Stirring the Pot.

Alright, time to get things clear.

All this nonsense about ‘awakening’ and all those who perpetuate the concept of ‘awakening’ and all the ‘stages’ of learning to ’embody it’ is nothing but nonsense. Anyone who speaks about ‘the awakening’, ‘individual enlightenment’ or ‘the beloved’ is obviously deluded or just a fool.   Rumi started that beloved nonsense and they were nothing but love poems. (Gasp! Shock horror – who is offended by words? – If Rumi was so great why have his words not freed you yet?) A mind can swoon in a pool of self-delusional concepts about ‘The Beloved’ for a hundred years and it will never be anything but the mind swooning in concepts.  It is very easy to feed the mind lovely concepts.  Cutting insights will not come from a swooning mind.

The problem is belief in a future time when ‘I will awaken’ and that ‘I’ can never wake up because it is a dream.  Dreams don’t wake up, they merely fade away.  Where is last nights dream now?

Alright, I do not care who you are or where you are from, can you honestly tell me that you are not awake right now?

So, what is all this fuss about awakening?  Isn’t is obvious that wakefulness is here, RIGHT now?

It is NOT owned by anyone.  It cannot be transmitted or given to anyone.  It already is.

SEEING is happening.

The only problem there seems to be is BELIEF in things that do NOT exist.

‘People’ go in search of their true self and there isn’t one.  Even if there was a true self, where the Hell would it be?  Under some rock?  Some ‘sacred rock’?

What you truly are can be called ‘self’ but to imagine that it could be somewhere else is a kind of madness.  If there is a self, then you must be that right NOW – it can never be something that you ‘become’ in some imagined future.  And that is what all these nonsense teachings suggest – some future time, you will become something better than you are right now – and people fall for it over and over again and again.  It is the oldest trick in the book.  The modern spiritual mind game of today has turned into a completely mad circus.   It is a circus full of clowns.  There is more clown and elephant (bull) shit than anything else.

What is totally absurd is that these deluded fools who call themselves, and with some obvious pride, ‘teachers’, are the ones who need to wake up – or at least cast away their delusions.  Everything is topsy turvey.   Bullshit is served as ‘truth’ and no one ‘calls them’ on it.  Or if they do they are dispensed with quickly.  The dream of being a spiritual teacher is a bottomless pity and more than a few fall into it.

There are ego bound fools who have jumped on the bandwagon and they behave like a monkey on a string.  They want to organise the truth.  It is truly a mad circus that is not even funny.   California has been a main contributor to the circus, with some cities having over a hundred Non Duality teachers – none of them worth the concepts that they are made of.

Are you not awake right now? Of course wakefulness is here.  There is no one to claim it as ‘mine’.  Those who know this totally do not behave like a circus monkey, they do not parade about spilling pink glitter about the place, with every step.

There are very few genuine ‘teachers’ – the rest of them are parasites.

Who cares?

Now, I will be accused of all sorts of things – some will hate me for being so blunt.   But let me ask you this:  Has anything EVER disturbed that natural Wakefulness – has anything EVER scratched it, harmed it, diluted it, distorted it in any way whatsoever?

Nothing touches the Wakefulness – nothing, never.

That wakefulness is the self.  There is no other.  It is ONE without a second.


Be joyous and celebrate ‘your own’ unique being – it is One Being.

  1. It is all words. Words can never harm anyone. Belief in words is the problem. Wakefulness is never threatened by anything.

  2. I would like to say…G I want to go into this what you say , is there anything with any substance there that can be the me, but the mind alwasy argues this question , the bidy idea and the me sence seem to always win, that incisive insight is kept away becouse of those strong beleives. yes the body can be broken down into no thing and the me sense can be paused , but those things have mainly clogged up just resting in this natural wakefulness, I seem to get stuck with that investigation is there anthing with any substance, the asnswer at the moment to that feels yes very much so

  3. Gilbert won’t be hated for being blunt, only for being foolish and hypocritical. What could possibly be more absurd than using concepts to debunk concepts? He constantly undermines his own credibility and it is mind numbingly stupid. Moreover, what could possibly be more presumptuous than criticizing freaking Rumi, of all historical mystical figures? Who’s next? Lao Tzu? Hui Neng? Ramana Maharshi? Randall Friend? Good grief. The vernacular “Get over yourself” applies – on two levels, at least.

    Truth or Wakefulness or Tao or Brahman or God or Emptiness or the Presence of Awareness – or whatever noun or nouns you please – is non conceptual , or neither conceptual nor non-conceptual, or whatever. Because every noun or concept that is spoken distorts it. By definition. Whether spoken by Gautama Buddha, Shankara, Rumi, Meister Eckart, St. Theresa of Avila, or Gilbert

    Some guy on the Internet who purports to be a teacher once asserted:

    “It is all words. Words can never harm anyone. Belief in words is the problem. Wakefulness is never threatened by anything.”

    Now THERE’S a teaching! Though “I” don’t “believe” a “word” of it 🙂

  4. Who cares about any of it because, as you said, Gilbert, wakefulness is not threatened by anything and so cannot be harmed by those ‘teachers’ and their followers. It is all part of the same oneness, isn’t it?

  5. The appearance is always questionable…concepts to remove concepts…of course. Knot you forget that words only refer and are not personal…Thus the very act of communication demands you question and investigate what the word refers to (unless this has already been done). When ‘teachers’ present a teaching (that’s a sort of forgetting) are they giving a lecture? As soon as you say thats my perspective, my opinion there are some assumptions in there: a claimant and claim to ownership (a forgetting that words are impersonal and only refer). If you not interesting in people arguing with you, you not interested in communication: though you can always haggle over words and there is a pointlessness to engaging when someone fences off a claim, and sticks to a defensive position… And a ‘seeming forgetting’ insight is wordless…silent.

    Anyway in the case for example of Shankara would he have really said anything , if he didn’t expect people to investigate, question, understand ‘what was’ being pointed too? Or questioning Ramana…you are only questioning a self-image in peoples minds… Ramana has said that he presented self-inquiry in disagreement with peoples interpretation of Shankara’s Neti Neti, but this is to clarify Shankara…so even in the case of a clear speaker… From the little I have read of Ramana it would wonderful if ‘someone’ challenged the self-image ‘in the public mind’. It seems when people read these writings on Self-inquiry they bring with them pre-conceived assumptions that colour their interpretation and they miss Ramana’s clear pointing. People practise self-inquiry for years getting nowhere, if you read what Ramana says it’s no wonder… in the interest to ‘do this you would need to be’ very clear in what you were attempting to communicate, without muddying the waters.

    But with ‘contemporary’ teachers there are many sloppy expressions, sure you can just ignore them or you can engage with them and really nut them out… Remember claim and claimants are assumptions, one without a second.

  6. …I just actually found this post quite funny to be honest.

  7. I would like to say…Gilbert ME agrees with everything you said but Me detects a little hostility and anger over the presentation of your thoughts. This is your cartoon and you can present it any way you wish but a kinder gentle approach would be a little more effective in ME’S Thoughts. JUST A thought.

  8. I would like to say…Anyone who points you away from being is worth not listening too, these teachings are of course right up the ego’s alley, so I have no problem with
    Gilbert being relatively pro-awareness here. It doesn’t really ever matter what words are used the direction of the point is the key to being and Gilbert hasn’t shown any sign of wavering.

  9. David there’s always a good question here though isn’t there? Who see’s hostility and anger?

    Seriously… We can talk about love, false assumptions, beliefs forever… but how far are you willing to investigate, to see the falsity of dearly held beliefs?…I don’t want to talk about Gilbert but I sense that he probably doesn’t have a care in the world about these ‘issues’, just a passion for clear pointing.

    So instead, I will talk about Nisargadatta… before listening to recordings of Nisargadatta satsangs… I always had this impression that he was an angry man, but in just listening to him it completely dissolved any ideas I may have had. I didn’t expect the sense of warmth and I dare say love coming clearly through the presence of a recording, ‘of someone who wasn’t even’ alive…and purely that. Why do I mention this? I don’t know… but seriously who see’s hostility and anger?

  10. I would like to say…I actually live in California, and what Gilbert is saying is 100% accurate about the spiritual scene. It is utterly manipulative and fake and anyone that speaks up is usually criticized as angry or bitter or crazy, etc… Yet, when someone like Gilbert makes completely valid arguments and criticisms, they never ever actually refute what he says. They find a way to perpetuate their scam, and avoid actually honestly debating the issues. They are pretty clever in that regard. But their positions and so- called teachings don’t hold water and the game goes on….

  11. If you perceive a problem, then ‘you’ have a problem. There never existed a problem, not ever. It is all mind stuff. I have no problem with stirring up the pot and it always amuses me how some take offence from it. It is only the ‘me sense’ that can be offended. Now if the ‘me’ does not exist, and I assure you that it does not exist anywhere, except in imagination, who can be offended? An imaginary identity called ‘me’. The constant pointing is investigate that ‘me’ and SEE if it has any reality. I do not waste time creating New Conceptual nonsense for people to consume and believe. I do not speak of ‘love’ for there is no need. Everyone innately knows the love of being – their mind may hate itself and being BUT the mind has NO being whatsoever – so, no problem. Sure ‘people’ commit suicide because they hate themselves and those they leave behind may blame themselves, punish themselves and that is merely the play of the elements. No one was ever born and no one ever dies. It is the ‘me’ that is born of mind and it has NO being. Discovering that is what we call Liberation. The Buddha discovered it PROVING that anyone can discover it. Why wait? Why do practices? Why try and purify the ‘me’ or the body?
    As far as I can see there is very little hard hitting discussions or ‘teachings’ around. It seems to be all lovey dovey nonsense and guru worship. Well, frankly I say “Piss it off, quick smart – it is useless”. Rumi was a Sufi Poet. Sure it is beautiful and it can swoon you into a trance – something that Sufi’s love to do. Become one with the Beloved. Well, you can Piss that Idea off too. There is NO ‘Beloved’ except in your own imagination. Any ‘teaching’ worth its salt is quick to dispense with illusions of mind. It does not ask anyone to BELIEVE anything. It Points and says….. ‘Look….see – See for yourself – you are not bound. You are like space, transparent and free flowing – the Essence os LIFE itself.
    I may also mention that I spent a couple of decades pussy footing around in spirituality or ‘esoteric knowledge’ before I eventual found a thread of ‘truth’, something that resonated in my being, so loud that it could not be denied. I followed that thread and as a result the ‘me’ was found to be non-existent. There is nothing more revealing than such a revelation. I don’t give a rats ass whether anyone believes me or not – as I often say this has Nothing to do with Belief. Believe what you want but belief will NEVER free you. Belief is bondage.

  12. I would like to say…beautiful…

  13. I would like to say…Also I think Rumi’s way was like that because he loved his teacher so much, Shamz, the real mc coy, no? anyways, what sufis mean I like but I do not fully see what they are pointing to

  14. I would like to say…this site is not for hot air arguments its for seeing the simple discovery of your true self full stop nothing more , theres plenty of sites that will take you in and feed you. cant be arsed with it , its boring , get serious or “Piss it off”

    G I want to go into this what you say , is there anything with any substance there that can be the me, but the mind alwasy argues this question , the bidy idea and the me sence seem to always win, that incisive insight is kept away becouse of those strong beleives. yes the body can be broken down into no thing and the me sense can be paused , but those things have mainly clogged up just resting in this natural wakefulness, I seem to get stuck with that investigation is there anthing with any substance, the asnswer at the moment to that feels yes very much so

  15. Belief is Bondage. No argument there. Here’s another: The Way that can be spoken of is not the Way. So pardon me if I point out that every single thing that Gilbert – or ANYBODY or any NOT-BODY – speaks is nothing but concepts. “Wakefulness” is a concept. “There is no ‘you’ to have a problem”: more concepts, objects perceived by a perceiver. No amount of repeating that there “IS NO PERCEIVER” or “you already are what is sought” solves that dilemma.

    By all means, every one who thinks he or she is a seeker should beware of fraudulent teachers who are nothing but egoic beings enhancing there egos. That leads nowhere.

    But Gilbert’s “Way of shock pointing” or whatever he calls or does not call his teaching, is STILL just another way, just another pointing, just another teaching. If there is no perceiver, there cannot be a Way, which would be an object of a perceiver. And if there is no Way, there quite obviously is no “better” way or “true” way or “not-false” way. A pointing is a pointing is a pointing. Who cares what the finger LOOKS like. They ALL appear uniquely. Rumi’s finger, Gilbert’s finger. Randall’s finger, Echart Tolle’s finger. There is no finger and there is no moon and there is no perceiver, so why pay the slightest attention to the appearance of any finger??? WHO CARES?

    Therefore, when Gilbert criticises other teachers and warns against the fraudulent, on the one hand I (who believe I’m me, so sorry) am down with that. Seekers have enough problems just existing in their perceived Samsara; they certainly don’t need to add getting taken by a charlatan.

    But on the other, I can’t help thinking: “What could be MORE fraudulent that the teacher who teaches there is no perceiver, there is no problem, you already are what is sought, and oh, by the way, “his way is wrong and my way is right”? In the USA we say bullshit”, in the UK they say “bollocks.”

    There is NO WAY and there is no RIGHT WAY and there is NO BETTER WAY and the is no WRONG WAY and THERE IS NO PROBLEM.

    So drop it already.

  16. Awareness – Wakefulness is NOT a concept. Sure there are concepts ‘about’ awareness or wakefulness – and unless you can discriminate the difference between awareness and thinking about awareness, then sure, it is all concepts. You cannot define awareness or consciousness or wakefulness but you cannot negate awareness. See if you can stop being aware. It takes you to the end of conceptualization. Not that there is a ‘you’ that can be taken anywhere – but you know what I mean.
    There is NO WAY – all directions are in the mind – USA or UK or anywhere is just a localization label, a concept. What could be More fraudulent than…..etc?
    BELIEF in concepts as being reality. Simple as that.
    The appearance, the manifestation, phenomena is appearing to be. It is appearance only. Find the seer.
    In realizing what the seer is, that is the end of ‘mind entrenched ideas’. In being free of the mind crap, there is no longer anything to be caught on. Life goes on exactly the same and no one will believe ‘you’ are free – but who cares? There never was a ‘you’ or a ‘them’. It is all appearance only.

  17. Jacob, be simple. Yes there is belief in ‘me’ – but the directive is to investigate that belief. If there is apparent substance, go into it and SEE if it has any real substance. Don’t be satisfied with some old idea about it. Go into that old idea in the living present and that old idea will reveal itself as an idea and it will dissolve completely. Jacob is convinced about past conditioning…….that belief blocks the way…….so you have to go through it…..investigate it. Everything is made of space. A scientist cannot predict where an electron will be at any particular moment. Why? Because it does not have any substance. It is an appearance. Same with the ‘me’. The ego does not exist but the belief (ego) does not want to face its own demise. But it never existed so it is all smoke and mirrors. The naked seeing is subtle. Most ‘seekers’ have been filled up with erroneous information and flashes of light, some big break through or some special event. That expectation blurs over the subtle and natural wakefulness. Be spaciousness itself.

  18. Knot, the difference between a “concept” and a “pointer” is definitely worth investigating. You can play the game of conceptual one-upmanship, saying “Well your saying that’s a concept, that’s just a concept itself!”, or you can look and see that what’s pointed TO is NOT a concept. What’s pointed TO needn’t be believed in, and has nothing to do with the pointer or the perceived person who points. Concepts appear in That which is prior to all concepts, and vanish without a trace.

  19. I would like to say…Thank you very much wayne. NOW

  20. I would like to say…Thank you very much Wayne , Now I SEE SAID THE BLIND MAN. you may not know why you wrote that but I do thank you

  21. Folks – All I am saying is that ALL TEACHINGS are by definition conceptual, and ALL point, or attempt to point, to the non-conceptual. When Gilbert speaks the noun “wakefulness”, the noun is a concept; what is points to is not. When Eckart Tolle speaks “Presence”, same thing. When Randall Friend speaks “Presence of Awareness”, same thing. Once the unspeakable is spoken, it is just another appearance. So any teacher worth his or her salt makes pains not to permit the seekers getting hung up on “doctrine.” There IS no doctrine.

    So the false me reacts adversely when any teacher criticism another. It may be valid; it may be that the many or most teachers are charlatans. It may not be. Why should anybody on THIS blog give a crap – especially the teacher? Here we are. We want the blunt pointing. We are NOT in California on Ecstasy at a love fest. We don’t care about the follies or the pursuits of others, and who are we to judge them anyway? They are what they are, and that should be the end of the story.

  22. When the rat takes the bait, the trap is set in motion. Yes, who cares? The rat? The cheese? The trap? It is all concepts and all concepts ARE awareness in expression. They have no independence from awareness and could not appear if it were not for awareness. NO ONE can define awareness or anything. My next note will cover this aspect. It may stir up all kinds of ‘reactions’ and it may bring insight for one or no one at all. Who cares? There is no teacher here. No pupils and no teaching. All is an expression of one essence. You are that.

  23. Anyone ever read the book Radical Awakening by Stephen Jourdain? The following was taken, not from his book, but from a youtube video. Read the book. The title says all.

    “Suddenly, it happened, something very surprising. I have not found the answer to the question that I asked myself, but suddenly on the spur point, without any harbringer, in a wholly abrupt way, I broke down, without realilzing it, the depth of my inner thinking and I found myself awakening a wake without any limits which is exactly what I am, that was my essence and I knew immediately that I had reached the ultimate bottom of myself, the ultimate foundation of myself, the base of all things. I understood everything. It was not a state of consciousness; it was an action. Suddenly I found myself knowing to do a kind of inner capital primordial gesture, which is the act of pure consciousness. It is a second degree and the dream that is dissolved is the supposedly vigilant state. In the strict sense of the word, from the diurnals dream, from the usual state of consciousness, so-called vigilant state, the vigilant state is asleep, dreams, hallucinations. Boom! a kind of awakening in a second level. The comparison with the morning awakening is an obvious one. It is a second degree and the dream that is dissolved is supposedly the vigilant state.”

  24. Sri Nisargadatta also used similar language to speak of the non-dual realization: he at times said that one returns to the absolute principle before consciousness, while elsewhere, however, he says that it IS just pure Consciousness:

    “Awareness is primordial; it is the original state, beginningless, endless, uncaused, unsupported, without parts, without change.”