Everything is relative.

EVERYTHING is relative.  

A thought says ‘I am a hopeless case’ – I can see the ‘road’ that such a thought sits on and I can see where it leads.    Equally, in the same way a thought says ‘I am free of all things’ – and not even a vision of a road appears to be connected to such thoughts.  

What is real?    Well, thoughts will not necessarily tell me or show me what is real.   I can think my way into all sorts of mind mazes – but can I think my way out?    

Put it all aside and all that is left is this sea of sensations – waves and ripples – endless sensations through all the senses – and words and thoughts are seen as vibrations immersed in this sea – the meaning of the thoughts and words is not obscured but they are merged in the same sea……and they don’t ’cause’ any trouble.  

You see God told Adam to name all the animals.   Animals come into existence without names, just like all phenomena. I know that you know this ‘sea of sensations’ because you have spoken of it frequently.  

THAT is the basis of life.   We all love life, we love to be.  Psychological suffering is unnecessary.

4 Comments
  1. Adam was cool until he ate that apple and cognized an objective self, making a distinction where there is none. It was all downhill from there…

  2. In a relative sense I may well be a hopeless case but in freedom that’s ok too.Hopeless case is a name for one of the animals. Ultimately we really don’t know whats going on but thought never stops trying to work it out, bless it and thats ok too.

    • Yes, everything is perfectly perfect, just as it is. ‘You’ are not doing any of it. Seeing is happening, ‘you’ are not doing that seeing. That should indicate what needs to be recognised. The mind is time and so the mind cannot ‘reach’ reality. You do not know what your next thought will be. Obvious and yet somehow the mind does not want to look at such obviousness, so it seems. All is perfectly perfect just as it is.

  3. interesting bit about naming.

    one of the first formal questions in one tradition is, “what is your name?” and after responding with the obvious, the retort is, “ that is the name of your body, what is your true name?” the second question is, “how old are you?” and the rejoinder is, “that is the age of your body, what is your true age?”

    the body and the name and all of the myriad details assigned to it are not you. you don’t have a name or any of that. you are the unnameable nameless.

    isn’t that a whole lot easier than being all of those other things?

    it’s all about investigation. usually it is about the investigation that never gets done. do not mistake diletanttism for direction.