|Posted on June 4, 2015 at 3:40 AM|
"It is rewarding to give up the attachment to the glamour of ‘being spiritual’, ‘holy’, or ‘special’.
Truth has no trappings.
Many false teachers indulge in theatrical self-presentations that are merely lures and self-gratifications of being ‘special’.
The Absolute Reality of Enlightenment is complete and total.
It has no role or function to fulfill, no purpose to serve, and no rituals to perform.
The condition is anonymous and without name or title.
If asked, it states the truth of what it is to the degree that such a condition can be verbalized. The state of enlightenment is invisible, and the truly enlightened pass about unnoticed in ordinary life
. Neither is there anything about which to be humble or prideful. The field of consciousness of the state of enlightenment is a nonpersonal emanation radiating from the essence of the state, and what the world considers remarkable is merely ordinary to the Self.
The ego, or more accurately, the belief that one is the ego, obscures the Realization of the Reality of the Self as the Oneness of All That Is. The dissolution of the ego results in liberation from the bondage of the illusions that create suffering. These illusions are susceptible to fearless scrutiny that reveals the underlying fallacies. The only tool needed is the willingness to unreservedly surrender all beliefs, opinions, and attitudes to God.
To surrender what one thinks they are to God does not leave one as ‘nothing’, but quite the contrary. It leads to the discovery that one is everything. Every identification is a limitation. Upon examination, every ‘am’ turns out to be merely a ‘doing’. Even the belief that one’s true self is an ‘is’ or an ‘am-ness’ is an illusion.
If all actions are taking place spontaneously and not being caused by an inner doer, then the emergence of the ego is a spontaneous and impersonal phenomenon.
Like any other expression of life, the belief in the independent, self-existent, autonomous ‘I’ arose of its own—unasked, unwilled, unchosen, unbidden, and impersonal.
Even one’s name was chosen by circumstances. It is an arbitrary, nominal designation for purposes of identification, like a license plate on a car. It is well to disidentify with that name.
To adopt a new spiritual name is to merely perpetuate the illusion and give it a holier implication (which is probably more of an ego trap than being content with one’s name as Tom or Betty). To identify with a personal name is a limitation. The family name also signifies attachments to subtle identifications. Reality has no name; it is merely a linguistic designation for purposes of communication, similar to the term ‘God’.
Any self-designation or description is illusory. Even the statement “to be enlightened” is misleading and not a reality. The state is beyond ‘being’ anything and there is no one to ‘be’ that condition."
From: “I: Reality and Subjectivity” (2003), Chapter 22: Applications, pp. 384–385
Categories: David Hakwins