i am challenging your level of intelligence here.
it is just stupid to refuse to look at something you are told is the truth and investigate it for yourself.

now, the degree to which what i have said pisses you off and sends you into an internal tailspin, is the degree to which it can be safely said the lie of self is functioning there.

that you which you assume exists because that feeling of offense or insult happened, does not really exist.

that's the truth.

there are no persons. personalities play in bodies like theater on a stage. they've been scripted by genetics and experiential conditioning. these stories start and end. they refer to nothing real.

what do you consider to be your self?

body?
mind?
thoughts?
opinions?
habits?
traits?
preferences?
talents?
wants?
goals?
purpose?
problems?
genes?
DNA?
soul?
spirit?

will any of these things last forever?

all of these things are observable.  we observe them with the brain.  everything you think is you boils down to functionality that is inseparable from the universe.

so what is really you?

are you the universe?

does it feel that way?

when you think about yourself and your needs and your life, what exactly are you referring to by calling all those things yours?

regarding the belief that the soul will last forever.  that the soul will last forever is unprovable.  it is just a belief, which is a widely held thought, which is based on the existence of the brain and the brain can only function in the universe.

so where is this soul?

where is the you, you assume you are?

ok people.

i stand here now and say to you that the truth is understood here.

and i say this also:

despite knowing there is no, and has never been, a separate 'me' or 'you'; despite knowing the truth of no self, i am in a state of confusion.

having been in a love affair with my seeking self for the past 20 years, i've awoken to find the words of those who i looked to for pointers on the 'path' to the truth to be nearly irrelevant to what finally pointed me at the nothing that i really am.

why is this happening?  why are so many books and films being made that do not simply scream:

"there is no you!"
go look for yourself.
put down everything and go LOOK.
focus on this one question.
"there is no you.  is it true?"

all it took for me, after all those years, was to look at what i believed my core self to be (i am this seeker for the truth.  i am this seeker of a way to 'let go'.), and then look for that self which the thought pattern of seeking assumed was real.

not until that task was completed, did the truth become obvious.  only then, did all the poetic words and pointers of the published liberated make perfect sense.

i submit that this soothing poetry is not a friendly way to share.  i submit that there are people in deep pain who need to be pointed right at the reality of their non-existance, and fast!

there are a lot of possibilities for why the mushy murk of spirituality spreads.  perhaps liberation is not just the direct certainty that there is no 'me'.  if that is the case, i would like to hear about it.

i have tested this again and again for myself and i am absolutely certain that this is the only truth that answers all the questions.

no me - no death.
no me - no fear.
no me - why not no problem with just getting people up to the gate and pointing them in the right direction?

liberation is not spiritual.
it's just reality.
it's just perception of things as they really are.
it's truth.
there are no beliefs in reality.
reality doesn't need a belief.
it is just how things are.
reality doesn't need YOU.
it doesn't need a 'you' to believe anything, to be how it is.

take a look.

do you wonder who you really are?
do you wonder what you really are?
do you have it all figured out?
you're so tall, so wide, so old, so gendered, so 'preferenced', etc.?

are you those statistics?
are you a combination of descriptive words?
is there something real those words are describing?
is there something tangible and findable that those descriptions point to?

have you noticed how each of those descriptions is not the way you would have composed this idea of yourself when you were 10?
or 2?
or newborn?
when was it that this 'you' you are describing started?
do you remember being that newborn?
do you have proof you became you at a certain point?

how does reading these questions feel?
is that feeling you?
if you don't know when you started, can you know THAT you started?
do you have any proof?
if you don't know that you started, is it possible you may not exist at all?

is it possible that the description, which clearly requires changing as often as the aspects being described change, is actually describing something unreal?

what is your proof that there is something real, and where is it?

what is the proof of you?

this is the best explanation i have read for how to look directly and honestly at the statement 'there is no you.'


14 September 2010 16:50

bobby said...

    This honesty that you describe, are you saying to start with the assumption that something is true then try to prove or disprove that assumption?
  
Ciaran said...

    No, you stare deeply into the possibility that it IS true.

    You look deeply and unflinchingly at the consequences, at what they would really mean, at what it would really involve if this thing was actually, really true.

    What you are not, not, not doing is engaging in some 'prove or disprove' shit in your head. This will be fatal to your honesty.

    If anything, looking at it from that point of view, you are trying to prove something you don't want to believe in.

    But even that is a hopeless parody of what this is really about.

    If you really want to disprove something, if you really want to fight something, you have to let go of your own preconceptions about it.

    Many people would probably nod along to this, but wouldn't actually do what it took - real honesty - to do this.

    What it takes, to leave behind your preconceptions, is to just force yourself to give the opposing viewpoint credibility.

    Even if it seems incredible - especially if it seems incredible.

    Even if it seems appalling - especially if it seems appalling.

    Even if it immediately makes you want to dismiss it - especially if it immediately makes you want to dismiss it.

    Force yourself (basically just shout at yourself until you do this) to treat the opposing viewpoint like it's genuinely credible.

    And the more credible you can force yourself to treat it, the deeper your understanding of it will be, and if it is untrue, in real life, the kind of counterargument you'll come up with by doing this will be absolutely devastating.

    If it is true, you will not only see that it is true, but how it is true and why it is true. That truth will be deeply rooted in you, and will give you a very strong piece of insight that will, because it is so deep, almost always shed serious light on seemingly unrelated issues.

    Force yourself to take shit seriously. That's it in a short sentence.

    In a medium sized sentence: force yourself to seriously face the possibility that whatever argument has challenged you is absolutely true.

    This is real honesty.


See the full post here:

http://ruthlesstruthdotcom.blogspot.com/2010/09/how-to-be-honest.html

sit down here a moment.

i want to tell you a story.

once upon a time, a baby was born.  this baby was born in the same way you've probably been told you were born.

the baby grew.

as the baby grew, sounds that were made by its family began to be associated with particular things.

dogs.  cats.  blue.  sky.

these sounds began to repeat inside, without making noise the others seemed to be able to hear and respond to.

then the baby began to repeat the noise the others made.  the others were so happy with it then!  clearly it was on to something.

it learned the right noises to make and understood the noises the others made.

it knew names for everything, including the name the others called it.  it learned to make a drawing of it's name.  it was again praised.

with all the interest and excitement of participating in all this noise making with reference to aspects of life, there were disagreements.

not everyone called something the same thing!  drama!

i suspect there are a number of reasons why the separating and naming of life's myriad manifestations became the most practiced human activity on the planet, considering all the stimulation it seems to provide for the non-existant selves playing their roles to the hilt.

with this obsession, the lie was intertwined.  assumptions were made.

i exist.  my self.  me vs. you.

is that truth?

there is the story of a birth, a body, a name.  the story includes memories of the experiences of learning and growing.

even the programming of the assumption of 'you' is part of this story.

but where is the you all this stuff is draped over?

if you look underneath all of it, will you really find you there?

go look.

i dare you.