Monday, September 14, 2009

True Self of Our Original Nature : Oneness with the Divine

The true Self of our original nature is that which is revealed when all striving ends.
Behind the conditioned habits of the ego - liking and disliking, grasping and fearing, striving and seeking; infinite love is waiting to shine.

This infinite love can be described as follows:
• A love that pays no attention to what kind of object is set before it
• A love that sees all things in the same light of perfection
• A love without end
• A love affair in which no otherness can be found, a love affair of the Self with Itself
• A love that is the vast spaciousness in which both suffering and joy, gain and loss, ill health and good health, conflict and harmony, birth and death, all occur
• A love which is the ground of being for all external experiences
• A love that is infinite, unconditioned, timeless, empty of content yet full, uncreated, unborn, undying


Anonymous said...

ONE: What are you and how do you know it?
TWO: I am pure consciousness, and I know it because I love.
ONE: The first is so, the second is not.
TWO: Why is that?
ONE: Because you say it.
TWO: I don't understand.
ONE: Pure consciousness cannot say 'I love'.
TWO: Why not?
ONE: It cannot be said by pure consciousness, but only by an identified object.
TWO: What then can I say as pure consciousness?
ONE: Pure consciousness cannot say 'I love' even via an identified object, but it can say 'I am love'. If the answer to my question had come direct from whole-mind that is the way you would have transmitted it.
TWO: Then those teachers who use the form 'I ...', in order to reveal the truth, are wrong to do so?
ONE: It might be better to say that the form of words in question is open to objection.
TWO: Because?
ONE: They are speaking to the identified, and the identified cannot speak direct from pure consciousness. Therefore when they repeat the words, applying them to themselves, inevitably the I-concept intervenes and seeks to apply the statement to itself. It cannot be excluded as long as it is there.
TWO: By saying what I am, rather than what I do, that is avoided?
ONE: It is nearer the truth.
TWO: An example to make it clearer?
ONE: As many as you wish: the Maharshi did not love - never, never: he was love, or, more exactly, karuna-caritas/prajna-gnosis. Pure consciousness is and does not.
TWO: And that applies to Jesus also?
ONE: Did he say 'God loves' or 'God is love'?
TWO: If I have understood, then love itself does not exist, nor hate?
ONE: Of course not.
'TWO: Nor impersonal, unpossessive love, asking no return and unaccompanied by jealousy?
ONE: That, too, would be a 'thing'.
TWO: Nor affectivity, knowledge, ignorance, cognition, prajna, karma?
ONE: Things, all things! The unending dualistic process of imagining entities and things!' - WWW

Anonymous said...

'There is no 'self and no 'other'. There is no 'wrong desire', no 'anger', no 'hatred', no 'love', no 'victory', no 'failure'. Only renounce the error of conceptual thought-processes and your nature will exhibit its pristine purity—-for this alone is the way to attain enlightenment.'
- Huang Po