Click here to go to the next issue
Highlights Home Page | Receive the Nonduality Highlights each day
How to submit material to the Highlights
Nonduality Highlights: Issue #3450, Saturday, February 21, 2009, Editor: Mark
Events in time and space - birth and death, cause and effect -
these may be taken as one; but the body and the embodied are not
of the same order of reality. The body exists in time and space,
transient and limited, while the dweller is timeless and
spaceless, eternal and all-pervading. To identify the two is a
grievous mistake and the cause of endless suffering. You can
speak of the mind and body as one, but the body-mind is not the
underlying reality.
- Nisargadatta Maharaj, posted to ANetofJewels
Our existence is trapped between desire and fear in the context
of time. The core of our problem, then lies in thought, which is
the creator of time.
- Ramesh Balsakar, posted to ANetofJewels
Human beings actually have no more independence or autonomy in
living their lives than do the characters in a dream. Neither do
they have anything to do with the creation of the dream or
anything in it. They are simply being lived along with everything
else in this living dream of the manifested universe. The entire
dream is unreal. Only the dreamer is real, and that is
Consciousness itself.
- Ramesh Balsakar, posted to ANetofJewels
The Om of physics - Dalai Lama
From Geilenkotten
One of the most important philosophical insights in Buddhism
comes from what is known as the theory of emptiness. At its heart
is the deep recognition that there is a fundamental disparity
between the way we perceive the world, including our own
existence in it, and the way things actually are. In our
day-to-day experience, we tend to relate to the world and to
ourselves as if these entities possess self-enclosed, definable,
discrete and enduring reality. For instance, if we examine our
own conception of selfhood, we will find that we tend to believe
in the presence of an essential core to our being, which
characterises our individuality and identity as a discrete ego,
independent of the physical and mental elements that constitute
our existence. The philosophy of emptiness reveals that this is
not only a fundamental error but also the basis for attachment,
clinging and the development of our numerous prejudices.
According to the theory of emptiness, any belief in an objective
reality grounded in the assumption of intrinsic, independent
existence is untenable. All things and events, whether material,
mental or even abstract concepts like time, are devoid of
objective, independent existence. To possess such independent,
intrinsic existence would imply that things and events are
somehow complete unto themselves and are therefore entirely
self-contained. This would mean that nothing has the capacity to
interact with and exert influence on other phenomena. But we know
that there is cause and effect - turn a key in a starter, spark
plugs ignite, the engine turns over and petrol and oil are
burned. In a universe of self-contained, inherently existing
things, these events would never occur.
Effectively, the notion of intrinsic, independent existence is
incompatible with causation. This is because causation implies
contingency and dependence, while anything that possesses
independent existence would be immutable and self-enclosed.
Everything is composed of dependently related events, of
continuously interacting phenomena with no fixed, immutable
essence, which are themselves in constantly changing dynamic
relations. Things and events are "empty" in that they
do not possess any immutable essence, intrinsic reality or
absolute "being" that affords independence.
The theory of emptiness was first systematically expounded by the
great Buddhist philosopher Nagarjuna (circa 2nd century AD).
Little is known of his personal life, but he came from southern
India and he was - after Buddha himself - the single most
important figure for the formulation of Buddhism in India.
Historians credit him with the emergence of the Middle Way school
of Mahayana Buddhism, which remains the predominant school among
Tibetans to this day.
One of the most extraordinary and exciting things about modern
physics is the way the microscopic world of quantum mechanics
challenges our common-sense understanding. The facts that light
can be seen as either a particle or a wave, and that the
uncertainty principle tells us we can never know at the same time
what an electron does and where it is, and the quantum notion of
superposition all suggest an entirely different way of
understanding the world from that of classical physics, in which
objects behave in a deterministic and predictable manner. For
instance, in the well-known example of Schrödinger's cat, in
which a cat is placed inside a box containing a radioactive
source that has a 50 per cent chance of releasing a deadly toxin,
we are forced to accept that, until the lid is opened, this cat
is both dead and alive, seemingly defying the law of
contradiction.
To a Mahayana Buddhist exposed to Nagarjuna's thought, there is
an unmistakable resonance between the notion of emptiness and the
new physics. If on the quantum level, matter is revealed to be
less solid and definable than it appears, then it seems to me
that science is coming closer to the Buddhist contemplative
insights of emptiness and interdependence. At a conference in New
Delhi, I once heard Raja Ramanan, the physicist known to his
colleagues as the Indian Sakharov, drawing parallels between
Nagarjuna's philosophy of emptiness and quantum mechanics.
After having talked to numerous scientist friends over the years,
I have the conviction that the great discoveries in physics going
back as far as Copernicus give rise to the insight that reality
is not as it appears to us. When one puts the world under a
serious lens of investigation - be it the scientific method and
experiment or the Buddhist logic of emptiness or the
contemplative method of meditative analysis - one finds things
are more subtle than, and in some cases even contradict, the
assumptions of our ordinary common-sense view of the world.
One may ask, apart from misrepresenting reality, what is wrong
with believing in the independent, intrinsic existence of things?
For Nagarjuna, this belief has serious negative consequences.
Nagarjuna argues that it is the belief in intrinsic existence
that sustains the basis for a self-perpetuating dysfunction in
our engagement with the world and with our fellow human beings.
By according intrinsic properties of attractiveness, we react to
certain objects and events with deluded attachment, while towards
others, to which we accord intrinsic properties of
unattractiveness, we react with deluded aversion.
In other words, Nagarjuna argues that grasping at the independent
existence of things leads to affliction, which in turn gives rise
to a chain of destructive actions, reactions and suffering. In
the final analysis, for Nagarjuna, the theory of emptiness is not
a question of the mere conceptual understanding of reality. It
has profound psychological and ethical implications.
I once asked my physicist friend David Bohm this question: from
the perspective of modern science, apart from the question of
misrepresentation, what is wrong with the belief in the
independent existence of things? His response was telling. He
said that if we examine the various ideologies that tend to
divide humanity, such as racism, extreme nationalism and the
Marxist class struggle, one of the key factors of their origin is
the tendency to perceive things as inherently divided and
disconnected. From this misconception springs the belief that
each of these divisions is essentially independent and
self-existent. Bohm's response, grounded in his work in quantum
physics, echoes the ethical concern about harbouring such beliefs
that had worried Nagarjuna, who wrote nearly 2000 years before.
Granted, strictly speaking, science does not deal with questions
of ethics and value judgements, but the fact remains that
science, being a human endeavour, is still connected to the basic
question of the well-being of humanity. So in a sense, there is
nothing surprising about Bohm's response. I wish there were more
scientists with his understanding of the interconnectedness of
science, its conceptual frameworks and humanity.
- The Dalai Lama, from The Universe in a Single Atom
There is a particular snag in the spiritual investigation that
must be unhooked, that must be unraveled. It's not a new one.
You've certainly heard of it before. It is the tendency and the
habit to look for truth or perfection or realization outside of
oneself. It's important to understand how this comes about. Then
maybe that understanding will be the means of unraveling this
very tight snag. An exquisite and important moment in a
lifestream occurs when one recognizes the disgusting habits, the
addictions, the horror, the violence, and the filth that one has
called oneself. It is a great shock, a great shaking, and it is
very important, otherwise, the horror and filth just continue to
accumulate in the name and the exultation of "me" and
"my story." This recognition is a spiritual shock, and
there can be, and usually is, a great trembling, and then a
desire to find what is true, what is real, what is pure, what is
holy, what is free. So, the search begins "out there."
We have many exquisite examples of "out there." There
have been sages and saints, messiahs, god women and god men
throughout time who we can point to and say, "Ah, there it
is. Why can't I get there?" Then there are many attempts to
fix what was seen as disgusting and limited so that it can be
like what is imagined to be pure and holy. All of you have tried
this. Certainly this is not news, right? There is striving and
working, a sense of gaining ground and sense of losing ground,
until finally, there is another great spiritual shock. I call it
"the great disillusionment." When it is recognized that
all of the fixing of the character or the personality or the
habits or the addictions still has not touched that seeming gulf
of separation between who you are and the perfection itself,
there is a great disillusionment. Such a gulf appears there. This
is the soul's longing for God. And you see clearly that all of
the scrambling and gaining and climbing up the ladders still
hasn't touched the depth of this longing. This is crucial. This
is the dark night of the soul. It is the recognition;
I will never be able to do it. I've tried, I've worked, but I
will never be able to do it.
There are many, many avenues away from this moment. You might
encourage yourself with thoughts like, Yes, you can do it. Just
wait, God will come for you. Try harder. Stick to it.
But I invite you, rather than taking any of those avenues, to
actually allow yourself to fall onto this double-edged sword of
disillusionment and longing. Fall right through the middle so
that the sword rips apart this sense of a gulf of separation.
Fall right into the gulf.
Refuse to take any avenue of comfort or hope or at this point,
even belief. Actually be willing to meet the sword, to have it
rip open your heart.
This is the true invitation of satsang. It is a radical
invitation. It is an acceptance of not moving from the longing,
from the disillusionment, to see, Who am I, really? What is
really here? It is an acceptance to see what is deeper than what
is perceived, what is deeper than what is sensed. It is an
acceptance to die. All of the conditioning is not to die. All of
the support and the hope and the belief is, I won't die, or If I
die, I'll go to heaven where I'll meet my grandmother, or my
friends who went before me. Under all of these hopes and beliefs
is this longing. I invite you to fall into that longing. Not into
the story of the longing, but into the longing itself. It is not
separate from the disillusionment. True disillusionment is holy.
Illusion is wiped out. What cannot be imagined, what is not
subject to the mind's simulation, reveals itself.
While it is awesome to meet some person or some moment that can
shake loose the illusion, and while that cannot help but be
revered, it is very important to see how the individual mind
creates a gulf of separation. All of the greatest teachers have
said, "You and I are one," or "I and my father are
one," or "All is the one Self." It is ironic how
the mind takes that and makes it into an illusion of separation;
He and his father are one. She and they are the same. All is one,
except for me, and I am left out. It's familiar, isn't it? These
habits of thought are strong, and even with the best intentions,
they get reinforced. In the willingness to stop feeding these
habits of thought, the longing and the disillusionment are faced
directly, much as Christ on his cross faced the apparent
abandonment of God.
This is open to everyone. Somehow, to some degree or another, you
have accepted the invitation. There is always more. Come in more
deeply, more deeply, until finally, you can find no distinction
between in and out, between the father and the child, between God
and soul, between you and me. This is the possibility that the
invitation to satsang reveals. This is your possibility. It is
not limited to Buddha or Christ. It is not limited to Ramana. It
is not limited to Gangaji. It is not limited, and that is the
greatest teaching. It is limitless. God's presence is
omnipresent, everywhere, every time.
This is the promise of all great teachings. It is the message
that my guru's guru transmitted to him. It is the message that my
guru transmitted to me. It is the message that is freely
transmitted to you. It is the message that comes from the core of
your being. To simply receive what is already in the core of your
being is the willingness to come in. Not some other time, but
now, always now. So I welcome you. I welcome you in. What appears
to be out is also in.
- Meeting with Gangaji, San Diego, California - March 7, 1997