It is interesting how a belief in “God” could trigger different reactions in people. Because that word represents one half of duality, then a separation has been given.
From what was shared here last week, someone could say:
“ Ananda does not believe in God.”
That interpretation does not understand the message about beliefs. That is how, these sharings may become less and less understood, more and more controversial… for some. I am sure that very few… very, very few… could understand these limited words by the guidance of their own experience. In life, without experience there is no understanding and even that experience, it is not “the experience,” but just an experience.
The other day I was speaking with a friend from India. She said: “This is where I am right now. That is my perception at this point of reality, although someone could say that it is a belief.”
That is correct. Once something is in words as the “only” way, it is a belief.
Something becomes a belief when it is the statement of truth to follow every single time. Something becomes a belief when we decide to put “all our eggs in that basket.”
That is why any dogma is full of beliefs.
Anything that someone may say about “God,” is just a belief.
What do we know about omnipresence?
Nothing without experience. It is just a concept. If we knew about it, we will act naturally accordingly. There is no need to “cultivate” ourselves when there is experience.
Without experience “to cultivate” ourselves to become a “concept” is all there is. That is the path of religions for the masses.
Someone living and breathing duality, could say now: “Ananda is an atheist.” 🙂
With that label, Ananda was comfortably put into the container of duality.
Ananda is neither a believer nor a non-believer. Do not place me into a container for your own comfort. Is Ananda an agnostic?
Just to stop the labeling….Yes and No.
Everyone has a belief which is so important for our perceived well being, which triggers a strong reaction.
If I write about predestination and the illusion of free will, then self proclaimed atheists may feel that this blog is no longer useful for them.
That is all it takes.
The interesting part about beliefs, is when we believe in contradictory beliefs such as predestination and the existence of a God or “free-will” and the existence of damnation.
Perhaps someone would like for me to go into detail on those topics?
I will not. Ananda respects all beliefs. Those beliefs have a purpose for the believers.
Are these sharings known as “non-duality”?
No. these sharings do not have a label. They cannot be put into a dogma. They cannot be put into a religion. They cannot be put into a box for someone to study, memorize and believe in it.
All Ananda is sharing is his own experience.
Any belief becomes a hurdle that will need to be overcome in order to face, that which is known as the “self.”
Without being able to see that “self” without the curtain of beliefs; to observe the self completely naked, as it is may be very difficult.
When the Buddha mentioned that “he does not deal with God” and that was interpreted as “atheism,” by popular understanding, then perhaps now, we could see that he was misinterpreted.
A belief in God or atheism distracts from self-discovery.
That is the path of “non-duality,” to let both concepts aside… BUT, it is not “non-duality.”
The age of duality is changing into non-duality.
Self-discovery is not a concept, a belief or an intellectual philosophy.
Interestingly, the experiences of the Buddha were made into “Buddhism” and with that, his personal experiences and self-discoveries, were put into a dogma for followers. Every religion has that same destiny.
Shall we put the discoveries of Ananda into Anandism?
That will be very lame. That lacks total understanding of what is being shared.
We need to discover for ourselves. Self-discovery.
In the “world at the office” we are told not to “re-discover the wheel.” In the world of self-discovery unless we experience something, we will not understand. We need to “re-discover the wheel” and then we will use our own words to describe that discovery.
However, those words are not the “truth” but a distortion of “what is.”
Is Ananda sharing distortions then?
You bet… but at the same time, how could I share something? 🙂
With that understanding,we may be in the same page now.