Thank you for your post, Avril. You say:

"There is nothing which is not an expression of that-which-is. There is no actioning, which is not an expression of that-which-is. There is no consequences of that actioning,which is not an expression of that-which-is. Each and every character, both the "demons" and the "angels", the "heros" and the "villans", the "saints" and the "sinners" in your last night sleep-dream, is just you, you as expressed as so. Each and every eventings, each and every nuance of the ado of the last night-sleep-dream drama, both the sublime and the ridiculous, both the profound and the profane, both the good and the evil, constituting your last night-sleep dream, is just you, as your infinite expressionings".

Roy Whenary replies:

It is true that there is nothing which is not an expression of that which is ... everything is as it is because that is the way it is - quite simple really. However, to say that the demons, the good and the bad, etc are you, I feel is wandering off the mark really. This view is often used by so called non-dualists to explain away their immature behaviour and inability to deal with the real issues in their lives. So they say that "my anger is what I am, here and now, so I must not deny it", etc, etc ... when in reality they mean that they have not looked deep enough to see where and how it arises. These demons are not you ... they are what you accept and think you are, they are what you identify with and believe are the true expressions of your individuated existence ... 'your' story. What lies beyond this? What is the true ground of your Being? I am not talking about ideas here ... my true Being does not lie in the details of this 'person' through which this is being written now. However, I would stop short of actually spelling out exactly where it lies, because words really cannot go there. If I have misunderstood the meaning behind what you wrote ... apologies!

I would also like to add that ... yes, things are as they are ... of this there is no denying. But acceptance and action towards changing situations can quite happily work together. I accept things exactly as they are .... but, for human life, I don't condone living in a violent and abusive society, so maybe I work towards changing it ... all the while accepting that it is as it is right now. This is normal, and this is also what is ... because 'what is' does not deny the impetus for change. Thus was born 'Engaged Buddhism' and now perhaps is the time for 'Engaged Advaita'?

with warm regards
Roy Whenary

**********

Avril:Is there a one who awakens?
Can there be an inappropriate way of responding?
Within a phenomenal context, there is eventing(s), in which notionally, there appears to be a cause and a separate to that cause, a consequential effect.
But is there any linear cause-effect continuum, within the phenomenal context?
Or is every cause the effect of every other causes and every effect the result of all effects,thereby indicating a holographic wholeness as the essence of the phenomenal context?
If the phenomenal context is a holographic whole, complete, as the moment,
moment to moment to moment,
is there any one awakened, in contrast to any one un-awakened?
As a holographic whole, is there anything as inappropriate, such that there can be something as an appropriate responding?

*********

Dear Avril,

If there is no differentiation between what is real and what is imagined in the mind ... if everything is homogenised into one vast and meaningless whole ... anything goes, any action is OK ... any thought or behaviour pattern is fine, no matter how much pain and sorrow it arouses in either subject or objects surrounding it. According to this view ... which I would say is cut off from truly feeling life in the present ... in the presence ... none of the subjects, objects or pain exist anyway. Life is meaningless, according to this view, as there is no differentiation between existing and not existing.

So what is the point of discussion, if there is always escape into this non-differentiation? I have come across this view a lot in recent times. There are certain 'teachers' who promote it heavily. It is quite convenient, because there is never any need to take responsibility for actions ... never any need to look any closer at what is really going on ... and ultimately, no point at looking at anything anyway. After all, who is looking? ... the seer and the seen are one. Therefore, there is nothing that can be done in this life, and no point attempting to do it ... and, of course, no one here anyway to do it. This is it, exactly as it is ... nothing else to say ...

sweet dreams!

Roy