Eternity Now

by Francis Lucille

  When this becomes our experience, it can be truly said that we stand as awareness in the presence of bodily sensations and perceptions, or in other words, that the world is in us.

  This transfiguration of the body is made possible by the understanding that we are not a limited entity, which in turn, establishes the proper welcoming attitude. This understanding is the instantaneous apperception of our welcoming presence, awareness, which destroys the false identifications in the flames of our eternal splendor.

  ***

  Could you speak a bit about how your teacher was able to help you?

  His words erased the doubts in my mind and left me open to the possibility that we stand as awareness between mentations. His presence made this possibility a living reality.

  Deep Sleep Is, Death Is Not

  What makes the diverse world appear as a homogeneous and meaningful whole?

  It is its source, consciousness. It glues the various elements together, because two objects can never directly refer to one another. Every object refers only to its source, consciousness. Two objects, be they thoughts or perceptions, can never be put in a direct mutual relation.

  If no two objects can be put in relation with one another, and only one object can appear at a time, we might expect the resulting show to be fragmented. But, it certainly leaves us with the impression of being a continuous fabric running constantly, with no holes anywhere, and not fragmented. Where does the seeming continuity of the whole arise?

  From consciousness. This continuity is the continuity of consciousness. This permanence doesn’t belong to the world. This becomes evident when we move from the waking state to the dream or deep sleep states. The world borrows its continuity from consciousness, in the same way as the screen is the permanent element behind the movie. Continuity, reality, being, consciousness are synonyms from this vantage point. They refer to the same “I am.”

  Would you comment on the Buddhist view that the universe, like a movie, appears in a series of still frames in succession? Ramana Maharshi also used this analogy. Physics, on the other hand, doesn’t find anything of the sort. If there is any discontinuity at all, it is to be found in quantum mechanics, where the process of observation, of “measurement,” on a physical system, seems to generate an abrupt discontinuity. The Buddhists claim that these discontinuities are there and that they can experience them. Are you saying that continuity is somehow “loaned” to something that is discontinuous by consciousness?

  Yes, real continuity lies in consciousness. Consciousness is the only “thing” we directly experience to be continuous, ceaseless. Everything else is impermanent. The world seems permanent only because we have displaced the emphasis from consciousness to the objects, to the appearances.

  ***

  What is the difference between deep sleep and death?

  Deep sleep is, death is not.

  Can you expand further?

  Death is a superimposition, a concept, whereas deep sleep is our real nature. Death is not real, deep sleep is our permanent reality.

  I think this question springs from an assumption that consciousness is absent in deep sleep, due to the absence of memory. Hence, the seemingly apparent similarity: the absence of the body, of the world, of consciousness.

  Yes, but what you see when you see a body lying motionless is not the actual experience of death. What really matters is firsthand knowledge, not projections.

  If you see a dead body versus a sleeping body, you are not saying that the one is any more or less a projection than the other?

  Of course not, but you are talking about a concept of deep sleep or death, not the actual experience.

  Yes, but the question is arising from a common experience. We have no firsthand knowledge of death, and absolutely no memory or knowledge about deep sleep. So, what firsthand knowledge do we have of either?

  We have a very good firsthand knowledge of deep sleep. When we wake up, nothing really changes, in the same way as the screen doesn’t change at the beginning of a movie. The screen is there before, during, and after the movie. Deep sleep is constant, present at any time. To conceptualize it as a state that begins when we “fall asleep” and ends when we “wake up” amounts to differentiating between the screen during the movie and the screen in the absence of the movie. This distinction is a mere concept about the screen. The screen is always the same.

  So, what is ordinarily thought of as deep sleep is every bit as much a concept as is death?

  Yes.

  When you say deep sleep is and death is not, you don’t mean deep sleep in the ordinary way?

  I don’t mean the deep sleep state. We have a very good firsthand knowledge of deep sleep. We simply have no objective recollection of the experience. The absence of recollection doesn’t mean the absence of experience. This is true even in the case of an objective experience. If asked, “What was in your mind at exactly 8:14 p.m. on May 17, 1979?” chances are you won’t remember. However, you will have no doubt about the fact that you existed at that time. Do you have any doubt about your existence during deep sleep? Do you fall asleep as John and wake up as Bill, or do you fall asleep as “I,” sleep as “I,” and wake up as “I,” remaining the unchanging witness of all these changes? The fact that you say, “I slept well” proves that you stand as awareness during deep sleep.

  ***

  What is the significance of being dispassionate in the pursuit of truth, and how is awareness dispassionate?

  Passion springs out of the belief that there is something to gain or something to lose. In this case, there is a fragmentation, there is some incompleteness somewhere, somehow, there is some lack which generates this dynamism we call passion, desire, fear, and so on. However, in the oneness of our true nature, there is nothing to gain and nothing to lose. This ultimate presence has no motivation, no goal. It is totally neutral, totally innocent, spontaneously dispassionate. Dispassion is not a quality we can cultivate; it appears as a natural by-product when we take our stand in our real ground. Awareness is naturally dispassionate.

  How would this dispassion look to an observer? The person would still have to meet the demands for physical safety, and react to conflicting social demands. He would have to make choices. He would still have to make a living, buy food, and pay the rent. In what sense is there no end-gaining and no goal?

  This person may even appear to be passionate and happy about whatever he is doing, because he is doing it without motivation. Egoless actions reveal qualities of liberty and enthusiasm similar to those of a playful child. They also have the same quality of dispassion, because, when the game is over, the outcome is immaterial and they are ready to enjoy the next game.

  So by dispassion you mean no ongoing investment or agenda, but a momentby-moment joy in doing something.

  Absolutely. Everything is the ultimate. Everything is an expression of joy. That is why true dispassion is not fatalism. Fatalism produces a passive, dull behavior which lacks freedom and spontaneity, whereas dispassion is neither passive nor active. It is passive and peaceful when the circumstances don’t call for action, but when they do, it is active and joyful. However, our intimate core is not involved and stands alone in its own glory as the dispassionate witness of the so-called action. There are low reliefs carved in the stone of ancient temples in India which represent deities engaging in all kinds of sexual activities. The faces of these gods and sages exhibit a total detachment, an absolute serenity, symbolizing the peace and the dispassion of the ultimate, while the body, which stands both for the individual and for the cosmic body, performs its spontaneous activity.

  One obvious consequence of non-duality is that there are no others. How is ordinary social life experienced and carried on when that is clearly established?

  We all know precious moments in our relationships, moments of selfless love, of giving up, of mutual understanding, when two hearts share their true feelings without having to use words. That is how.

  But these are moments. You
are saying that current is continuous. For most people, they are relatively rare moments, and most social goings-on involve a clear felt perception of self versus others.

  That is true, but we know these moments and they leave us with the nostalgia of the oneness, of the fulfillment we have experienced. Most importantly, we should understand that during these moments we stood as awareness beyond all mentations. When we take our stand there, there is no separation, no David’s consciousness and Francis’ consciousness. This experience has its own fragrance, and this fragrance is unforgettable.

  If there are no others, then it would follow that there is no morality arising from the actions of people on one another. So non-duality does not carry with it any kind of moral view?

  It doesn’t. Morality isn’t necessary because the action that springs out of the understanding of the experience that there are no others can’t do any harm. It is perfect, righteous, totally “in place.” I am not saying that morality as established by religion and society has no value. Morality is useful to maintain a certain order in society, to prevent chaos. It comes from a deep spiritual insight by the founders of religions but it may also include sociological concerns that were specific to a given civilization, and are now obsolete in a different environment. Real morality is created from moment to moment. It is totally in tune with the situation, because it comes from life itself. That is what is meant by the expression, “The word kills, the spirit gives life.” When there is understanding, when there are no others, there is no person here either. There really is nobody. Every question that appears is dealt with swiftly in a completely adequate manner. The usual laws and codes of conduct that maintain social cohesion are obeyed most of the time, not because they are held to be the ultimate truth, but simply because, as a result of the absence of separateness, one is spontaneously a good parent, a good spouse, a good neighbor, and a good citizen, as appropriate to the circumstances.

  ***

  What is the scope of reason?

  Reason is a tool. Logical reasoning is a process in time. Even in the case of relative knowledge, for instance in science, logical reasoning in a temporal succession is not the essence of the creative process. Before we find the solution to a math problem, for instance, there is a kind of spatial simultaneous “visualization” of its various components, which reduces them to a synthetic whole (to synthesize means to put together) so that they can be dissolved in understanding, in intelligence. Notice that the verbs “dissolve” and “solve” have the same common root and the same literal meaning. If the various elements of the problem are put in the right place, the (dis)solution is very near. We could compare this spatial “visualization” process with the solving of a jigsaw puzzle in which the various pieces are in a configuration that is not final, but close enough to their final positions to give us the possibility to “fill the gap.” Suddenly, we “see” the solution, which means we see the current content of our mind dissolve in intelligence.

  What we call reasoning, or at least its creative part, even at the relative level, is mostly based upon this “visualization” process. This same tool can be used at the absolute level, in the search for the truth. In this case, it is put in motion by the intuition of our true nature. As a result of this glimpse, the mind with all its abilities, including its reasoning skills, becomes the servant of the ultimate.

  And reason, from that point on, would be said to be higher reason?

  Right, because reason takes its directives from the timeless . . .

  And takes aim at the timeless . . .

  Yes, and also takes its conviction, its certainty from the ultimate. It is a very joyful event to find oneself, at last, on solid ground.

  There are many approaches to the truth. It can be approached on various levels, through various kinds of teachers. Some teachers can mislead. Some teachers are not living in the truth. When a seeker is pursuing a particular approach, this one, for example, how can he know that he isn’t being misled? How can he know that he has arrived at something that will take him to the truth? What are the earmarks of that authenticity?

  His own satisfaction will tell him. What is the earmark that you are happy? You know when you are happy. You don’t need anybody to tell you that you are happy. In other words, happiness knows itself by itself. The earmark of a meeting with a true teacher, with a sage— and to meet a sage, in reality, means to meet oneself—is joy. You cannot have any doubts about happiness. It speaks for itself, in your heart.

  Isn’t it possible for some seekers to be deceived and yet be happy to the point of ecstasy, thinking that they have finally found the way, when in fact they are being misled?

  In this case, they are going into a dream. It is like taking a drug. At some point, they will have to wake up. If their happiness is derived from any object, there is an end to it. But, when their happiness is in their own liberty, in the discovery of your their own treasure, what they really are, there is an exhilarating feeling of space which never fades away. It is absolute.

  You Are in Love with Love

  A modern teacher of non-duality has remarked that a relaxed body is a dead body. This is a rather paradoxical statement for modern ears. In our society, relaxation is a virtue. It is sought after; there are methods that are sold. I wonder if you could clarify what is meant by this?

  One way to clarify it is to ask the opposite question: What is a body full of life? What is life in the body? The ultimate source of everything, life itself, is consciousness. All that appears, including the world and the body, appears in consciousness as sensations or thoughts. So, a body that is alive is a body full of consciousness, totally open in consciousness. This should not be understood as an intellectual assertion, no matter its value. It points, rather, toward an experience in which the body, instead of being felt, as is usually the case, as solid, opaque, heavy, dead, is felt as aerial, transparent, weightless, eminently alive. As long as we maintain the notion that we are our body, an object with a contour and a weight, we maintain its heaviness, its solidity, its objectivity. We make it inert and dead like a stone.

  When you describe a stone to be well-defined, with a discrete shape and mass, and say that it is dead, people would agree. But, if you say the same thing about the body, when it seems to be opaque and well-defined in shape, they would object and say, “No. What we mean by alive is not formless, light, or weightless, but rather sensitivity and awareness.” They would say that they can lie down and be completely relaxed, but be sensitive and very aware of their surroundings; hence, unlike the stone, alive. I think that is where the difficulty comes in understanding why, “A relaxed body is a dead body.”

  Before we go there, let’s first understand that what kills the body is our identification with it, and what makes it alive is our disidentification from it. Going back to your question, it could be said that the ultimate relaxation is beyond activity and passivity, tension and relaxation. This ultimate relaxation can’t be achieved as long as you identify yourself with your body. You may achieve a certain degree of vacuity, expansion, or lightness using sophisticated relaxation methods. At the end you may even have an apparently totally relaxed body, a blank body. So what? You are still caught in duality as a subject facing an absence of sensations, a dead object, a dead body. Sooner or later boredom appears, followed by desire, fear, and activity.

  When we understand that what we are, awareness, can’t be a perceived object, we effortlessly, instantaneously, disidentify ourself from our body, and find ourself as welcoming beyond activity and passivity. From this vantage point of a disidentified witness, the psychological and somatic traces of past experiences lose their potency and their virulence before being, in due time, completely erased.

  Only in this manner can the total weightlessness to which I was alluding be achieved. As long as we identify ourself with a perceived body-mind, this identification maintains in existence blind zones in the body (areas which have not been explored, which are not open to consciousness) and localizations
(areas of muscular tension which are perceived as being “me”).

  This black-and-white picture of bodily sensations is what we usually call “me” or “my body” and it is what I call a dead body, a mass of old patterns inherited from the past. If the attempt to relax the tense areas originates from the person, this dynamic entity will find new localizations to maintain its existence. The tense areas may have been cleared or relaxed, but new tensions continue to be created somewhere else, and we are still facing a dead “relaxed” body. We have simply dragged the corpse from one location to another.

  Real letting-go takes place in the absence of an ego, of any dynamism. As a result, the energies frozen in the old localizations are set free and expand into the surrounding space, the blind zones open up and become sensitive, and the entire psychosomatic structure gradually returns to its natural condition.

  ***

  I often feel that there must be a right way to live, to reduce the noise in my life, so to speak. Is that something that I should impose on myself or is that something that arises naturally as understanding deepens?

  The right way of living comes only from understanding, through a self-correcting process. When we understand that the old ways of facing situations were not appropriate, we naturally change our ways of doing things. This change doesn’t involve any effort.