Beyond Captive Meaning, September 1, 2021

Participant 1: I am very grateful for your presence, David. I experience deep peace and enjoyment in your meditations. I am curious to clarify what you mean when you use the word “Bliss.”

David: I use it for the most part as the Hindus use it. So, if you look up the term ananda on the internet you will see, especially if you go to a Sanskrit website that will give you the root of the word and the various connotations, you’ll get the flavor of my meaning. It’s what you’re describing, the peace, satisfaction, the sense of coming home that you feel when we connect in this universal field. It’s very simple really. It’s not complicated.

Participant 2: I awaken sometimes lately with no thought, and I say this is heaven here and now. I recall Nisargadatta, who to remain awake with no thoughts is the greatest worship, to remain in the waking state.

Moderator: From London, “I was asked recently how I could be sure there is one truth. I found myself trying to defend ultimate reality. I would like to know how you would respond to the same question of “Is there one truth?”

David: There’s one, but I’m not too sure about the truth part. And I would also say there’s truth, but I’m not too sure I would say there’s one truth. There’s the one, and there is the truth. These two things to me seem to be the same, that the truth is unfractioned, undivided, in other words, it’s one. But to say there is one truth points to an objectification of what truth might mean, my truth, your truth, this truth, that truth, those are all objectified stances, things which you can defend in arguments or discussions. But as you’ve seen it can become very awkward when you have to defend something.

The topic now is defending. Why would the truth need a defense, someone to defend it? If it was truth it would have to be apparent to everyone, not just to one person. And I would say further if someone has a personal truth, it cannot possibly be truth for the simple reason that it has adapted to someone’s idea. It has become captive to someone’s perspective. Unfortunately, this topic of owning the truth becomes a more virulent topic in the circles of spiritual teachings, religious teachings, where people state openly they have absolute truth. I’m happy to talk about absoluteness. I’m happy to talk about an absolute, perhaps even the Absolute but not my absolute or your absolute or Nisargadatta’s absolute or Ramana’s absolute.

This topic can quickly degrade into either a religious discussion or a philosophical discussion. I don’t have to explain all the arguments in religious circles. It’s pretty apparent what goes on there. It’s a circus. And if you have happened to had the good luck to study philosophy as I have, the same thing goes on in universities with people who believe that they study truth in the form of the subject philosophy. You get the same kind of defensiveness of various positions in universities. You get them in religious circles. In other words, you get divisive discussions based on discrimination, the use of discrimination to understand truth. And then you also get arguments in the religious circles around faith, around who has the right belief, the right faith, the one that God favors. Either way, we’re talking about self-righteousness and the belief that I have something particular that’s universal. I own something particular either in my mind or with my feelings that is universal.

So, the topic of self-righteousness, captivity of meaning, captive meaning, becomes a proper discussion, the way in which humans or a single human being wants to own and rule meaning. What makes this discussion on the religious and philosophical vulnerabilities to wanting to own meaning is that it’s all based on opinion, an opinion which usually is formed from accepting an authority, an outer authority whether it is scripture in the case of religion or whether it is a philosophical text in the case of philosophy. I’m a Platonist, I am a Hegelian, I am a Heidigarian. Or, I am a Christian, I am a Jew, I am a Muslim, I am a Sufi, I am a Buddhist, and it goes on and on.

Why do human beings want to protect themselves or shield themselves inside of ideas that appear to be larger than their own mind? Let’s ask that question. Why do human beings want to fit into a larger meaning? Is it because that they don’t have any meaning to begin with? Inside they are empty, helpless, ignorant, divided from existence, separated from existence? After all, existence appears to give birth to quite a bit of manifestation, life, and we don’t seem to have any indication that a tree or a butterfly is in search of truth. So, why are we as part of that same existence obsessed with finding meaning, creating meaning, living inside of meaning that somehow sedates us?

We become sedate when we find this thing called truth. Are we afraid to live without certainty about the meaning of everything? We become frightened because there’s nothing there but you when you don’t impose. When you stop imposing meaning, creating meaning on yourself and others, you find yourself alone. If you choose not to depend on someone else’s meaning, meaning, importing meaning, importing meaning and then adopting it, taking it in, saying this is it, I’ll believe this, I know Jesus loves me, I know Allah loves me and that he hates infidels. I know all that. It makes me feel wonderful. I finally have something powerful here in my hands, something that can have real practical consequences. I can begin shielding and defending, separating myself out from people who don’t believe like I do.

You suddenly, or one suddenly becomes very small to oneself when one does not identify with something big, something bigger, a bigger idea that puts everything into perspective for you whether the ideas come out of quantum physics or a piece of religious scripture. We begin to feel very tiny all of a sudden if we don’t buy-in. Yet, it’s very tempting to take that road for the obvious reason that you don’t want to feel small. You don’t want to feel insignificant. Therefore, you’ll choose this path of bolstering yourself, taking an ideological injection that you think is giving you nutriment.

At the root of every human being is this need to love and be loved. Mistakenly, it could be interpreted as weakness, as smallness, as a sense of being insignificant because you cannot demand love. You can only wait for it and offer it. Those are the only two options with regard to love. You offer it, you manifest it, you show it, you give it, or if you want to feel love coming from somewhere else other than your own area, you patiently open and wait for it. That area of opening and waiting is the place where people often go into panic attacks around the meaning of existence because they want love on demand. So then love could easily become an ideology. This ideology, this belief is now nourishing me because I’ve identified with something greater that has taken me out of that small area where I am so lonely.

But can you live inside that sense of loneliness? Do you know how to live inside that feeling without moving away from it, without covering it up? After all, the knee-jerk reaction to do something about that betrays itself immediately as inauthenticity, as fakery. In other words, you’re being moved by something inside of yourself which you feel is intolerable toward something that you now want to affirm. That movement is fakery because it’s all away from the initial situation. The what is of that situation is your helplessness, your smallness, what that is, where that’s coming from. And if you choose to live with that without running into some ideology to save you, you would be surprised at the feelings you go through as you investigate, as you open that up and feel into it.

The thing that looks like your worst enemy, in the end, might become your best friend because of the possibility of realness, of authenticity, of not escaping from what is. It’s in this sense I think that Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita says that which tastes like sweetness, in the beginning, turns to poison in the end or bitterness. And that which in the beginning tastes bitter ends up being sweet. So, it’s in the trajectory of time between opening into what is, abiding there, waiting inside of what is, and whatever comes next, that determines your spiritual fate. Your spiritual fate, meaning, I don’t mean to throw in a whole new term here, your total sense of being and existence, both in yourself as you feel yourself and as you open into everything.


You may also like

Heart-Felt Abidance, March 9, 2010
David: Namaste. Sitting here just saying nothing would be the optimal teaching. Language creates a whole series of unsolvable dilemmas and problems that are built within communication itself. Those dilemmas have to do with mainly the mind ...
Revolution In Consciousness, March 12, 2010
David: Now what? What’s next? Where are you now? Participant 1: Just happy. David: Why are you happy? What is the nature of this happiness? Is there anywhere to go? P1: No. David: Is there anything to do? P1: No. David: Is there anything to know ...
Grace and Surrender, February 27, 2010
David: We think we’re in a position to enlighten ourselves, but just the opposite is true. We’re only in a position to recognize where we are. And then in that recognition, there’s an easy movement that happens, an organic movement that unites ...
The Final Stroke of Bliss, February 26, 2010
Moderator: The viewer further comments, “I am melting into you, into us.” David: Right, and what more can you say beyond that? And what more clarification do you need? That’s everything that dissolution into Unity. And when you refer to me ...
Shakti's Waves Of Realization, February 17, 2010
Feel the power of the Shakti, how it moves in to usurp the ego center. It displaces the center of attention as the ego mind into the felt deepening of Being. In this way, the Shakti can produce Self-realization. It directly confronts and then ...
The Interiority Of Felt Being, February, 16, 2010
In meditation, whether it is a formally eyes-closed kind of meditation or whether it is an open-eyed tuning into the present or into what is, beckons us into the interior of quiet Consciousness. It dissolves the I. Meditation dissolves this ...
Absolute Enjoyment, February 13, 2010
David: When you’re doing sadhana and your mind is opening up to the Bliss of the Absolute and you’re still practicing within it you will do anything to maintain that. You look to maintain, you’re living for it. It’s like the long-lost friend ...
Talking About Avatars, February 13, 2010
David: But Avatars come into this world. They descend into this world. That’s what Avatar means. It means descent. So, it takes on the connotation of a descended human being, that is right out of the Absolute, just poof, with no karma, no real ...
Mind After Realization, February 13, 2010
Participant 1: [Comment inaudible.] David: Yeah, look at a lot of flowers. P1: I guess it kind of takes the edge off of it basically and makes it funny. David: Yeah, you’re supposed to take the edge off your suffering. That’s why you were given ...
Talking About Blacky, February 13, 2010
David: The guru is That. There’s no person in the guru no matter how he behaves, no matter what indication he may give that there’s a person operating. There’s no person. There’s just that Reality. Yet that personhood that appears to be seen, ...
Going Beyond Realization, February 12, 2010
Participant 1: Praying for help to God doesn’t feel real anymore. I feel stuck in my patterns. Oneness has disappeared. David: You can feel your patterns without feeling stuck in them. P1: I definitely feel my patterns. David: Okay, but I just ...
Love Is An Organic Force, February 05, 2010
David: The sun loves you. The sun loves you. The moon adores you, only as long as you’re here to experience it. This is not a rejection scheme. I’m not suggesting that you’re unloved in the Universe, precisely the opposite. You can’t live ...

Page 1 of 20

Easy Grace

Easy Grace
Meditations on Love, Awakening and the Ecstatic Heart

Newly Released DVDs