Our prior (prior to the arising of an other, ANY other), non-dual natural state is an absence, but it is not the void, not the nihilist’s nothingness. The hardest thing to grasp about nothingness is that it doesn't exist. That is precisely what makes it NOTHING. There is no such thing. The absence of space-time is our prior natural state, a fullness beyond explication, explanation, exegesis or experience, all of which belong to the 'ex' or 'separated out' exigency which we experience as the realm of becoming; a realm we might term apparitional in relation to the ineffable presence of Being.
'Relative absence is Absolute presence', says Nisargadatta, prodding the mind beyond its uncomfortable limits.
Meanwhile, it seems we are all pretty much preoccupied with the apparition, with what appears. Appearance parents experience, but only apparently. An Advaita aphorism states, "The world is the child of a barren woman." That is, it is an appearance only. It is not the Real, at least not all on its own little appearing lonesome.
When Nisargadatta makes this point to a visitor, the latter wonders what is the point of doing anything at all. Nisargadatta encourages him to do his work in the world with great zeal and to take good care of that work-in-the-world, for "it is an orphan." All this may seem pretty harsh until one reflects that if the alternative were true -- that mortal physicality is alone real and fully accounts for who we are -- then we'd be talking downright nasty cruelty.
It's pointless to try to convince anyone that reality arises only within consciousness and, paradoxically, that consciousness itself is all appearance and no substance. Our language does not enable us to articulate that which is beyond or prior to consciousness. Yet, at some point, if you just watch the coming and going, the arising and subsiding, of all things, thoughts, feelings and intuitions, it becomes obvious that coming and going are noticeable ONLY from the vantage point of that which neither comes nor goes.
An ancient fable with a modern twist, once given by Muktananda Paramahamsa, illustrates the mind's facility for turning delusion into suffering.
"A man was walking along a forest trail when he came upon a coil of rope lying in the path. The man reacted with great fear, thinking the rope was a snake. Of course the rope could not hurt him, but fearing for his life, the man grabbed hold of a tree branch with which to beat the snake. Unfortunately, the tree branch was a snake and it bit him. "
Appearance (the entire-universe-as-ROPE) cannot harm us. Thinking that appearance can harm us, gets us into a bit of trouble. ACTING on the basis of that delusion (reaching for the 'branch') gets us into trouble that hurts. 'Mental things are alone real,' wrote William Blake, pointing out that even the snake that bites arises within consciousness.
What if that which observes also creates?
"Apparently there are not many people who have an awareness that includes awareness as something to be aware of." -- David Bohm, Physicist... I would add two things about awareness that have caught both my eye and my I. First, it is never an object, so we cannot see it because we are it (as Peter Baker has skillfully noted). Second, what arises in awareness is always, paradoxically, ONCE ONLY. The perfection of awareness does not seem to have anything to do with an accomplished or realized end point. Rather, it is a process, a becoming, forever uniquely a once only miracle that we call the present, as in present moment and present-as-gift.
In Kashmir Shaivism, this ONCE ONLY miracle that is the unity of awareness and creation, is called the union of Shiva and Shakti. Their eternal love embrace is just this, indescribable, of course, though we strive ever to sing songs deeper and more true.
In Kashmir Shaivism, this ONCE ONLY miracle that is the unity of awareness and creation, is called the union of Shiva and Shakti. Their eternal love embrace is just this, indescribable, of course, though we strive ever to sing songs deeper and more true.
