Gill - being: the bottom line

being:

the bottom line

nathan gill

NON-DUALITY PRESS

Deepest gratitude to Rose Youd for her hard work and
dedication in preparing this book

________________

Non-Duality Press

6 Folkestone Rd, Salisbury SP2 8JP

United Kingdom

www.non-dualitybooks.com

First printing March 2006

Set in Plantin 11.5/14 & Rotis Serif

Cover design by John Gustard

www.nathangill.com

CopyrightNathan Gill 2006

CopyrightNon-Duality Press 2006

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the express written permission of the publisher.

ISBN 978-095517622-7

In the year following publication of Already Awake , the focus of the talks began to shift to the theme of Being. The present book is a selection from transcripts of live dialogues that emerged in the autumn of 2005.

The bottom line is Being. Being awake or being asleep are actually beside the point.

Usually the idea is that dialogues such as these have the specific purpose of bringing about enlightenment, awakening, liberationwhatever the term used for that which is deemed to be escape from (or transcendence of) identification as a suffering individual. But our true nature is always Being and doesnt require any enlightenment or awakening. It simply is already, whether theres identification or not.

In the play of life, whenever there is identification, the story tends to be about improving what is in some way. And when that takes the form of the search for awakening, the focus usually falls on getting rid of the sense of individuality, as though it were somehow wrong or unreal.

But if theres a sense of individuality and a story about seeking to be rid of it, then precisely that is reality. Being has no requirements whatsoever. Nothing needs to be changed or attained in order to be . This present appearance is already the perfect expression of Being and cannot be avoided.

Oneness, or Being, although indivisible, could be said to have two aspects: awareness, and the presently appearing content of awareness.

The content of awareness is all of the various images that appear: visual images, sensations, sounds, thoughts, feelings, etc. All these images appear presently in awareness, but the thought images appear to offer an added dimension, the capacity for seeming distraction away from or out of presence into the story of me as an individual, a distinct entity located in time and space.

This story of me is based in thought, and as thought is only part of the whole picture, when the story appears as reality theres an accompanying sense of lack. Seeking for wholeness is the story of the attempt to fill this sense of lack.

The search for wholeness arises in myriad ways, one of which is the search for enlightenment. Here too it is inevitably focused within the personal story, the partial, psychological view of reality, and consequently it cannot result in a lasting sense of fulfilment.

Whenever the play of life is not seen from the psychological viewpointfrom the point of view of my storythere is a non-personalised, unfragmented picture free of any sense of lack.

Everything is likely to appear just as it did before, but without the distorted view that makes it mine.

So what can be done to disengage attention from the personal story?

Nothing can be done, because there isnt actually any entity present that could do anything. The personal story is what gives the impression of a someone thats doing things, making choices, taking decisions, etc, whereas in actuality this someone, or me, is simply a commentary arising along with whatever else is appearing.

In the absence of the commentary, or where the commentary is seen as such, its quite obvious that everything is happening or appearing entirely of its own accord. No one is doing anything.

But who sees it as a commentary?

All of the images are appearing, or being registered, in awareness. Theres no one, no entity, to see it. All of this is simply happening in Being. The commentary has the effect of personalising the awareness aspect of Being, giving the impression of a someone where in fact theres no one.

This can be very frustrating, to hear that theres nothing to be done when theres still a sense of a someone that can do something.

Yes, whenever theres identification as a someone, there will be a corresponding feeling of agitation or frustration, the need to fill the sense of lack. Maybe seeking to fill that sense of lack takes the form of performing various practices such as enquiry or meditation, or maybe simply hearing a description about all of this is enough for seeking to be seen in its true light.

At those times when theres an understanding of that, there comes a real feeling of relief.

Understanding can certainly give rise to a profound sense of relief. But understanding (in the sense that I use the word) is still something integral to the story of me.

But cant understanding also lead outside of the story, to enlightenment?

If the story is seen as a story then no understanding or anything else is needed to lead outside of it.

So seeing through the story, or the disappearance of the storyis that enlightenment then?

Enlightenment only appears significant from the viewpoint of me. Only the story of me requires enlightenment. Your true nature is Being, and Being is already all that is (even when there is seeming ignorance of that) with no requirements whatsoever.

So even apparent ignorance of Your true nature is still the expression of Your true nature?

All ignorance and all stories about overcoming ignorance are the perfect expression of Being. Its impossible to avoid Being. How hard is it to be ? Its always the case, regardless of what appears.

Various teachers prescribe methods and techniques that seem to produce results.

Yes, and just as often they dont produce results. Its an interesting story, isnt it?

So it all just happens as it happens? The teacher prescribing a technique, and the student practising the technique, and some result happening or notthat couldnt be otherwise?

Exactly so. Everything is happening entirely of its own accord because there actually isnt anyone to make anything happen. I is part of whats happening, not the cause of any of it.

Everything may be happening of its own accord, and yet it often seems as though theres a me making plans, taking decisions, doing things.

Its the commentary in thought that seemingly divides what appears into something being done by someone.

But theres nothing wrong with that; its not something thats got to go so that something else called enlightenment can take over. If theres identification, then thats whats happening, thats what appears as reality. If that identification is seen through, then thats whats happening. Being is already the case, whatever the configuration of appearances.

A sudden total dropping of identification of any kind could also happen of course.

Yes, that could happen mid-story.

But the identification could return?

Maybe, but any coming and going is merely the play of life. As far as Your nature as Being is concerned, the absence or presence of a personal self is inconsequential. Being simply is, and all of these appearances and happenings may simply be described as the cosmic entertainment. In actuality, nothing has ever happened.

I wonder what you see as the purpose of this talk?

I dont see any purpose. A room is appearing with people in it. A conversation is happening, which appears to be in the form of a description. Maybe in the case of some of the characters some kind of relaxing happens in hearing this description, maybe not. It doesnt actually matter because the whole thing is simply happening in Being, is Being. Purpose or meaning appears within the story of individuality, and if thats whats happening, then thats fine as well.