This month's contents:
Peace of Mind Despite Success (part 3) by Richard Rose | Six Methods of Perception by Richard Rose | Going Within by Bob Cergol | How to Surrender by Douglas Harding | Go Deeper than Love by D.H. Lawrence | Mind Breakers by Bob Fergeson | Material for Contemplation by Shawn Nevins | Humor
Sign up for e-mail alerts that will let you know when new issues are published.
Want to meet some of the Forum authors in person? Interested in meeting other Forum readers? Watch for more information about TAT's meeting schedule and programs.
~ From a 1984 talk in Akron, Ohio—Part 3
(continued from the January 2004 TAT Forum)
So as you move, you're starting to move considerably away from this idea of being nothing but a programmed hunk of flesh.
Now this is all demonstrable. I can't get into the techniques of it tonight, but I could cite you a lot of instances. When people first hear them they think, "Hey, this couldn't hardly be true." Some people are born with it, as the savant-idiots are. Some people can acquire it much more easily than other people; for some people it seems to be tremendously hard, and to other people it seems to come very quickly.
For instance, they had a boy—they used to put him up in an airplane and fly over the land, and he could look down and see oil beneath the ground; he would tell them there were oil deposits there. It's not too far-fetched from the fellow with the dowsing rod: that fellow also had some way of seeing the oil—he had a mental faculty that he developed which caused him to twist the stick himself. That's what happened—his hands had to twist it.
So these things fall into this idea of the supermind, or the direct-mind concept. Precognition, being someplace else—these things have happened to me a good bit throughout my life. Although not in a consistent manner; I couldn't tell you for instance what the stock market in AT&T is going to be tomorrow, or something like that—that doesn't happen. But every now and then this thing pops up.
If I put a great deal of weight upon it, if I didn't have some work to do that I thought was more important, I could allow myself to develop in some sort of medium, healer, Lord knows where it would take me. For instance, I've been able to see into people's heads. I've been able to feel and take pain out through the top of their heads. And— no science. Except what I call direct-mind science. There's a science to the procedure, but when it comes, it's spontaneous and unpredictable. And I always have to check to see if it actually happened.
I feel what I'm doing—I can feel pain in a person's body. The first time it happened was just on a hunch. It was with a man's wife—a man and his wife came to my house, among the first of the people that came into the group back at the beginning of this twelve-year period. I could sense something taking energy out of the room, and I looked around and it was she. She had a tremendous headache.
She called it a migraine headache. The only thing I noticed was that after it went on so long her lips got pale and kind of purple—she was just in pain. So a hunch came to me: Take the pain out of her head. So I walked over like an idiot—feeling like an idiot—because I didn't know anything would happen. But I had to follow my impulse. I went over and put my hand on her head. And I pulled my hand away very quickly, and she said, "Boy!—how did you do that?" That's when I knew something happened. I only obeyed an impulse.
Because—you don't have time to logically think out the things that can come into the mind, and from the mind. What we're getting into is that the mind is nothing more than a computer. You want to throw a certain subject into a computer and get an answer out—it takes a certain number of seconds for the computer to shuffle and run it out to you.
The human mind has a vast, tremendous amount of knowledge in it. And these things I'm telling you—I don't need to write a book—you live the life and they'll intuitively come to you whenever you need them. It will just come to you, and then the explanation will come later. If your nose is clean.
In other words, don't have any selfish ideas about building it up into a big-feeling empire. Just be glad that it happened and go on about your work. That's the formula, part of the formula. Don't be egotistical. Because it's done by working between. Working between. You desire—with no desire. That's the basic formula.
So if I run into somebody and see something and have a hunch, "Hey, you can alter that situation,"—I do it, and then look and see if it gets results. In other words, I have the faith that ultimately I'm not wrong—if the time is right. If the time is right.
Getting back to the computer—we have, what, ten million, ten billion cells? We have data, DNA molecules, genetic memory, all sorts of places in the body. I think that the basic mind—the real mind—is not physical. The brain is physical. The real mind—and this is again my concept; I'll always tell you that I've got a concept when I'm not talking about something I have conviction on—touches the body at the synapses.
In other words, there's another dimension called Mind—and in that, we have a substance called the mind, "our" mind—which transcends death. But which is in constant contact with us and also records the memories of this body. And I have a reason for what I'm saying: people in these after-death instances—when they come back, they remember.
There's a lot of stuff that if you read it and contemplate as you're reading it with an intuitive mind—a lot of wisdom will come to you out of these little books they're writing.
Monroe [Robert Monroe, who established the Monroe Institute], when he was sailing over Atlanta, Georgia or wherever he was, saw and recognized and remembered people. He's out of his body, but he's got his memory and his recollection with him. Meaning this has to record in that astral body, if you want to call it that. But at the same time, it records in this brain. There’s a lot of stuff that if you read it and contemplate as you're reading it with an intuitive mind, a lot of wisdom will come to you out of these little books they're writing.
I wondered why Monroe himself never mentioned—or any of the other people that have written about astral projection—that they had a memory there.
My brother had an experience. I don't know whether it was a case of astral projection—he wasn't conscious of being in an astral body. He was at the point of death from an automobile accident, lying on the operating table. And when he came out of it, he said he was above the table a considerable distance. His wife was cursing the priest—because she thought he was a devil-worshipper. And this was a hilarious thing to him—from where he was floating, he thought this was the height of absurdity—because it didn't matter whether they anointed his toes or not. The thing was that he was happy now, and he'd gotten rid of his wife and the priest, both.
But he remembered all those details and verified them when they brought him back. They called me on the phone that same time and said that he was dying and to get there if I wanted to see him while he was still alive.
So the little pieces of evidence—if you put them together, you find a tremendous picture. What we're getting down to is that there's a way of contacting simultaneously all of the knowledge that there is in that computer—and possibly all that's connected with that computer—by holding your head a certain way. And this is one of the aims of this system.
Now as I said previously, we have all sorts of success formulas. They have seminars that charge anywhere from two hundred fifty to six hundred dollars to tell people how to succeed. And what they are, they're exhilarating exercises. You can do aerobics and get the same thing. If you want to hop around and shout "Hallelujah" or "Hare Krishna" or something like that, you might get inspired—temporarily.
But what happens when reality comes back? What happens when the intoxication is over?
And the reason why there is trauma after that is that the person does not know himself. He doesn't even know what type of success he wants. For instance, if we could run through the crowd and ask everyone what they wanted out of life, I could guarantee you that within an hour after I asked them a few questions, they'd have doubts about whether that was really their aim. To have a million dollars, for instance, is nothing. Even the desire to know all there is to know, is nothing if you didn't know something, one thing in particular, correctly—and that's your definition. Then, after you find your definition, what is there to know next? What you are supposed to do. What you are supposed to do. Not what you want to do, but what you are supposed to do. Can you succeed? The best thing that was ever written was a little prayer used by Bob Wilson in the Alcoholics Anonymous literature [i.e., Niebuhr's "serenity" prayer]. This is the significance that you learn after you go through years of booze or years of dope—that you're not running the show. The closest you can get to running it is being on the train. Not trying to throw it off the tracks.
So, how do we go about this? It involves the whole being. As I said, we start back with basics—what we see. We see that we are a body. We see the reactions. We stand behind that to a degree. You watch the body, and you become an observer. I've got a little book written called the Psychology of the Observer, and this is what we are approaching now. You have to do this. You can't read books about your self. You have to go inside your self. The book isn't too thick. It won't get in your road. It will help you a little bit. Basically, as you approach it, if you are diligent, you don't need books. But why do you need books? Why do you go to church on Sunday? Because you can't keep a discipline every seventh day unless you are pushed in the door. Unless there is an attachment there, a social drawing, a feeling of responsibility to show up because you pledged yourself to that congregation, or something of that sort.
We go back to the business of trying to accept what we are supposed to be doing. That doesn't mean sit down. This is one of the bad things about when people get into any church or group. This is the decadence of a lot of groups. For instance, I was talking to this fellow in Irwin, and he said he had lots of people come, but they were shallow. He just flattered them. Most of these success seminars are just flattery—you can be this, you have this power, you're responsible. Nonsense. You didn't put yourself here. You didn't pick your parents. I'm not speaking negatively. You're supposed to think positively? Nonsense. What is positive? What is positive is what you're supposed to do. Who wrote your blueprint? Ask him. Ask it.
Who did write your blueprint? You wrote it. You wrote it. There's a paradox. Way back there, you wrote it. You've got to get back inside yourself to find out that you wrote it and what you want.
At the last lecture, I mentioned the word blueprint, and it puzzled one fellow. I asked for questions, and the fellow said, "What do you mean by blueprint?" He said, "Who wrote the blueprint?" I said I don't know who wrote your blueprint. I said all I know is the significance of nature shows that there is a pattern that you can't violate. If you do, you're clashing with the formula. This is the blueprint. In other words, snakes are not supposed to fly. They don't have any wings, they shouldn't try to fly.
So you find what your adaptation is and you're put in a certain environment, you're born with certain parents for a specific reason. You get ideas, of course, because of training, that seem to make something in life very important. Like, some guys want to find the link between certain moths. I see a guy on tv, running around with a net catching moths on tree bark down in Florida. He's dedicating his whole life to it. He didn't have much life left. They said he had cancer. Nevertheless, he's still out there with that net, and before he dies he's going to get this magical moth that will tell him the secrets of the moth kingdom. But he doesn't know who is swinging the net. That doesn't seem to concern him much. This is the case of a man knowing he is lost, and he has to keep moving. He uses his past experience in order to keep going, keep plowing along the same course.
The desire to know your self and the relentless push to find that self, leads you to find that there are two selves. Small-s self, that is who you thought you were, and large-S self, that you find yourself to be. Once you find your capital-S self, you don't have to be.... anything, except keep moving. Keep functioning, until your course is played. Beyond that there's no concern. The capital-S self is synonymous with the totality of all Essence.
~ Continued in the March TAT Forum.
© 1984 Richard Rose. All Rights Reserved.
~ Excerpted from The Psychology of the Observer
Richard Rose writes in his booklet on meditation:
"The ultimate aim of meditation is to go within. Going within means to find Reality by finding the Real part of ourselves. It does not mean merely playing around inside the head with random observations which we have discussed as being important to understanding the natural mechanism of man's mind."
"When we begin to meditate in the attempt to go within we should simply observe our self. We cannot really do it simply. It is a very profound task or attempt."
Rose also writes in that booklet of the levels of meditation, of which "Going Within" is the 4th level. The instruction given is: "Employ whatever necessary."
What does it mean to "go within"?
Its not a place, and you don't really "go" anywhere. It refers to the direction of one's attention.
What is it that you do to "go within"?
Life is basically an experience. Experience is a continuous stream. We can categorize our experience as "inner" and "outer." Inner experience refers to the totality of our individual reaction to outer experience—and on another level to inner experience itself in a spiraling, even "tail-chasing" process so the line between inner and outer is blurred—and ultimately may prove to be a false distinction, i.e. all experience is external....
Going within means a shift in the object of seeing or listening, of one's attention from the perceptions and events swirling around us to the seeing or listening to our reactions to life's experiences.
What determines those reactions?
We engage ceaselessly in evaluating whether our sense of self is affirmed or diminished. The former is pleasure. The latter is pain.
Which reaction is dominant for you? What is its source?
What fills your attention most of the time?
I believe that fear of death develops in concert with the development of identity, for the simple reason that intellectually we know that the body is mortal and therefore cannot be the vehicle that will ensure survival of that identity. The escape mechanism is to disassociate from the body, place oneself anterior to it and take possession of it, as it were. But since there is no hard proof, there is this core knowledge of the lie, and our lives become an incessant, doomed-to-fail effort at proving the independent existence of that identity by attempting to magnify it through experience.
What is the motivation for shifting your attention away from external experience to look at inner experience? Or said another way, what motivates you to examine what is occupying your attention?
The primary motivation is whenever experience diminishes the sense of self. It is not really motivation since the shift is a reaction. If looking at the internal experience of reaction is painful, the automatic reaction is to shift the attention away either by engaging in rationalizing analysis or by engaging in alternative mental or physical activity.
What result do you expect from "going within" as you conceive it?
Consciousness versus Awareness: definitions
The dictionary defines the words "consciousness" and "awareness" as synonyms, and each word is used in the definition for the other. The definition for both words depends on there being an object to which consciousness or awareness applies. This implies that there must be a subject who possesses the attribute of consciousness. One is either conscious of something or not. In this sense the words are verbs and denote action by an individual being—even if that action is itself either automatic—or an unconscious action!
Students of the esoteric have this concept that "God" or the "Source" is pure "awareness." They conceive this awareness to be a possession or attribute of God's, just as they perceive it to be an attribute or possession of their own self—or one that can be acquired. Realization is conceived as adding god-like awareness or consciousness to this same personal self. This all stems from an egocentric point of reference that places their ego anterior to everything else. Seekers of enlightenment have this idea that they will become god-like, or one with god, or attain this god-like awareness, and so there is the presumption of personal immortality and eternal ego consciousness.
Let's see how this would apply to God, Supreme Being or Transcendental Awareness:
What is the object of this consciousness or awareness? What is God aware of?
If God's awareness is without object then, how is God alive according to our concept of being? Does God know that he's alive?
Does the knowledge of "being alive" require an identity? Would you be alive without your identity?—Without your body? Without your mind? Without—YOU!?
If God is all-knowing, what does he think about?
If God is beyond all thought, what occupies his attention?
If God is the object of his own attention, how long is God's attention span?
If God is beyond time and exists eternally, then how could God not be eternally bored with himself?
If you believe in your own immortality, or even the possibility, what will the object of your attention be for eternity?
Can you imagine yourself, your identity with all its history, as the object of your consciousness for eternity—with no ability to alter that history? Is that realization?—Or the definition of Hell?
I distinguish between the two words consciousness and awareness.
For me, consciousness is personal and temporary; awareness is impersonal and timeless. Consciousness is the experience of individuality, and awareness is that which powers it. The "experience of individuality" is motion on a background of immobility—a whisper that cannot alter or penetrate the silence. Consciousness is a point. Consciousness is the point at which the un-manifested intersects the manifested. Awareness is boundless.
Awareness is consciousness without an object, unless you wish to say that awareness is its own object.
How then does an individual become aware of that which is anterior to that individual? The question seems a contradiction—indeed a Koan!
The short answer is by "abandoning the ego-centric position"—another paradox. The verb abandon implies action by the ego, which action itself would reinforce the supremacy of the ego's position. Therefore it is said that the ego is taken from you or dropped. When one "gives up" or "expires" it is not a voluntary action but a spontaneous acceptance or natural consequence....
The process is negative or subtractive. The end result is not created by the process.
Two Meditation Exercises:
Superficial "Going Within"—skirting with loss of self—and resistance....
(Looking at self-dissatisfaction in a specific instance.)
Focus your attention on that which bothers you the most about yourself. What troubles you more than anything else? (It is that which is wrong about yourself—that which hinders you from attaining the fullness of life that you crave.)
This is NOT "going within." This is focusing the attention on one's reactions to external experience. This reaction comprises one's internal experience. It's like a "parallel universe" or dream world that is evoked by external experience.
Real "Going Within"—acceptance of what is....
(Looking at the self directly.)
Focus your attention on what it feels like right at this moment to be you—to exist as you. You have to do this gently. You cannot strain to focus the attention in this fashion. You need only to just notice your sense of self and then gently notice how does it FEEL to exist as this identity this moment. Perhaps you notice a certain positive or negative feeling that accompanies your self-existence.
How strong is the sense of existence as you?
This is a crude attempt to illustrate my point: Self-dissatisfaction is merely the kindling to light a fire that must ultimately consume you. You must get to a point where the looking inward is automatic, and there is either not much reaction to what you see—or, if there is strong reaction, there is simultaneously a detachment from and acceptance of the reaction—just as if it's merely another part of the experience you've had to contend with all along anyway, and it's no longer of much value to you.
Note: For years my meditations were all about me—my problems, my feelings, becoming free of myself. There was much I didn't like about myself, and I'd lost track of it all and just plain felt bad, inferior to others. It was only after this had burnt itself out—with some help perhaps from looking at it—that I began to look at the world outside myself. And when this happened, I began receding from it—automatically.
~ From a presentation delivered at the July 2003 TAT meeting.
~ Excerpted from Know Deeply, Know Thyself More Deeply
Go deeper than love, for the soul has greater depths,
love is like the grass, but the heart is deep wild rock
molten, yet dense and permanent.
Go down to your deep old heart, and lose sight of yourself.
And lose sight of me, the me whom you turbulently loved.
Let us lose sight of ourselves, and break the mirrors.
For the fierce curve of our lives is moving again to the depths
out of sight, in the deep living heart.
"The greatest revolution in our generation is the discovery that human beings, by changing the inner attitude of their minds, can change the outer aspects of their lives." ~ William James
When we first start out in this business of finding the Self, the Truth of who or what we really are, we are forced to use the only tools at hand: our thinking and feeling. After a few years of trial and error with emotion-based cogitation, we may stumble upon the intuition that there's another tool available: direct seeing, or the listening attention. Our personal heredity, environment, and karma, will lead our thinking and feeling around and around in a never-ending circle of ego-fueled projections. This mechanical tail chasing may become more and more astute as we grow older and more crystallized, but never leads us to Truth. How can we blow a hole in this armored box of mind and emotion? Is it possible to perceive without coloring the perception?
Let's get to really know ourselves by playing some games. Drop the heavy learned pose of knowing, and instead return to the lighthearted innocence of simple seeing. Take the sense of "I" from your thinking and feeling, and allow the ever-present inner silence to be your center. We will now become, as Douglas Harding says, headless, alert idiots. Like taking a mini-vacation from yourself, drop the "you" you try so hard to be, and just listen and look. Does it sound like fun? You bet it is.
Put your conceptual thinking, precious feelings, and clever intellect aside and try the following trick: pick an object in front of you, say the tip of your finger. Where is this object in relation to you, as awareness? Now pick one behind you, the same finger if you like, and see where it is (the memory or feeling) in relation to you. Now, close your eyes, and scratch your nose. Where is this happening, in relation to you? Now, scratch the back of your neck. Look closely. Where is this taking place, in relation to you, as awareness? (Hint: having a double arrow of attention is imperative: one pointed outward towards the object, one inward towards the Unknown.)
Now, let's play a modified version of the same little game. Close your eyes, and, while looking inside with your inner eye, scratch the back of your neck with your finger. In your mind, which do you label as "me," and which as "object": the finger, or your neck? If you'd like, you can try switching the subject/object relationship. If you see the finger as object, and the neck, or body, as "me," try becoming the finger, and let the body be the object.
Let's revert back to thinking for a bit, a relapse, so to speak, and see what just happened. The feeling of "me," and the feeling of the "world" or "objects," is an arbitrary designation brought about by what we call learning, another name for hypnosis. It is not a fact of our own seeing, based on present evidence. If we look a bit closer, with our eyes closed, we see that what we call the finger and body are simply tensions in the field of our awareness. They are both what we call objects, mind-made, whether we have been induced to call them "me" or "I," the body or the world.
To illustrate this even further, let's try this trick. Remember to keep focused, in silence, out of worded thought and the internal dialogue, and only watch what you're seeing with the mind's eye, on present evidence. Try and remember a moment when you were offended or hurt by someone. C'mon, this isn't hard, we all have many such moments, I'm sure. Relive the event just as it happened. Now, on present evidence, what is it in you that is hurt? And what is the form of the offending party, right now, as you see it? Remember, this is all now only in memory, so you can look clearly into your mind, and simply watch. What is the make up of the subject/object relationship in this play of victim and perpetrator? Who is doing what to whom? Where are you in all of this?
Now, for all you intellectuals, pick up a pencil or pen, and take a good look at it. Give a thorough, verbal description of the object before you. You may even list any associations the pen/pencil has for you. Now quick, who was talking? Who was listening? Who was being spoken to? Remember, this internal dialogue is happening inside your own head. Look carefully: in which voice is the "I" usually placed?
Now, let's finish up by giving ourselves a break, and get up and get a drink. But before we go to the kitchen for our drink, let's prepare ourselves. First, let's take a look at our aim, simple as it may be. We wish to get up, go to the kitchen and get a drink. This is our desire of the moment. You might even call it our longing. Now, without thinking, but by just observing in the present moment, watch what actually happens as we allow our longing to unfold. As we begin, the desk with its computer swings back and out of the way, and the view of our desired destination, the kitchen, swings into view. As our longing continues, the kitchen magically gets closer and closer. Realigning itself to our vision, it eventually presents itself to us, even if a hallway or another room has to first pass by. The water glass we need comes into view. A hand reaches out and picks it up. Then, the glass and the hand go under the faucet. Another hand appears, and turns on the faucet. The water appears and fills the glass. A hand puts the glass to a mouth and the water flows inside, becoming a feeling or tension somewhere within our mind's field of view. Somewhere, desire is replaced by satisfaction.
Now, what did we really have to do with any of this? Nothing. It just happened as an answer to our longing. The only part we actively played, in truth, was that of observer. The ever-still awareness we really are was witness to a play of desire and fulfillment. The play was created from nothing, out of nowhere, to miraculously appear in the aware space that is Us.
All spiritual work relies on the same basic principle. Our true longing eventually brings us to that which fulfills. We can now also see how the simple aim of reading this paper was not interfered with by the smaller aims of conducting the individual experiments. The end goal was achieved by progressing from one small goal to another, with our longing as the guide. As long as we didn't cater to a conflicting desire, and thus were not distracted, we came to the goal.
Any question asked with absolute sincerity, honesty, and commitment will be answered. If we want the world of form and images, along with its corresponding pleasure and pain, we will have it. If we wish to gaze upon the miracle of existence right before our eyes, created from nothing, moment by moment, we may have that, too. If you want to know what your true desire is, look truthfully at the life before your eyes. There is your true longing, playing out before you in the events of your day-to-day life. If there is static and pain, worldly desire and anxiety, then find out why you long for it. The answers are there, in the present moment. Bravely clear your vision, and turn the subjective world of your unconscious desires and fears into a simple clear longing for Truth.
Note: On Saturday afternoon during the November 2003 TAT meeting, we walked down two hills on the Rose farm from the community building to Big Wheeling Creek, coming out of the woods onto an open field of harvested corn. We then split off to find separate spots on the border of trees along the creek, to spend some time—listening. This material was available as a handout for possible contemplation.
Big Wheeling Creek, WV - by Art Ticknor
An opportunity opens,
Life is a series of misleading loves
Your claim to a season
I fear that between each thought
The diminishment of many of our psychological ills and acceleration of our retreat from error occurs through the contemplation of death. It is useful to recognize death in its many forms: fear, loneliness, loss, sleep, embarrassment, and forgetfulness.
"I'm trying to age a few young people." ~ Richard Rose
Frisbeetarianism (n), the belief that, when you die, your soul goes up on the roof and gets stuck there.
(We appreciate hearing from you.)
Want to help? Your donation of $5 or more will support the continuation of the Forum and other services that the TAT Foundation provides. TAT is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit educational organization and qualifies to receive tax-deductible contributions. Or, download this .pdf TAT Forum flyer and post it at coffee shops, bookstores, and other meeting places in your town, to let others know about the Forum.