When it comes to enlightenment, sometimes it feels like it’s all about figuring out a bunch of strange riddles. Although these riddles have a purpose (no, they’re not just there to confuse us), they can sometimes make our journey toward Awakening into a tangle of frustration.
The key with these riddles is that you are meant to encounter them during certain times of your journey. When you are using books or online writings as your ‘guru’ or guide, these riddles can be presented at very inappropriate times. And many writers mistakenly or unknowingly present these riddles as truths – as descriptors of what ‘reality’ is really like.
If you are using books and online writings as a guide, it’s important for you to understand the nature of these riddles, and to discover how to use them in a manner that will be an aid, rather than a hindrance.
Confusing Riddles
Let’s imagine that we’re sitting in front of a great guru, and she presents us with one of these riddles.
“No effort can bring you to Awakening,” she says. “It is something which is already here.”
What??? When we hear this, our mind starts a process of dissection. We latch on to certain words in the puzzling statement (‘No effort’, ‘already here’), and then try to figure out how they relate to each other.
This is the only way we know how to think (the only way we can think), and thus we enter the puzzle-trap. We think: How can we reach Awakening if we’re not making an effort? If it’s ‘already here’, what use is there in trying to Awaken? Does this mean I should just sit around and drink copious amounts of beer? Why the heck should I listen to all this nonsense?
If you search the internet, you’ll find websites where people calling themselves non-dualists spend inordinate amounts of time debating the concepts and relationships presented in these riddles. I used to play this game myself. But the real point of these riddle-statements is not to have us argue with others (or with ourselves) about the meanings. We can discover the true meaning behind these riddles in this way, if we follow our definitions to their conclusions, but most of us aren’t very adept at this, and will become ‘captured’ with some idea, and find ourselves tangled in confusion.
Pointing vs. Describing
These riddles can become less confusing if we understand that they are meant to point us toward something, instead of describe something. The difference between these two is very significant.
Imagine that you are standing with someone out in a field. Imagine that this person has never seen a flower. You want to show them a daisy that is growing nearby.
If you were going to use words as descriptors, you would start to describe the daisy. “It’s white and yellow, and has these long white sort of spokes sticking out in all directions. It has a long green stick called a stem which connects it to the ground.”
“How big is it?” the person might ask.
“Well,” you answer, “the top part, called the ‘flower’, is a little smaller than your palm, but the stem is long – almost as long as your arm.”
The person could go on asking questions (Soft or hard? What does it feel like? What does it smell like? Does it move around? Is it alive? Does it eat things? How does it reproduce?)
You could go on describing all day long, but the best you’d be able to do is to give the person an imaginary picture in their head, which may or may not be similar to what a daisy really looks like. You’d also be able to impart all sorts of knowledge (for instance, regarding the daisy’s reproduction). But all of this knowledge would be descriptive – a trading of ideas in your respective heads.
Okay. How about pointing? If you were going to use words as pointers, you might say, “Look down and to your left, and there is something yellow and white.”
If the person followed your instructions, they would look down and see the daisy. Now they would be getting a direct experience of the daisy, and would know immediately what you mean when you say ‘daisy’. The longer they spent watching the daisy, the more they would directly experience the aspects you were describing above (its smell, its movement, its reproduction, its appearance).
Seeing Fully
When we are young, we can see things ‘just as they are’ (akin to the ‘pointing’ aspect I was describing above), without any descriptors attached. As we learn words, we start to transform our perceptions until we completely lose the ability to see the world without describing it in our heads.
This is where most of us exist, in a state of pure description. We have become so adept at it that we don’t even realize we’re doing it. Not only is this the only way we can see the world, but it’s the only way we can communicate with other people about the world. With every word we speak, we reinforce our and others’ powers to describe the world. Which means that we are simultaneously eroding our and others’ ability to see the world just as it is.
To fully mature as human beings, we need to come full circle. This means that we come to understand both the ‘pointing’ and the ‘describing’ methods of seeing the world. We regain our ability to see the world ‘Just As Is’, and discover for ourselves how our descriptive methods really work. We must be able to experience the daisy and talk about it.
These two ways aren’t mutually exclusive. Indeed, when we come full circle, we discover that when we regain our ability to see things Just As Is, that discovery automatically integrates the descriptive methods we’ve been using for so long. Now we can see the whole world Just As Is, including all of the things we once called ‘dualism’ (our describing method).
Riddles As Pointers
The meanings of these strange statements, then, are to serve as pointers. We don’t need any more describing. We’re all very good at it. If we latch too strongly onto the ideas presented in riddle-statements, we’ll just get confused.
But if we can understand that these are simply meant to point our attention toward something, we can come to a new understanding of how to use these statements. The trick, of course, is that we’re not being pointed toward an object like a daisy, which (surprise!) when we see it Just As Is, turns out to be just another descriptor in our heads. We’re being pointed toward Reality itself. And Reality is a little more challenging to point to, since it consists of everything around us, including our delusions and our descriptors.
If we are captured in our descriptive minds, we’ll be convinced that we will never experience Reality directly. We will convince ourselves that Awakening consists of breaking the world into the ‘pure’ and the ‘profane’. If we watch ourselves, we’ll find that what we’re really trying to do is to eradicate all the things we don’t consider to be part of pure, non-dual reality, such as negative emotions, distraction, a belief in multiplicity, our ‘monkey mind’, and all the other aspects of our ‘delusion’. We’re convinced that if we eradicate these things, we’ll be left with Awakening, Enlightenment, Reality.
It is much simpler than this. It is just about seeing what is right here, right now.
This doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t ponder these riddle-statements. They have great value in that they can get us to examine our usual assumptions about the world. It’s okay to think about them. But when we get too hung up on one of them, it’s time for us to realize that they aren’t descriptors. They are pointers, and are urging our gaze toward something.
Seeing Daisies
It’s important to note that when we were standing in the field showing our friend what a daisy is, our friend would have become pretty confused if they tried to interpret our pointing language as descriptive language.
“What do you mean,” they might ask, “by ‘Look down and to your left, and there is something yellow and white’? How does this describe a daisy?”
Part of your statement would make a little bit of sense (‘yellow and white’ seems to be describing a daisy), but the rest of the words are nonsense if the person is looking for a description of a daisy.
Recognize in yourself the person attempting to see the daisy. When you hear words, how are you interpreting them? If you are interpreting them as descriptors, much of what is said regarding non-dualism will make a sort of ‘half-sense’, just like in the example above. But ultimately, unless you follow each of your assumptions to its very end, things will just become more confusing.
If, however, you are interpreting words as pointers, you will face yet another challenge. And here I’ll have to engage in riddle-talk myself. Because these pointers aren’t pointing toward anything. Anything they can point toward is just a descriptor.
This Reality (God, The Ultimate, Oneness) – even this is an idea in our heads. The goal is not to realize Wholeness or Non-Dualism. These are things we are conceptualizing. These are descriptors. What is being pointed to is an experience of what is always going on, all the time, right now. It is so breathtakingly simple and clear. It is much more like a direct perception (much like a sensation of cold or heat) than like anything you can imagine in your head.
On this site, and throughout writings on non-dualism, you will discover these riddle-statements.
See if they transform for you when you cease trying to make them into descriptors.
Read your post with great interest, though unfortunately the topics of which it treats are a bit removed from my own area of understanding, philosophy. Nonetheless it was a pleasure to read it and surely threw light on how what is involved in to trying to see daisies.
I was specially struck by this paragraph:
“If, however, you are interpreting words as pointers, you will face yet another challenge. And here I’ll have to engage in riddle-talk myself. Because these pointers aren’t pointing toward anything. Anything they can point toward is just a descriptor.”
Perhaps the work of Wittgenstein seems to come close to what you have written.
Andrés
Greetings Andres!
I have very little knowledge regarding philosophy and its famous voices, so I’m always excited to hear the name of someone who seems to touch on the same subjects I’ve been touching on here. Wittgenstein, you say? I’ll have to check on him and learn a little more. It seems that whenever I do explore philosophy a bit, there are a number of voices speaking out to the basic premise that most of what we call ‘reality’ is a construct — real, but not in the manner in which we usually conceive.
Thanks for pointing me in the direction of something new.
Sweetwater,
Kenton
To those who have experienced it, no explanation is necessary, to those who haven’t none is possible???
Greetings Sac-A-Lait,
Perhaps so. Sometimes it seems like anything can bring the experience about — maybe an egg cracking into a pan, or a sudden sound. Perhaps carefully crafted words can serve as such a ‘trigger’ — at least as well as the egg. When the words twist upon themselves, they at least help us to see the oddity of our usual world-view. It’s a sort of play, leading to more play.
Sweetwater,
Kenton
Excellent post Ken. This is the first writing i’ve come across that explains the purpose of sutras in this way. Many writings speak of them as signs pointing to something else, but you’ve gone into much deeper detail on how to approach them wonderfully.
Thank you, Dean — I’m glad this held clarity for you!
Sweetwater,
Kenton
Hi Ken,
I’m not sure that I fully understand the meaning of what you are saying.
We all have an on-going and constant internal dialog with ourselves. That dialog, our thoughts, uses words to describe, interpret, create and assign the meaning of our experiences. We think in the words of the language we began to learn at birth. Words are the descriptors we use in which we interpret and assign the meaning of all things. They are the descriptors of descriptors, if you will. If we use words to describe and shape our reality, it then follows that our reality is limited to the meaning (along with our emotional responses) we assign to our words.
So, we get stuck a paradoxical feedback loop with our minds trying to describe and find meaning in something that can not be described and has its own inherent meaning (or not). It can only be experienced.
It isn’t possible to experience that that IS if you try to experience it… or even CARE if you experience it…
Is that the gist of what you said or am I completely missing it?
Greetings Dan,
I believe that we are indeed saying the same thing in different words =) You’re noting the power of our language to masquerade as ‘reality’, and noting the loop we get caught in as we try to resolve this feeling that an apple is an ‘apple’ (a word, which creates an idea in our heads — perhaps with an emotional response as you’ve noted), while we also realize on some level that an ‘apple’ is just a sensory perception (and even this doesn’t adequately describe the simplicity I’m trying to use to describe the reality of ‘apple’) which we have given a word to.
Once this is realized, it becomes easy to think of words as ‘negative’, as creating an illusory world which hypnotizes us. But a full perception of reality includes observing our mind’s use of words as creators of ‘reality’, and includes even our attempts to eradicate our word-hypnotism in favor of ‘direct perception’. This is where a riddle is an apt method of describing the situation. We can say that we’re ‘already there’, in that there is nothing we need to change, since everything is ‘reality’, and yet there can be practical value in asserting that all of our current experience is basically illusion. Both statements hold truth, and both can be quite misleading.
Sweetwater,
Kentone
Thank you Ken,
You stated, “Once this is realized, it becomes easy to think of words as ‘negative’, as creating an illusory world which hypnotizes us. But a full perception of reality includes observing our mind’s use of words as creators of ‘reality’, and includes even our attempts to eradicate our word-hypnotism in favor of ‘direct perception’.”
Ah, I understand. Very nicely put.
So, when the physical “reality” of everyday life is knocking at your door, it is best to simply observe and acknowledge your thoughts, understanding that they represent both the manifestation and creator of our concept of reality…and then let them go… I suppose the “letting them go” part causes me the most trouble… Indeed “hypnotizes” is a very apt way of saying it. It can be difficult to kick old habits and “perceptions”.
I think that the sticking point is the fact that, as you stated, everything is reality, yet reality is an illusion. I believe that both statements fit within my current concept of what might be called, for lack of another description, “subjective truth”. Yes, both concepts can be VERY misleading. Giving them thought (i.e.: trying to understand) can easily lead to the paradoxical feedback loop I mentioned. I don’t know, Perhaps intellectual philsophyzing is a comfortable habit I may need to take a good hard look at.
At any rate, I’m letting my mind ramble so I suppose I should stop here.
Thank you for sharing your insights. This is a wonderful website. A few days ago I “Stumbled Upon” the article in your Quick Thoughts section called “The Game You’re Playing”. I shot off a comment before I’d looked through the rest of the site. Since then I’ve taken the time to actually read what you and others have had to say.
Wow… Fascinating, insightful stuff.
Anyway, thanks again!
Best regards,
Dan
Greetings Dan,
I’m so pleased that you’re finding value here =)
I’ve been enjoying your comments, because you write very clearly about what you’re experiencing. And these are not easy things to write about clearly! You’ve ‘hit the nail on the head’ here, noticing our mind’s ability to drive us in circles whenever we want to conceptualize all of this. Philosophy is great fun, but it is, of course, trying to put these things into a framework that will make sense to a reader — usually a reader who is using rational thought processes. And the trouble (as you note), is that no matter how ‘close’ of a picture we can paint with words or ideas, it never can compare to the real deal.
The key is the observation you spoke of — in my experience, it’s all about observation (but even using this word gets us into trouble, since it carries the implication of an observer and sets us up for the sensation of ‘watching’ our thoughts or experiences). What I’m pointing at throughout this site is that there is a way of experiencing this world that is outside of words and concepts — and that if we’re holding on to any concept during our observation, we’re apt to miss the process of aware observation. Part of what I’m hoping to do is to make this whole thing less ‘mystical’ and mysterious — as a writer on non-dualism it would be easy to hide behind riddles and mysterious sayings — instead, I’m hoping to drag each of these hiding-places out into the light and give us no place to shelter our concepts until we have little choice but to see the world as it is. This is the same thing that happens when we eat a chili pepper and briefly experience the purity of sensation — the purity of the pain and taste needs no adjectives (though it might engender an exclamation!). So what happens when we experience all of life like that — without our usual labels and overlaying concepts? Most of us think we’d be paralyzed, since we put a lot of faith in our conceptualizing minds. But my challenge to people is to simply try it — you can always add concepts back into your stew, but we miss a lot of life’s offerings when we insist on using them to filter our every experience.
Again, thanks for your thought-provoking comments, Dan. I think these exchanges are really the heart of this site.
Sweetwater,
Kenton
Hello Ken,
***sigh***
There have been many times when I was off in the la-la land of my mind when I’d get these brief glimpses of that that can not be imagined or described. Unfortunately, I’m usually so startled by the… I don’t know, perhaps what’s so startling is the simplicity and beauty of the true nature of reality. I suppose that might sound rather trite, but there really is no way to describe it. As corny as it may sound, I’ve always experienced a feeling of absolutely, limitless, unfathomable, peace and joy. I feel limitless… everywhere and nowhere all at the same time.
As I said, this is usually so unexpected and startling that it brings me up short and I pop out of la-la land with a “What the HELL is THAT all about?” thought. Instead of simply being in the “now”, my pesky analytical mind wants to try to interpret the experience in a rational way that will fit into a physical concept of reality. It’s very irritating when all I want to do is stay in that wonderful “place”. I always want to stay there.
But, ya gets what ya gets when ya gets it… And, of course, there is certainly no point in trying to go there when I want to. It just does’t seem to work that way. It only seems to happen … Ah… I just had a moment of clarity just now… It only happens without thinking! That really tickles me! It only happens while I’m outside my “self” and simply observing (no attachment to my thoughts…) whatever comes up…
Wow…
We ARE all playing the roles we make up as we travel along this journey called physical reality… a reality we also make up on our travels.
But then of course, there’s that really irritating part of me that always wants to scream out WHY??
Perhaps it doesn’t understand how inconsequential and meaningless that question really is yet. But I’m working on it.
Thanks for this site and a sounding board for gaining insight into the way things really are!
I don’t know of any other place like this. (and I’ve looked!)
Best Regards,
Dan
What’s really serendipitous is that I just “Stumbled Upon” this site without looking for it…
Ya gets what ya gets… =)
Hello Dan,
I’ve had limited access to computers for the last few days, hence the late reply to your comments.
You’re describing an experience that’s been reported by many mystics. This feeling of suddenly ‘getting a glimpse’, and then watching it slip away. You seem to be seeing the whole affair with a sense of humor, and I think that’s key — it allows us to ‘just see’ it happening, instead of getting tangled in the process. Thanks for sharing your observations! I think they’ll resonate with a lot of readers =)
Sweetwater,
Kenton
Kenton,
Yeah, I agree that it helps to have a sense of humor about all this stuff.
Although, it is darned easy to take it way too seriously. (yes, I’m afraid that I’m all too guilty of that terrible transgression!) After all, this is some pretty serious “life and death” stuff we’re talking about here… gotta learn it.. gotta get it “right”… =)
Dan
Hello Dan,
Oh yes, it’s easy to take it seriously. But I often feel that it’s in our discovery of why we take the world so seriously that we discover the delightful lightness of life. May we all find joy, even in our tears =)
Sweetwater,
Kenton