| Selections |
| Selections on 'suffering, guilt, pain'
February 2008 MESSAGE FROM WAYNE Hello my loves, You have probably spent your whole life trying to control and modify the events you see are connected to your guilt and suffering. You try to be more patient, more honest, more loving, more chaste, more generous, more open, more tolerant, more productive or more effective. Despite your efforts it is likely that some, perhaps many of the events connected to your suffering and guilt continue to occur. Now may be the moment for you to take a radically different approach. Rather than trying even harder to control your behavior, perhaps it is time to turn your attention to this OTHER aspect of your sense of guilt and suffering. The Living Teaching invites you to stop here and take a fresh look at something. Look deeply into the assumption that you COULD have acted/reacted differently in the moment that you did what you did. Examine the claim by the ego that you were the author, the independent source of that event for which there is now a feeling of guilt. Is it true? With much love, Wayne
February 2006 MESSAGE FROM WAYNE I have recently returned from Mumbai and my annual winter visit to see Ramesh. As always, it was a truly joyous and blessed time. To spend time in the presence of one's guru is life's greatest pleasure. I am often asked why I continue to visit Ramesh even though there is no longer any 'seeking need' to do so. For me, the seeking long ago morphed from a process of acquisition whereby I was hoping to GET something to a state of Acceptance wherein there was not only nothing left to GET but more importantly, no longer an egoic 'me' needing to get IT. What remained was a man named Wayne who loved a little Indian retired banker named Ramesh. For almost twenty years now, that love has flowed unabated. It matters not if we are in the Satsang room together or eating a meal together or watching cricket on television together or simply sitting together in comfortable silence, the love that is the very essence of the guru/disciple relationship is there. Each year when I visit Ramesh I get to watch with amusement, awe and delight how his Teaching evolves and changes its emphasis. Never wavering from the fundamental Understanding, his approach continues to move and dance like a boxer's. This continued movement keeps the more 'advanced' and knowledgeable disciples alert and on their toes. One of the greatest obstacles to a deepening of Understanding is the complacency inherent in knowing something. Once you have an answer there is no longer any movement. Inquiry is dead. What remains is a dull and lifeless repetition of a concept that may have once brought insight and is now mistaken for insight itself. Ramesh's continual changes keeps his disciples engaged and active. His current emphasis on the value of the Teaching in daily living is simply another door opening into the corridor of Truth. The value of the guru is not in what you can get from him...it is the guru/disciple relationship itself which is its own reward. With love, Wayne
A LIVING GEM FROM RAMESH (previously unpublished) Living in the NOW, living in the present moment, means living like God: Doing whatever you feel like doing in any situation - total free will; you have no control what happens thereafter; What happens thereafter is God's Will/Cosmic Law; therefore, enjoy the pleasure of the moment and suffer the pain, without blaming anyone: neither yourself nor the other; Live from moment to moment, without any regrets for the past, without any complaints about the present, and without any expectations in the future. "Have faith in God, but tether your camel" - an old Arabic saying. (In any situation, do whatever you think you should do.)
October 2004 MESSAGE FROM WAYNE Hello my loves, Many people who come to my Talks say they are there because of an interest in enlightenment. But when we get down to what this thing called enlightenment actually IS, there is enormous confusion. When I talk about enlightenment, I talk about it very, very specifically, and it's very simple. In humans, at around the age of two-and-a-half, a shift occurs whereby they change from free-flowing, uninvolved beings to experiencing everything in terms of 'Me!' and 'Mine!' It is that moment in which what I call the 'false sense of personal authorship' kicks in. It happens to virtually every human being. It is the false sense that 'I' as this body-mind am the source; that 'I' as this body-mind am responsible for making it all happen. It is this false sense of personal authorship that creates suffering, because the sense is that 'I' am in control of things, and, yet, there is continuous evidence to the contrary - that I'm not in control. So a powerful tension is established. In some body-minds, for whatever reason, that sense of personal authorship permanently dissolves - dies. That event, for lack of a better name, is called enlightenment. Over the millennia, generations of seekers have mystified the hell out of it. Basically, it's an event that happens in the history of some human organisms. Now, the reason this event is so interesting to people is that the organism through which it happens is no longer suffering. There is total acceptance within the organism. There is total acceptance because it is 'understood' that what is, is. There is no longer a separate sense of 'me' to become involved with what is and claim it as 'mine' - egoically mine. When that process is no longer occuring, that permanent lack of occurence may be called peace or bliss or enlightenment. What is crucial to realize is that it is a happening. It happens as part of the functioning of the universe. The pointer of this teaching is that everything happens that way; everything happens as part of the functioning of Totality. With love, Wayne
Hermosa Beach, 27 September 2004 Webcast Transcript Excerpt ...Wayne: I can tell you what my model is. When I talk about enlightenment, I talk about it very, very specifically, and it’s very simple. In humans, at around the age of two-and-a-half, a shift occurs where they go from free-flowing beings to everything is 'Me!' and 'Mine!' It is that moment in which what we call the sense of personal authorship kicks in. It happens to virtually every human being. It is the false sense that 'I' as this body-mind am the source; that 'I' as this body-mind am responsible for making it all happen. It is this false sense of personal authorship that creates suffering, because the sense is that 'I' am in control of things, and, yet, there is continuous evidence to the contrary – that I’m not in control. So a powerful tension is established. In some body-minds, for whatever reason, that sense of personal authorship permanently dissolves - dies. That event, for lack of a better name, is called enlightenment. Over the millennia, they’ve mystified the hell out of it. Basically, it’s an event that happens in the history of some human organisms. Now, the reason this event is so interesting to people is that the organism is no longer suffering. There is a sense of acceptance within the organism. There is total acceptance because it is 'understood' that what is, is. There is no longer a separate sense of “me” to become involved with what is and claim it as 'mine' – egoically mine. When that process is no longer happening, that state is called peace or bliss or enlightenment; there are a lot of names for it. You still get angry and sad. It just doesn’t make you suffer. Wayne: Exactly! You see, anger and sadness are functions of the human apparatus. This thing has been programmed to experience a variety of emotions and reactions. That in itself does not create suffering. What creates suffering is involvement in the ego in the sadness, in the anger, in the pain; where this separate egoic me becomes involved in the pain of the moment and projects it into the past or the future. It is that projection of what is occurring in the moment into the past and future which is (for lack of a better term) suffering. How does enlightenment happen? How do you return to that state? It just happens? Wayne: It just happens. It happens as part of the functioning of the universe. The pointer of this teaching is that everything happens that way; everything happens as part of the functioning of Totality...
Hermosa Beach, 21 September 2004 Webcast Transcript Excerpt ...Wayne: My guru, this fellow Ramesh Balsekar, is an enlightened master. I was with him some fourteen or fifteen years ago when he was in the States on a speaking tour and news came to him that his son had died in Bombay. He had lived with him essentially his whole life. His grief was enormous, of course. People have this fantasy that when there is enlightenment there is no longer any pain and everything becomes fine, okay, beautiful - all sweetness and lights all the time. That’s not true. Life is by its very nature exquisitely beautiful and exquisitely painful. As long as there is life in the organism we call the sage, there will be beauty and horror, joy and sorrow. What we can call the blessing of the ultimate understanding is that there is no suffering attendant to the pain. There is not the slightest sense that things as they are, no matter how painful, should be different or that what has happened should not have happened. There is the implicit understanding that everything that happens is part of a massive functioning, a part of a huge tapestry of Totality, and it is inescapable – could not be otherwise. In that acceptance, there is peace even in the most profound grief, the most profound pain. The impact of this teaching is often to diminish that sense that things should be other than they are. Which is, of course, why I’ve struggled so much with it. How I used to feel is much more different now. Wayne: I have not lost a child, so I don’t have that experience. But every experience, particularly those that are dramatically painful and emotionally devastating, does change the organism. They change the programming of the organism, and so life is viewed differently. There is a difference in perspective and perception in accordance with the occurrences of life. The good news is that the change in programming is dynamic, it is continuously happening. So the fact this is how it is now does not mean it will be that way next week, next month, or next year; in the same way that where you are now is different then where you were three years ago because of the event that intervened...
Hermosa Beach, 14 August 2004 Webcast Transcript Excerpt ...Does your model recognize suffering in the world? I know that you acknowledge that there is suffering. I guess what I’m saying is that in the model I’ve been studying that is the focus. Suffering exists. I’m not too familiar with your model. Is suffering pertinent in it? Wayne: Suffering does exist, clearly, as part of the functioning of Totality. We can identify the source of the suffering as the involvement by the ego. In the absence of that, there’s no suffering. Yes, we can point to all of those things. That is very much a part of this model. But I guess what brought that question to my mind was the fact you said the functioning of us as separate thinking egos is part of what was divinely placed. It’s almost like the suffering is integral, to use your word, but not necessarily something that should be displaced or escaped. Wayne: There is no 'should' involved at all. The whole notion of 'should' has no real significance in the context of the teaching. Yes, this is how it is. In the next instant, everything can change. Suffering is very much part of the model as it has existed historically and as it is experienced presently. What will happen in the next instant – absolutely anything is possible. But the suffering is a function of the ego. Wayne: Yes. The involvement by the ego in 'what is' is how suffering is produced. The ego isn’t the source of the suffering. It is the instrument through which suffering is produced. That’s the whole point. The ego is impotent. It does nothing. It will claim that it is producing the suffering, because it is in its nature to claim potency. But it’s a false claim. It has none. And when you remove the self, the suffering still exists, I suppose. I guess I’m not formulating it well, but in my mind, I’m trying to see if the suffering is as much a part of your model. You admit it exists and you say the ego instrument is through which it is perceived. Wayne: No, through which it is created. Created. Wayne: Yes. So if the ego is absent then there is no possibility of it being created through that organism. In that way, the sage does not suffer. The enlightenment is the end of suffering, but it’s not the end of suffering for any one. Simply, the suffering does not arise through that organism anymore. There is no longer any one egoically identified with the organism. So you’re saying in that way things are just happening? Wayne: What I would say is almost exactly that, except I would take out the 'just'. Things are happening. They’re happening, really happening! Check this: the ego says, “If I’m not the source of it then things are just happening.” The fear is, okay, you have this ego and you know you should just let go of the ego and let things happen. Wayne: Who is going to let go of the ego and let things happen? The ego says, “I’m going to let go of ego and just let things happen and then everything is going to be great. Then I’ll have mastered this situation.” But in some sense, isn’t there an effort of 'letting go of being in control'? Wayne: There may well be some effort exerted in letting go of being in control. Who is exerting the effort? The ego. Wayne: The ego does nothing. It only claims that it is exerting the effort - falsely claims. The organism exerts the effort. Whatever effort is required comes about as a result of untold forces of the universe. The ego says, “I did that.” But the organism is still doing its thing? Wayne: Absolutely, until it’s dead...
Hermosa Beach, 24 May 2004 Webcast Transcript Excerpt ...You’re asking, “How do I get what I want? How do I make myself more peaceful? How do I stay in the presence that I like and avoid involvement that I don’t like?” We go one layer beneath that and take a look and see if, in fact, you are producing either the state that you like (a state of peace) or the state that you don’t like (this state of involvement). If you are producing them, then produce the state that you like more often, and stop producing the one you don’t like. That’s simple. If you’re not the one producing, if these states are, in fact, the product of forces much greater than your egoic self, meaning that this body/mind organism we call Cindy is the instrument through which a certain amount of peace happens and a certain amount of involvement happens, then in the seeing of that there may well come a degree of acceptance of what is happening in the moment. Whatever that is. This is not to say that you won’t continue to have preferences, meaning that you’ll continue to prefer to have the peace over the involvement. The peace is pleasurable; the involvement is painful. So, unless you’re a masochist, then the ‘you’ will prefer the peace or pleasure to the pain. The preference is a function of the programming of this organism we call Cindy. She’s constructed in such a way to prefer pleasure to pain. So the acceptance is total. The acceptance includes all the responses. The acceptance includes even the desire to have one thing over another. Without those preferences, you have no qualities or characteristics. You’re just this bland, colorless lump. It is the preferences, it is the desires, it is the passions that give you thought, give you color, and give you shape as a person. It would be horrible if this ultimate understanding robbed you of that color, of the passion, of the vivacity of life. So, what about all the teachers who continue to say that those are the cause of suffering? Wayne: Yeah! What about all those teachers? It’s pretty interesting, isn’t it? I was right in there with that question, because I had the exact observation. I read the words of the third Zen Patriarch in Hsin Hsin Ming, which was translated by Richard Clark in 1972. It said, “The Great Way is simple for those who have no preferences.” Unfortunately, that was the translation I found in the first place. And having now been plodding around in these fields for a number of years, I’ve seen the subtlety of simple words. However, thirty years later, Richard Clark got a little wiser and a deeper understanding, so he redid the book. This is how he retranslated that same passage: “The Great way is not difficult for those not attached to preferences.” There’s a huge difference between not having preferences and not being attached to them. It reminds me of the story about a guy back in the thirteenth century who is traveling around visiting various monasteries. He visits this one monastery, and he’s taken around by the Abbott on a tour. They come to a big room full of monks at their desks transcribing the texts of the holy books. As the head Abbott explains this whole process to him, he asks the Abbott, “Are all of these monks copying the book from the original or they are copying from the copy?” The Abbott replied, “They’re copying from the copy. We have the original safely down in the vault.” So the monk asked, “What would happen if there is some discrepancy in the copy and you keep duplicating this error?” The head Abbott said, “Well, you may be right.” So, he went down into the vault to look at the original text. About an hour or two later you hear this incredible, anguished cry come from the vault. Everyone rushes down to the vault and they find the head Abbott scratching his face, and he’s crying, “Oh, I can’t believe it. I can’t believe it! The word was celebrate!” So, there are numerous interpretations of and numerous statements to the effect that it is desire that is the source of all suffering, that it is our preferences that are the problem. The problem with these pointers – and they are pointers or tools; they are not truths – is that they are subject to enormous misinterpretation. The original pointer may have been about the involvement by an egoic me in what is happening as a function of the meat. The meat has preferences. It is genetically imprinted and programmed with these preferences. The meat has desires. And if you try and circumvent or squash the desires of the meat, you have weird shit happening. The real pointer of the sage is that the suffering is a product of the involvement by an egoic me (what I call an authoring me) which claims these desires and preferences as ‘mine’, and becomes involved in them. That involvement is suffering. So it’s true that involvement in desire, involvement in the preference is suffering. You can see from your own experience that that is the case. But it is not the desire or the preference itself that is the source of suffering...
February 2003 A LIVING GEM FROM RAMESH (previously unpublished) The result of Self-realization is that the ego no longer has to carry the burden of pride and arrogance for 'success' nor guilt and shame for 'failure', nor the burden of hatred and malice, jealousy and envy for the other - in his or her daily living.
|