In other ‘teachings’ the attempt is made to adjust to the ignorance of the listener’s minds so that the said can be related to. In Paul’s case, there is this uncompromising, unpretentious directness that is not going to guide the conditioned mind to a loftier place. He undermines it. How beautiful is that!
Being
Can the ‘me’ step outside ‘me’?
The ‘selfing’ can’t ‘unself’ itself, in the same way as it is impossible to get out of the mud by trying to pull one’s own leg. However, to honestly see the activity of selfing may relax that activity, and then attention may be freed from its hypnotic involvement with that activity, and it could more easily return to the realization that it is not confined by selfing. I don’t know of anyone explaining this as clearly as Paul Hedderman
Questions from Fred C.
The following was posted by Fred C:
There are a lot more ‘dodgy’ concepts put out by non-dual ‘communicators’ that need clarifying too:
1. There is nothing you can do to realise reality because there is no one.
2. It is hopeless. Life is utterly meaningless
3. “i am not a teacher because I can’t teach you to be who you already are”
4. There is nothing you can do because awakening is uncaused (but at the same time there is an admittance that liberation is gradual, as if there really is a cause and effect path- or a someone who traverses it)
5. “Realisation is the realisation that there is no I” — what so realised beings only go around always noticing that there is no I anymore and that’s all there is to it?
6. Compassion is not required and a hangover from old spiritual teachings that don’t work 7. Wisdom is not needed in the modern non-dual communication as there is no one to be wise.
8. ALL there is is THIS
9. There is Nothing, period!
10. Liberation doesn’t make you a better or wiser person, you can still be a horrible, nasty, small minded person who causes harm to others and be liberated.
11. It has got nothing to do with thoughts and thinking but energy. Energy is contracted in the body and this is the cause of a me that feels small and restricted. 12. The energy needs to shift from contracted to uncontracted for awakening to occur.
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rV55MRhw6R0
Denial of awareness?
Identification with a tool
To improve skills and to make homes look better is not in opposition to our subject of realizing freedom. Skills are tools, and we can enjoy these skills and improve them without compromising freedom. The identification with a ‘me’ that believes it is not good enough is the problem. You don’t identify with your hammer, and in the same way you don’t identify yourself with any skill, no matter how advanced they are. They are beautiful tools in the hands of the infinite. In fact your hammer will hit the nail more precisely if the identification with the ‘me’ has been dropped by just observing it when it pops up without judgement.
In response to a comment by Gavin.
One could call this a ‘method,’ the most shunned word in the world of advaita. Pausing, facing whatever is perceived could be called ‘the recipe.’ ‘Pausing’ is another word for ‘not doing anything.’ Therefore, the words ‘method’ and ‘recipe’ are inadequate as they usually imply some doing such as favoring, rejecting, changing, achieving, avoiding.
Seeing
Seeing or perceiving – what is it? It can’t be seen as an object, otherwise there would be yet another instance of seeing to see that seeing. We are talking about the seeing that actually sees everything. Its nature is awareness as it is aware of whatever appears in it, and it is aware of this very fact without needing to think that it is so.
Say we touch a hot stove. The knowing of the sensation is immediate. There is the sensation of heat, without first calling it ‘heat.’ The characteristics of the heat are sensed, and no definition of ‘heat’ is needed to sense the appearance of heat. Also, there is no need for a conceptual ‘me’ to be imagined first, so that heat can be perceived. Likewise, there is no need to label any appearance for it to be perceived. In fact, labelling an appearance has nothing to do with perceiving it while the appearance happens.
If labelling happens, it happens after or before perceiving an appearance.
After:
By that time, the original appearance has become significantly less original. This type of copy of the original can be perceived by visiting the memory bank. Sure, the image (copy) of the original is an appearance as well, and it is seen by the same awareness, by the same seeing.
Before:
Prior to the appearing event, there was a visit to the memory bank. An imagination is seen that was derived from a previous event. Now, it is anticipated (imagined) that there will be either another original event happening or it is anticipated that the new event will be different from the previous one. In either case, the projection into the imagined future is based on memory.
When the event happens, we can either perceive it or we can perceive our memory while it happens. Why is it not possible to perceive what is happening and label it at the same instant? The very fact of the fleeting nature of everything that appears makes it impossible for any thought to attach itself to the appearing and disappearing instant while it is happening.
If we perceive our memory while an actual event happens, we basically miss out on the fullness of perceiving what is happening. Perceiving contents from the memory bank is a very poor substitute for perceiving what is actually happening.
However, most people seem to focus on memory, rather than on what is happening. Why is this so?
