The Paradox of Teaching

[pianoperformer]

I know that it is my purpose to teach and to heal. It's been revealed to me over and over, both through my connection with Jesus, as well as through others I have spoken to. The theme has been clear all throughout.

However, I'm beginning to have a conflict about even the possibility of teaching. Who is there to teach? I've noticed that if I see a problem, it stems from my own consciousness. When I go in and heal, love, and integrate it, there is no longer a problem.

Furthermore, I know that anything I see is just aspects of myself projected "out there." There is really no one to talk to, no one to heal, no one to teach. There's just being.

Even in the simple act of speaking to anyone, I must operate under the assumption that "I" exist, the person I'm speaking to exists, they are separate from me, and that there are concepts about which we are speaking. What a bunch of assumptions that don't even hold up when one really looks at them.

Now I see why the masters are largely silent. What is there to say?

I remember when reading Dr. Hawkins, he says that there is a level in which it becomes more difficult to do anything, let alone teach, but that beyond this level, they somehow are able to do so again. The great masters such as Jesus, Buddha, Krishna, etc, all taught. How did they do so I wonder?

Especially Jesus. Not only did he teach, but he healed as well. Why did he heal? How could he heal if he did not see any problems in anyone? Perhaps someone's perception of sickness could not hold up in his presence, so they were just healed by default. He really just healed their delusions.

Even in writing this post, I am asking aspects of myself about their opinion on this. Really there is no one. There's just being.

But nonetheless, the question is still being asked, albeit by no one and to no one. Let's see what answer bubbles up.

[ButterflyWoman]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

However, I'm beginning to have a conflict about even the possibility of teaching. Who is there to teach? I've noticed that if I see a problem, it stems from my own consciousness. When I go in and heal, love, and integrate it, there is no longer a problem.

The same is the case in my perspective of reality. Who is there to teach? Only myself.

[zeitgeist]

I tend to share my spiritual insights on my blog and am always amazed of how connected I am with my visitors. Since I am able to see the stories they click on, I have found time and time again that the themes they are looking at happen to be the one that concern me as well on that day. Once I would have thought that I am lifting up others, but quite frankly it is the other way around. They are lifting me up. The only conclusion of this is that there is only one person out there in the universe, and that's me, or you, it is really the same thing. Thanks for sharing!

[pianoperformer]

Originally Posted by zeitgeist

I tend to share my spiritual insights on my blog and am always amazed of how connected I am with my visitors. Since I am able to see the stories they click on, I have found time and time again that the themes they are looking at happen to be the one that concern me as well on that day. Once I would have thought that I am lifting up others, but quite frankly it is the other way around. They are lifting me up. The only conclusion of this is that there is only one person out there in the universe, and that's me, or you, it is really the same thing. Thanks for sharing!

I have found that, too.

So what's the point of sharing? What's the point of posting your blog posts or replying to this thread?

What would be the motivation of a master to teach, such as Jesus or Buddha?

[VinceG]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

I know that it is my purpose to teach and to heal. It's been revealed to me over and over, both through my connection with Jesus, as well as through others I have spoken to. The theme has been clear all throughout.

Indeed, it is the purpose of all of the spiritually advanced. We are destined to create a new society and bring it to a Golden Age of achievement and wonder.

However, I'm beginning to have a conflict about even the possibility of teaching. Who is there to teach? I've noticed that if I see a problem, it stems from my own consciousness. When I go in and heal, love, and integrate it, there is no longer a problem.

You can find things to teach simply by looking out at the world. You may see friends in need of guidance, assistance, or just a shoulder to lean on. These actions are teaching as much as any other. You don't have to be a literal teacher in the sense of having pupils and structured advancement.

Furthermore, I know that anything I see is just aspects of myself projected "out there." There is really no one to talk to, no one to heal, no one to teach. There's just being.

Be careful with this line of reasoning. It is not intended to be literal. You've read Hawkins, so I'll put this in his language. Going about things in this way leads to the end-point of The Void. Existence in the Void is a sublimely awesome place, but it is not the endpoint.

Many schools of Buddhist thought place The Void at the endpoint, which is why you hear this being bandied about so much.

Even in the simple act of speaking to anyone, I must operate under the assumption that "I" exist, the person I'm speaking to exists, they are separate from me, and that there are concepts about which we are speaking. What a bunch of assumptions that don't even hold up when one really looks at them.

We are always living in one illusion or another. The trick isn't to try to remove all illusion, but to gain an element of control over the illusion. Life without illusion would be a pretty dull place.

Now I see why the masters are largely silent. What is there to say?

They're silent because you haven't asked them anything that you really need a Master to answer. Their teachings are vague and general because you're expected to flesh them out with your own experience.

I remember when reading Dr. Hawkins, he says that there is a level in which it becomes more difficult to do anything, let alone teach, but that beyond this level, they somehow are able to do so again. The great masters such as Jesus, Buddha, Krishna, etc, all taught. How did they do so I wonder?

He's talking about the crossover into level 600. At this point it becomes difficult to maintain a worldly presence. Around the 700s, they return to the world, having completely shed their former selves and living completely spiritual lives with just the barest veneer of worldliness. I would love to discuss this topic further, it's something I've thought a lot about.

Especially Jesus. Not only did he teach, but he healed as well. Why did he heal? How could he heal if he did not see any problems in anyone? Perhaps someone's perception of sickness could not hold up in his presence, so they were just healed by default. He really just healed their delusions.

Perception doesn't completely go away, even for guys like Jesus. What Jesus does is he looks at the person needing healing with the eyes of that person, sees what's needs to be done with those eyes, and then does that thing with the power of Oneness.

Even in writing this post, I am asking aspects of myself about their opinion on this. Really there is no one. There's just being.

But nonetheless, the question is still being asked, albeit by no one and to no one. Let's see what answer bubbles up.

Just relax, and enjoy your world as it comes. All will be revealed in good time.

[ChrisGinsburg]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

I have found that, too.

So what's the point of sharing? What's the point of posting your blog posts or replying to this thread?

What would be the motivation of a master to teach, such as Jesus or Buddha?

Motivation just happens. The dissonance occurs when you believe you are the one behind where the motivation is coming from and where it's going. Because awakening to the truth means a recognition that it's not a separate self that is now free, there seems to be a natural inclination of consciousness to awaken itself and so the appearances seem to take such a role. In sharing the truth there is no loss on either end. There is only a sense of deepening and trusting the unfolding of it all.

[zeitgeist]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

I have found that, too.

So what's the point of sharing? What's the point of posting your blog posts or replying to this thread?

What would be the motivation of a master to teach, such as Jesus or Buddha?

I can only speak for myself - I still have to learn a lot.

[pianoperformer]

Originally Posted by VinceG

Indeed, it is the purpose of all of the spiritually advanced. We are destined to create a new society and bring it to a Golden Age of achievement and wonder.

I don't think that's true. No enlightened master I know of made huge changes in the world itself, though people may have expected them to. The world doesn't exist to them.

Originally Posted by VinceG

You can find things to teach simply by looking out at the world. You may see friends in need of guidance, assistance, or just a shoulder to lean on. These actions are teaching as much as any other. You don't have to be a literal teacher in the sense of having pupils and structured advancement.

But again, there is no world to look out at.

Originally Posted by VinceG

Be careful with this line of reasoning. It is not intended to be literal. You've read Hawkins, so I'll put this in his language. Going about things in this way leads to the end-point of The Void. Existence in the Void is a sublimely awesome place, but it is not the endpoint.

Many schools of Buddhist thought place The Void at the endpoint, which is why you hear this being bandied about so much.

I do think it is literal.

What do you believe to be the endpoint?

Originally Posted by VinceG

We are always living in one illusion or another. The trick isn't to try to remove all illusion, but to gain an element of control over the illusion. Life without illusion would be a pretty dull place.

When you remove it, you do control it. It's like if you realized your were in a dream, then you can control the dream.

Originally Posted by VinceG

He's talking about the crossover into level 600. At this point it becomes difficult to maintain a worldly presence. Around the 700s, they return to the world, having completely shed their former selves and living completely spiritual lives with just the barest veneer of worldliness. I would love to discuss this topic further, it's something I've thought a lot about.

Yes, this is what I am referring to.

This is what I am beginning to feel like, so I'd very much enjoy if we discussed it.

Originally Posted by VinceG

Perception doesn't completely go away, even for guys like Jesus. What Jesus does is he looks at the person needing healing with the eyes of that person, sees what's needs to be done with those eyes, and then does that thing with the power of Oneness.

I agree with this.

[pianoperformer]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

Motivation just happens. The dissonance occurs when you believe you are the one behind where the motivation is coming from and where it's going. Because awakening to the truth means a recognition that it's not a separate self that is now free, there seems to be a natural inclination of consciousness to awaken itself and so the appearances seem to take such a role. In sharing the truth there is no loss on either end. There is only a sense of deepening and trusting the unfolding of it all.

Thank you. This helps.

[pianoperformer]

Originally Posted by zeitgeist

I can only speak for myself - I still have to learn a lot.

That's the only person I'd expect you to speak for. So what is your motivation?

[ChrisGinsburg]

Originally Posted by VinceG

Indeed, it is the purpose of all of the spiritually advanced. We are destined to create a new society and bring it to a Golden Age of achievement and wonder.

Who is spiritually advanced and how is this idea of yours inherently true and not just something you have entertained as an interesting concept?

Originally Posted by VinceG

We are always living in one illusion or another. The trick isn't to try to remove all illusion, but to gain an element of control over the illusion. Life without illusion would be a pretty dull place.

Who is saying anything about removing illusion? Seeing through duality doesn't mean duality stops appearing. Part of the clarity of this seeing is noticing that 'you' are not in control nor do you have any need to control illusion. Everything is unfolding spontaneously.

Originally Posted by VinceG

He's talking about the crossover into level 600. At this point it becomes difficult to maintain a worldly presence. Around the 700s, they return to the world, having completely shed their former selves and living completely spiritual lives with just the barest veneer of worldliness. I would love to discuss this topic further, it's something I've thought a lot about.

Levels although interesting are just another suitcase full of ideas the mind has about things it would like to experience.

Originally Posted by VinceG

Perception doesn't completely go away, even for guys like Jesus. What Jesus does is he looks at the person needing healing with the eyes of that person, sees what's needs to be done with those eyes, and then does that thing with the power of Oneness.

This doesn't sound a bit silly to you? There's a lot of stories about Jesus but this one is pretty creative.

Originally Posted by VinceG

Just relax, and enjoy your world as it comes. All will be revealed in good time.

Indeed. Except it's not 'your' world.

[VinceG]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

I don't think that's true. No enlightened master I know of made huge changes in the world itself, though people may have expected them to. The world doesn't exist to them.

Jesus did. And still is. He's still hanging around if you want to talk to him.

But again, there is no world to look out at.

Dig deep and ask yourself if you really believe that. You might not perceive the world, but other people do, and labor ceaselessly to create it, and that is enough to create the world.

I do think it is literal.

When you start playing with the funny logic of the divine, you'll see how it's both true and false. Human minds can't quite grasp this.

What do you believe to be the endpoint?

There is no endpoint. Hawkins defines his scale with an endpoint of 1000, but as you move up the scale, it starts to lose meaning. What's happening is, as you flesh out the teaching with your actual experience, you learn that existence and spiritual advancement is way more complex than the scale can capture. Yet, at the same time, the scale remains relevant for many things.

When you remove it, you do control it. It's like if you realized your were in a dream, then you can control the dream.

But where you're at when you remove yourself from your current illusion, is but another illusion. It's turtles all the way down.

Yes, this is what I am referring to.

This is what I am beginning to feel like, so I'd very much enjoy if we discussed it.

When I took a hard look at what it took to become enlightened, and what removing yourself from the world did to accomplish that, I realized that the road to enlightenment is as much a cultural journey as it is an individual journey. The seeker needs to remove themselves from their current society so they can see it for what it is, and so they can free up mental space to complete their transformation.

Imagine if Ramana Maharshi hadn't removed himself from the world and set up shop in the mountains. Could he really have been enlightened in the society he was in, informed as it was by scarcity mindset? These things depress the mind and keep it from the constant contemplation of the divine that's required to unfold the nature of reality.

You must not just look at your own relationship with the divine, you also need to look at your relationship with the world and its culture and society. These will inform your passage as much as anything, even if you choose not to perceive them.

Now, in today's world, complete removal isn't necessary or even desired. Being able to share notes on the path with others is of great import, and facilitates swift progress.

It's enough to give up worldly seeking (such as the pursuit of a 'career') and do the equivalent of Nisargadatta Maharaj, setting up shop in a humble abode, working quietly and silently on communing with the divine. When you're ready, you can slowly expand your 'footprint' on the world, as Nisargadatta, and Mother Theresa eventually did.

The cases of Buddha, Jesus, are a bit special, because they were fully God-Realized sages. The extant writings concerning them are highly mythologized and intended for mass consumption. For where you're at, I would go back through Hawkins's literature and look at the lives and journeys of the sages you find at the 600-750 level.

It's also instructive to look at the cautionary tales of those who've fallen from grace, such as Osho and Eckhart Tolle, for an example of what happens when people fall away from the path and choose worldliness over divine grace.

[pianoperformer]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

Levels although interesting are just another suitcase full of ideas the mind has about things it would like to experience.

I'm just curious, but what do you think of Hawkins?

[Merrick1]

Originally Posted by VinceG

Existence in the Void is a sublimely awesome place, but it is not the endpoint.

Yes, the concepts like Merkaba or the kabbalistic Tree of Life do show that. And it has also been confirmed to us in our work.

Merrick

[VinceG]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

Who is spiritually advanced and how is this idea of yours inherently true and not just something you have entertained as an interesting concept?

Who is saying anything about removing illusion? Seeing through duality doesn't mean duality stops appearing. Part of the clarity of this seeing is noticing that 'you' are not in control nor do you have any need to control illusion. Everything is unfolding spontaneously.

Levels although interesting are just another suitcase full of ideas the mind has about things it would like to experience.

This doesn't sound a bit silly to you? There's a lot of stories about Jesus but this one is pretty creative.

Indeed. Except it's not 'your' world.

If you want to converse with me, I suggest you start a new discussion with questions that don't rely on concepts that you don't believe in. I'm fine with dropping them for the purposes of communicating with you, but I'm not going to justify them to you, either.

[ChrisGinsburg]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

I'm just curious, but what do you think of Hawkins?

I don't hold any particular opinion about the man himself. It would seem he is quite good at producing content for minds to think about enlightenment though.

[ChrisGinsburg]

Originally Posted by VinceG

If you want to converse with me, I suggest you start a new discussion with questions that don't rely on concepts that you don't believe in.

What does this mean other than that you only seem to want to converse with people who won't disagree with you?

[VinceG]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

What does this mean other than that you only seem to want to converse with people who won't disagree with you?

That you're simply not ready to deal with these concepts in any other fashion than a critical one. Nor do you have the communications facility to maintain a discussion concerning them without shutting it down eventually by making negative, definitive, reality-asserting statements which reify their own existence.

When you are ready to entertain the notion that I might actually know what I'm talking about, I'll be happy to discuss. But until then, discussion is completely pointless and amounts to argument.

[Merrick1]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

Especially Jesus. Not only did he teach, but he healed as well. Why did he heal?

And if we put it this way?:

Let's say your wife breaks her leg. Would you start wondering: "Why should I help her? Should I help her? It is all but an illusion, isn't it? There is really no one to help."

Would it make sense to help her, so that her leg heal and she can walk normally again? Or would it make sense to leave her crippled for life?

Merrick

[ChrisGinsburg]

Originally Posted by VinceG

That you're simply not ready to deal with these concepts in any other fashion than a critical one. Nor do you have the communications facility to maintain a discussion concerning them without shutting it down eventually by making negative, definitive, reality-asserting statements which reify their own existence.

When you are ready to entertain the notion that I might actually know what I'm talking about, I'll be happy to discuss. But until then, discussion is completely pointless and amounts to argument.

Okie Dokie. Just for the record, I'm genuinely interested how you came to know this for instance,

"it is the purpose of all of the spiritually advanced. We are destined to create a new society and bring it to a Golden Age of achievement and wonder."

[VinceG]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

"it is the purpose of all of the spiritually advanced. We are destined to create a new society and bring it to a Golden Age of achievement and wonder."

Understandings like this build on each other. That's the nature of the spiritual path. You start with regular mundane reality, and soon, you're fighting demons, sitting for hours meditating, then before you know it, you've got a complete vision of the world that's as sublime as it is subjective.

That particular conclusion was primarily informed by the book Unveiled Mysteries, along with my own musings on what our society looks like and where it's likely to go, along with my understandings of what consciousness is, how it grows, and how it manifests across societies, meditation on the six-dimensional model of existence, and just about everything I've been immersed in for the last year or so.

Unveiled Mysteries:
Unveiled Mysteries Index

[zeitgeist]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

That's the only person I'd expect you to speak for. So what is your motivation?

I am a mind person - I am amazing by life, the laws of the Tao, and I want to grasp them as best as I can and communicate them to others. Share the secret tends to be my mission in life.

[RonSouther]

Originally Posted by ButterflyWoman

The same is the case in my perspective of reality. Who is there to teach? Only myself.

That's what I find...the effort to teach others ends up too often where I was the one that learned.

[pianoperformer]

Originally Posted by VinceG

Jesus did. And still is. He's still hanging around if you want to talk to him.

I do talk to him regularly.

Originally Posted by VinceG

Dig deep and ask yourself if you really believe that. You might not perceive the world, but other people do, and labor ceaselessly to create it, and that is enough to create the world.

Who are these "other people"?

[pianoperformer]

Originally Posted by VinceG

That you're simply not ready to deal with these concepts in any other fashion than a critical one. Nor do you have the communications facility to maintain a discussion concerning them without shutting it down eventually by making negative, definitive, reality-asserting statements which reify their own existence.

When you are ready to entertain the notion that I might actually know what I'm talking about, I'll be happy to discuss. But until then, discussion is completely pointless and amounts to argument.

This looks like a huge projection to me.

Aren't you shutting down what he is saying? Aren't you making "negative, definitive, reality-asserting statements which reify their own existence"? Do you entertain the notion that he might actually know what he's talking about?

This isn't meant disrespectfully. Just pointing out a projection. I didn't see his post in that light.

[pianoperformer]

Originally Posted by Merrick1

And if we put it this way?:

Let's say your wife breaks her leg. Would you start wondering: "Why should I help her? Should I help her? It is all but an illusion, isn't it? There is really no one to help."

Would it make sense to help her, so that her leg heal and she can walk normally again? Or would it make sense to leave her crippled for life?

Merrick

I see what you mean, but it sounds like an appeal to an attachment of mind to convince mind that it should heal. The thing is, mind has no power to heal, anymore than a rock. If mind tries to heal, it fails.

That's like the spouse of a cancer patient blaming themselves for that person dying. They could try their hardest to heal, but nothing would happen. The mistake is in thinking we can heal, and trying to do so. That is not to say healing doesn't exist (see below).

The point of this thread is saying that the concepts of "wife", "broken leg", "cripple", "heal broken leg", "help wife", just don't point to anything real.

Do you break your leg, or do you have the perception of having a broken leg — a perception that can be just as easily changed?

When you were a child, and you woke up from a bad dream, did your mother try to resolve the problem in the dream? Or did she say "honey, it was just a bad dream. Everything's OK." Even if you previously believed it was real, you listened to her, understood it was just imaginary, and could sleep peacefully again. Was she insensitive for pointing out that the dream was just a dream? Should she have tried to heal you of the problem in the dream?

I was reading up on Matrix Energetics late last year. In the book, Richard Bartlett reports of someone coming to him with a frozen shoulder. He spent a whole hour trying to "heal" the shoulder, with no result. He tried every technique he knew of to heal it.

Finally he heard a voice which he thought came from his spirit guide, saying "imagine if it just didn't exist?"

He did exactly that, and the shoulder was healed in an instant.

If he would have started like that, there would be no question of a frozen shoulder. He would laugh at the perception of it, and simply declare it never existed.

I'm not trying to get into the mechanics of healing here, but that is what I'm saying. It's not a matter of whether I'd heal my wife's broken leg. There is no broken leg, and nothing to heal. If there seems to be a perception, I simply correct the perception. I don't try to heal an illusion.

[ChrisGinsburg]

Originally Posted by Merrick1

And if we put it this way?:

Let's say your wife breaks her leg. Would you start wondering: "Why should I help her? Should I help her? It is all but an illusion, isn't it? There is really no one to help."

Would it make sense to help her, so that her leg heal and she can walk normally again? Or would it make sense to leave her crippled for life?

Merrick

Of course you would go and help her and probably without a thought about it. I think what you're pointing to is the fallacy that some people get caught up in thinking that oneness must mean that duality isn't actually appearing or that it must be resisted or denied in some way. If anything, duality is a magnificent accomplishment when seen to be both illusion but operating flawlessly and allowing for such a range of experience.

[VinceG]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

Who are these "other people"?

The people you pass by on the streets. The people who built the building you live in, the building you work in. The people who create the television shows or movies you watch. You can't get away from the world, or the people that are busy creating it. Trying to do so is tantamount to self-deception. On a certain, divine level, all of us souls are precisely identical to each other. But that can only be approached by us lowly humans in an allegorical and metaphorical manner.

There's no need to get literal about Oneness. You'll find your abilities and perception greatly increased when you stop trying.

This looks like a huge projection to me.

Maybe it is. I stopped paying attention to what I was projecting and what I was truly "truthing" ages ago. Whatever I say, I mean. That's the best I can do.

Aren't you shutting down what he is saying? Aren't you making "negative, definitive, reality-asserting statements which reify their own existence"?

Yes. I'm mirroring him. It's a technique I employ on occasion for those who simply cannot converse peacefully. At some point, I have to realize that nothing I say will be taken seriously. So I have to either end the discussion or move into a new space to try to break up the dynamic.

Do you entertain the notion that he might actually know what he's talking about?

Right now? No. That respect doesn't exist. I'm trying to create it by pointing out its lack. He can either recognize the lack and work together with me to create it, or decide it's too much work for him.

This isn't meant disrespectfully. Just pointing out a projection. I didn't see his post in that light.

No offense taken.

[Merrick1]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

There is no broken leg, and nothing to heal. If there seems to be a perception, I simply correct the perception. I don't try to heal an illusion.

Well, to me this is just playing with words, from the practical point of view.

Merrick

[Merrick1]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

Of course you would go and help her and probably without a thought about it. I think what you're pointing to is the fallacy that some people get caught up in thinking that oneness must mean that duality isn't actually appearing or that it must be resisted or denied in some way. If anything, duality is a magnificent accomplishment when seen to be both illusion but operating flawlessly and allowing for such a range of experience.

Yes, exactly.

Merrick