Truth Realisation And Chance

Someone asked me this:

“And then you said something very striking to do with T.R. being Chance. Well and furthermore that enlightenment doesn’t even exist, but one thing at a time. Can you tell me a little more about your understanding of how “T.R.” lands on humans? And how advisable is it for us humans to even look for it from your perspective?
The next question is any thoughts on Bernadette Roberts’ work or state?”

How does TR land on humans… the short answer is ‘I don’t know’. I have no idea how it landed on me, except to say that I was intensely (INTENSELY) driven to see what was real. That’s all it took, and it took under two years. The inherent independence and a critical turn of my mind helped not to fall into the numerous rabbit holes.

Spiritual game players call it ‘grace’. The word ‘grace’ has an emotional ring to it, a vague call to the specialness and the chosen status of the one whose mind suddenly penetrated Reality and saw it for what it is. I also used to call it as such until I realised there is a simpler, more honest answer that bears no mystical signature: chance occurrence.

Chancing upon Realisation only applies to that one moment of the expansive and irreversible shift within one’s conscious awareness. THAT was chance, and humans have different words for it. Mine is the ‘Big Bang’, but it is just some name for the final mind opening. Can be given any other name, makes no difference.

However, the preceding was no chance.  It was stumbling on to question upon question, going through all of what the supposed spiritual movement of generations presents to ‘seekers’ and answering each and one of those questions with own resources: own thinking, own intuitive perceptive feeling, own knowledge of facts, own disbelief in any answers supplied by an outside authority. This is the true process of self inquiry.. or spiritual autolysis.. or the Work… whatever the name given – the process is always the same: ‘is that true’… what is fed to me and others.. IS THAT TRUE? Look, evaluate, see it, feel it… is any of it TRUE?

Intellectually bent minds take the process name (whatever name appeals to them) and turn it into a ritual. To turn this into a ritual they run to the one who came up with the name (Jed, Katie, Ramana, Alan… doesn’t matter) and ask stupid questions such as ‘How do I do this? (insert the proprietory process name here)’. How to do what? How to ask oneself questions? Is that so hard that suddently it requires a second person to teach you how to ask questions and look for answers?

I thought many times ‘WTF?! Humans turn everything into a Sabbat, a worshipful event, with the invented seriousness, but a complete lack of inner sincerity at application.’

I can tell you this… most ‘seekers’ are great liars. They lie to themselves (and to others by extension) every waking moment of their seeking. Why do I say that? Because if the sincere intent is present – no one would spend their entire life looking for something which is walking right beside you every day. It is IMPOSSIBLE not to see IF one is focused and honest in their endeavour.

Is it advisable you ask… No. You will find nothing at the end of it all. There was and is nothing to find. I have to correct our boy ‘Jed’ here: true TR is not as rare as he surmised, but remaining true to Realness of own being – IS very rare. A good portion of people at SAND, for instance, are TR. However… they play the ‘spiritual’ Game and, thus, lie.

I don’t know anything about Bernadette Roberts, apart from the name. The normal rules of spiritual engagement didn’t apply in my case. I hardly read any ‘spiritual’ books and pursued no enlightenment or any other associated activity prior.

And I don’t do so now. It had been over long before it began.


Burnt Orange Geader


 

12 thoughts on “Truth Realisation And Chance

  1. IMO, you began this essay well with, “ I don’t know.”
    However, you then contradicted that by writing such things as:
    1. The paragraph beginning with: “Spiritual game players call it ‘grace’.” Begining with these words – you threw away the “I don’t know.”
    2. “I realized there is a simpler, more honest answer that bears no mystical signature: chance occurrence.” I ask you, how do you know this if you begin with “the short answer is ‘I don’t know’. I have no idea how it landed on me, EXCEPT…” (caps added by me).
    3. “ Intellectually bent minds take the process name (whatever name appeals to them) and turn it into a ritual.” So, you know they are “bent”?
    4. “but a complete lack of inner sincerity at application.’” Really? You know there is a complete lack of sincerity?
    5. “I can tell you this… most ‘seekers’ are great liars….if the sincere intent is present – no one would spend their entire life looking” How do you know this? What happened to your, “I don’t know”?
    6. “There was and is nothing to find.” Really? Yes, however, words fail. IMO you’re missing something; something you don’t know you know.

    I could go on, however IME, you may not be open and accepting of this sort of comment.

    1. Joseph, why do you care about what Tano is writting ? Look by yourself. Answer your questions yourself.

      Are you a child ?

      1. Cedric, that’s harsh. I reply, “why do you care about what” I am replying to “what Tano is Writting” (sic). I know her personally, do you? Although what I wrote above is open and public, it’s, IMO, not your business to judge me or my comments. I am willing to say more about why I care; however only openly, person to person, not to you as an anonymous somebody. I am, respectfully yours, B Joseph Kotrich, Brian Joseph Kotrich, email zen@zen.nu If you care to have a more informative reply to your comment above, please contact me, or comment more respectfully and less judgementally here.

    1. OH! Wait! Am I slow? Yes. Enlightenment Myth, have you become now on this blog, not perhaps a competitor, but an alternative to Ken on the IGF? Have I just defended myself to a new sycophant of yours?

    2. That’s it : do not care about what I think. 😉

      (sorry for my English which is far from perfect (I speak french))

      I know you know Tano “personnaly” (whatever that means)… I’ve never met her “in real life” but who knows, maybe I know her better than you do. But even if you know her better than me, that’s not my point.

      I’ve followed a bit what has been written on reddit, and your reactions there. That’s why I asked you the question. It seems you are attached to her or her words or her way of thinking or her way of seeing the world. What I say to you is that that attachment will never give you any truth.

      I’m not talking about the age of your body, I’m talking about inside : are you a child ? (by the way I’m born in 1980, but that has no importance at all).

      I have nothing more to say to you. (but if you really want to contact me, you can find my email in my profil on my blog)

      I don’t respect the “child in you searching for answers in others”, but I respect the man you are. And I’m talking adult to adult with you.

      Maybe Tano doesn’t want that little conversation we have to take place here (you can delete that comment if you like Tano), I don’t want to bother her with my words.

      I had just one question for you, Joseph, and you are the only one that can answer it, and I don’t care about your answer.

      But the most important thing is : Don’t care about what I wrote to you, don’t care about my questions. 😉 Why would you care about what others think ? 😉

      1. Cedric. If you wish me to reply, ask me personally, privately, email works. This is not the forum for you to attack me if you wish me to respectfully reply to you. Are you familiar with the English saying, “Respect given, earns respect”? My email is zen@zen.nu

  2. And Cedric; I looked, for the record, and I do not see what you said is: “find my email in my profil on my blog”. Anyway, you are the one flaming me. I am here, I’m not anonymous. I haven’t had anyone insult me privately for a while. Would you care to do so via email also, and not insult me only here? Once again, my email is: zen@zen.nu

  3. Cedric. This is the sycophant sort of thing I comment on above (google SYCHOPHANT.) Think about it. You wrote/commented above: “Maybe Tano doesn’t want that little conversation we have to take place here (you can delete that comment if you like Tano), I don’t want to bother her with my words.”

Leave a comment

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s