When offering pointers, I’m not considering every interpretation someone might pull from them… that is always shaped by the conditioning of the reader. Pointers are only pointers, they are never the truth the mind imagines it can grasp.
I’ve seen people who follow the words of Sri Nisargadatta and others who follow Ramana Maharshi, and I’ve heard all the arguments about what their pointers mean. Some say the message is essentially the same, others insist it is not… but it can hardly be argued that either of these two lacked clarity in what they were pointing to. They simply expressed the same no‑thing in different ways, and the mind turns those differences into divisions.
I don’t mind clarifying what I’m saying, but even the best words cannot describe what is being pointed to. And I’m not debating psychology on any of this, because psychology says awareness comes from the mind or the brain, while nonduality is pointing to something entirely different… it says the mind and the brain appear within awareness. These are two different levels of seeing, so there is nothing to argue about. There is more value in a subtractive kind of pointing that shows what it is not… and even that gets pulled into the mind and turned into a belief or a stance imagined by the reader.
Speaking in person has always tended to be the clearest way to share this, because reading seldom leads to any real understanding… the mind grabs the words and runs with them, while direct conversation has a way of cutting through that. Focusing on words, any words including mine, can be misleading when they are misconstrued, because what they point toward is before thought, and once thought tries to describe it the ability to say what it is is already gone. If the words resonate, they resonate, and if they do not then someone else may come through with something that strikes a chord. In any case there is no one here saying anything to anyone there… just appearances moving as they move.
No comments:
Post a Comment