test them out. See if you can find a true thought, by whatever definition of true you care to use. I know you will discover a lot of peace exists from doing so.
@Davidya & Barbara In the reply I just left Barbara, I realized something about my statement “no thought is true” that I will have to write a new post about. As Adyashanti likes to say, all words are strategies, nothing more. So, a statement like “no thought is true” is simply a strategy to help bring about awakening. This statement is merely a pointer in the direction of the truth. Actually, I have used it as a spiritual practice, going through my beliefs and seeing how they are not true. Very useful, and extremely liberating.
I guess you could say I don’t really believe “no thought is true” because, well, if no thought is true, then neither is this one.
As you suggested Tom, I briefly put a few things I had thoughts about to the test. I decided to use some of what I read here as example. Here’s what I found.
I had thought about some of what you’ve reported modern day Adya teaches. And some of the quotation you reprint from great masters. Could I say that on one hand the contemporary knowledge imparted by Adya is untrue? Or that ancient “tried and true” lessons of the master are?
It is more likely that the limiting thoughts I often have filling my mind could be said to be untrue, as I have no proof of my limitation.
But when I think with the masters, or in similar fashion to that of the masters, those who are looked to for their experience of truth or reality, it is more likely what I encounter is true.
So my thoughts can be untrue, are possibly untrue.
Equally, my thoughts can be true, are possibly true. Just not absolute.
I have found in my recent thoughts that some come true and some don’t.
Therefor Tom. I think that a thought is just that. A thought. It will take time to test out if it is true or not.
Mark’s last blog post..Justa hoping for some good Karma!
@Barbara
One of the things to keep in mind is that thoughts are symbols of ideas about things. They represent meaning. In the sense that they are separate from what the represent, they are always false in and of themselves.
Theres an old Sanskrit saying – Knowledge in books, remains in books. Its also notable that one of the last barriers to waking for many people is their ideas about what waking is. Because ideas are born of the mind, they can never comprehend a change in being, a change beyond mind.
Thus, any thoughts about things beyond mind are always false as even meaning can only vaguely represent them. What a master speaks may be correct, but what you hear and can comprehend is always incorrect until it is an experience you share. How many people can comprehend the rapture, where happiness overshadows any experience? Or total silence of both mind and breath, the body simply vibrating with life? These pale in comparison to complete changes of consciousness.
Both Adya and another teacher I know wrote books, then didn’t publish them as they felt it was too oriented to the time it was written. Then they shifted to writing to the moment, writing as a vehicle to waking. Using ideas to draw you in.
Davidya’s last blog post..The Pout
@Barbara I’m glad you tried what I suggested. I’m not going to attempt to persuade you that you are not correct. I don’t know if you are right or not. All you can do is keep experimenting and see what happens. The more I examine the things that I think are true, the more I discover that, for me, they are not, and the freer I feel. At the last Adyashanti retreat I went to, he asked somebody to look at their beliefs and then ask themselves: “If you had to stake your mother’s life on this belief being true, would you do it?” What he was after was getting the slightest bit of doubt to arise. From the doubt, an opening occurs.
All in all, I’m glad you tested it with your own experience. I hope you will test more things, especially the beliefs that we all carry around with us. That’s where the real value in this type of thing lies. Thanks for the comments!
@Davidya “What a master speaks may be correct….” Interesting. I think the biggest issue we are all having are the words “true” “truth” “correct” “right” etc. These are slippery buggers. I’ve heard Adya say he has never spoken a true thought. He says that his words are only pointers to The Truth. The one, single, solitary Truth.
I guess my bottom line to this whole discussion is that words and thoughts can never be true. They can point us to the truth, but that is beyond all words, thoughts and experiences. It is far, far beyond. And yet, even words and thoughts are contained within it.
Tom,
The more I look at this discussion, the more I see my need or want to be correct. That’s actually funny. Because most of the time when questions are put to me, I do not have such immediate response. I’m most often in the I don’t know category and therefore silent and probably a bit fearful of genuinely not knowing.
I think since these thoughts came to me so immediately (for a change) I trusted they must be accurate. If only for right now I might be right…
Thanks for humoring me!
@Barbara I’ve loved the exchange with you. No humoring at all, just two people speaking about the most wonderful subject in the world, the Truth of our being. Mainly, Barbara, it seems the most important thing is to experience that Truth. All the words are just to help with that. I recognize a tendency in me that wants to be right, but then I remember that none of my thoughts are true! See how useful it is?
Feel free to comment anytime. I enjoy responding to comments as much as I enjoy writing articles.
Heres one for the mix that adds to your position Tom:
“Most people know Descartes’s famous statement “Cogito, ergo sum” (“I think, therefore I am”). But he actually wrote “Dubito…cogito, ergo sum.” “I doubt…I think, therefore I am.”"
More on the post linked below..
Davidya’s last blog post..Blinded by the Light?
@Davidya, I was unsure what you were attempting to tell me these last few days. So I hesitated to venture a response. I think reality is very much simpler than I may ever experience because when I am in the stillness between thought, I do receive what appears to be simpler and simpler answers.
I still receive them as thought, however, or at least that is the way I interpret it. They rise from somewhere and I guess I believe I eventually process them in my mind. And maybe they are just ‘better’ thoughts than others, who knows.
I am a little familar with the religious, spiritual, (use your own label) more readily and widely espoused teachings available today. I could certainly repeat here what I’ve garnered from those collections of ideas in response to what I believe you were trying to demonstrate. An idea of awakening, my eternal being, however you’d like to describe that, but I would be simply repeating what is in those books. And it might make me sound as if I know, but that would be the extent.
For the moment, I think I was expressing what I know at a feeling level, not something I conjured up in my mind, which certainly may be much different than your expression and current experience. It is not that I do not want to know what you may, it is that I do not (yet?), in this present moment.
I do have to tell you I love the irony of the idea called now, since it always seems to be described in terms of the past and future that isn’t. Yet we all seem to experience both, draw for the past, anticipate the inevitable change in the future and generally falter in our ability to express our understanding of the now in any other manner.
@Davidya I like it!
@Barbara I’m really enjoying your comments. You seem to be working with these ideas and seeing if they are true for you. And that is what is important. Ultimately, there is no authority for anything but you. it is your experience that will determine all. Thanks for sharing your experience.
@Barbara
Very beautifully put. I was simply trying to say that what seems real varies. Yes, Reality is very simple. But you will still find how you perceive that simplicity will vary as you grow and open.
Before we awaken, we perceive the world from mind. So everything in our world is an idea / mental construct. After we wake up, we see through those constructs and what had seemed real no longer does. Hence this discussion.
Its hard to digest not being in the mind. You have tastes of that, then process the experience as thoughts, as you note. Thats when the mind steps in. Thats fine and normal. Satisfying the mind helps get it out of the way.
Because the mind thinks in what it has already processed, it lives in the past, in memory. From memory, it projects forward into future. The deeper irony is that both past and future are simply concepts. Thoughts of now are never actually now. Now is just being in that stillness between thoughts that you mention. Only more so.(laughs) But words are of the mind so to describe anything, we have to use mind.
Until it is your experience, all this is concepts. When it is your experience, it will allow you to make sense of it. You would of course sort it out but its much simpler if we can compare notes when we get there. Like finding something with or without a map.
Being able to express from a feeling level is very good. You can only do that if you are conscious there. That will become more prominent over time until eventually, its more what speaks through you. There is no longer an individual.
The difference between that and what you experience is really very small. Only a lift in the veil of who is experiencing. That changes what is most prominent in attention – mind or silence. And that changes everything, yet changes nothing. (laughs)
Davidya’s last blog post..History