- Study Materials Library
- Further Resources
Going Deeper part 3
Editor's note: This transcript has been lightly edited to bring clarification to certain points of the dialogue and for easier readability. For this reason, it does not match the corresponding audio mp3 word-for-word. However, the overall content and the expressed ideas remain unchanged.
The Projected Split
To start to see that these are projections, these are ideas in my own mind that I have projected begins to give that sense that there is an I that is distinct, and that is whole and is capable of observing those thoughts without believing in them.
Participant: So is it just intention and willingness to do it that way and look at it that way that is required?
Speaker: To not order it. It’s to be able to free associate with some ideas. For instance: morning, chairs, microphone, David, couch, sunshine and so on. Here we have a stream of thoughts that I verbalized. To get a sense of an observer or of something that is able to watch those thoughts without ordering, without reading meaning into the thoughts. For instance: woman sitting in chair, speaking into microphone, looking out at sunshine. All of those thoughts have a reference point to woman. The woman in that sense is the subject. The person with those eyes is able to look at the microphone and the chairs and the sun. There’s the subject/object split as opposed to those all, including the woman, being a stream of thoughts in the mind, without an association or connection. There is no association to them. In reality it’s impossible to link up false thoughts. That is what the deceived mind attempts to do. It tries to associate thought forms and constructs meaning based on those thought forms. In one sense that is how the world was made up. It’s combinations and links of thought forms.
Participant: Just as you went from naming couch, sunshine, and microphone to woman sitting in the chair speaking in the microphone, looking out the window; the whole point of saying all that was that the individual components are then attempted to put into some combination. That is what the mind tries to do; to take the isolated thought forms and associate them and from that come to some kind of meaning or interpretation.
Speaker: Yes and that is false. The mind can attempt to do that but it just continues to sleep. It’s trying to do something that can’t be done.
Participant: Because they are individual isolated thought forms? Is
that what you are saying?
Participant: But only in combination with other thought forms do they seem to take on some meaning?
Speaker: Yes, if you think of a chair, immediately there all kinds of associations. You could say chairs are made for bodies to sit in, or there are different types of chairs or different weights of chairs. For example when you go to a pavilion or a picnic you take a lawn chair as opposed to a reclining chair which you consider too heavy. With everything in the world the way that the ego and the deceived mind works is that it has all kinds of meanings and things associated into the thought world. The thought form is associated with all sorts of other thought forms.
Participant: What you’re saying is that we’re moving toward a letting go of all of those associations.
Speaker: Yes letting go of all of those associations, because they
are all very relative.
Speaker: Yes, A child could grow up playing little league baseball and just have a fondness for a particular wood bat that he has played with for years. That same bat could’ve been used in a home in an abusive situation where a father goes into tirades and knocks things down with it. He puts holes in the wall or smashes the TV or strikes somebody with it. That bat then has different associations for this child than the other child who has fond memories of the smell of the wood or the crack of the bat as he hits a home run. The whole point is that they’re all associations that are being made and they’re all unreal.
Participant: That’s why there is some attempt to let go of any associations whatsoever. It’s pretty inconceivable to my mind right now how it would be if I let go of all my associations with everything. I mean the very thought of it seems like it would be immensely chaotic and disorienting and disconcerting and unstable.
Speaker: To the deceived mind there is chaos perceived within. In other words, two thought systems that have no meeting point. There is a split that is very horrifying and that gets projected out, and the ordering of these thought forms is the minds attempt to bring some sense of order and sanity back to it. But, by associating the thought forms and reading meaning in and constructing its own version of reality based on these associations, it covers over the light in the mind for the miracle which sees the sameness of everything. The ordering and associating of thought forms we’re talking about obscures the sameness of the thought forms. Regardless of what the thought forms are there is a meaning or a purpose that can be given to them that is completely new and completely fresh every instant. It has nothing to do with the association of the thought forms. It has nothing to do with the relative meanings that have been read into those. It’s an intensity when we come together to discuss as we are doing, that takes over or that can take over for the self consciousness or for the censoring the words or make an unawareness of the distraction of the microphone. Or with the boys, there is an intention, a purpose that can so much take over that is so fresh and new that the attention of the mind is so focused and the mind becomes so single minded that whether the boys are running around the house or there’s noise or no noise it just disappears or fades away. The mind is capable of focusing its attention on a different purpose. Just as if you were in a crowd speaking to someone and how you could focus your mind/your attention on the person that was speaking across from you and pull it away from the background noise, other people speaking, the song on the radio or the train that’s going by.
Participant: It seems the thing to do initially is to get very, very focused before beginning anything else. And have that intention be all that there is. Because I have experienced how that is and how powerful it is when everything else just fades away with a really strong intention and purpose. It fades away or comes to meet it, whichever way you want to look at it. So that all there is is that one intention and everything is there to support it. Nothing can be there to detract from it.
Speaker: For there to be a conflict there has to be opposition to something. You can see what freedom there is, what release there is in this idea of transcending the subject/object split. If the mind can stay focused on that one intention and not become distracted or allow its attention to wander back to the ‘I’m a subject and this is the object’ or ‘this is the person I’m speaking to’ or ‘this is the situation that I seem to be in’ and so forth. If you can stay back in detachment from all those thought forms, that purpose or intention then can be held in mind.
We could perhaps get into this subject/object split by saying that the subject, the small self, the me, the person in this world seems to be very distinct and very unique and very important. All of the goals, all of the expectations, all of the thought form associations and meanings, the relative meanings that are read into the world spring from this subject/object split. So that if I have career goals or have appearance goals like I want to look a certain way or if I have aspirations and ambitions, everything that becomes a goal or that is strived for in this world, springs from that subject/object split in the mind.
Participant: Is that just another way of speaking of the self concept?
Participant: So you can say that the self concept becomes the point of reference for everything that’s perceived.
Speaker: Yes. The self concept we could say is a construction or a making up of these associated thought forms: I perceive myself as a person, where am I? I’m a person in the living room, in a particular city, we could say i.e. Cincinnati, in a particular country, you can say for example America, on this particular planet, earth, and so on and so forth. The construct also includes reading meaning into ‘I’m a body, I’m obviously speaking through a body’, things like male female, educational backgrounds, social status, what language I speak, am I multilingual/bilingual, it goes on and on and on. There are stacks and stacks of meanings of the particular thought forms that have been constructed in a specific way that makes this small self unique and different from every other perceived form.
Participant: The particular configuration that seems to define my self as other than/different than/separate from the next self.
Speaker: There’s where the conflict can arise. If I perceive myself as apart or different from your self and that my self is important, in areas where our configurations and constructs of the world and ourselves and realities are different from one another, then we have a difference of opinions. Then we have set up a situation where there’s a competition between us or something to fight about or something to prove or to win or to be right about. And once that is accepted the intention, the sense of connectedness and the sense of oneness then has to go immediately. So from this point of view you can see how important it is to step back in the mind away from those constructs, to let go of them. How would peace be possible if everyone has a different construct of themselves, a different concept and the differences are accentuated. If there is the sense that if I give in to what you want, give in to the way you see it all the time then there won’t be any of me left. There’s a sense of compromise that enters into relationships…I’ll give in this much and you give in this much. We’ll try to find a middle ground. From the self concept or the construct point of view it’s a weakening of the self concept or the construct because something is given up or eroded and compromised.
Participant: And usually only given up because it’s perceived that what can be gained is greater than what is given up.
Speaker: Yes. It’s a perceptual sense too. One could say that in any type of marriage or collaboration or any type of coming together there is a pooling of material resources, of skills and of objects so that you have more than you had before. But we’re back to that idea of thought-form-associations that all thought-form-associations are projections. Literally, the mind is whole and complete in a state where it doesn’t project, where it just thinks only the thoughts that God created. It has no thoughts apart from God which is pure abstraction. God is not associating thought-forms.
So this really gets at the core of any perceived problem in the world. If I’m trying to attain something or achieve something in the world, that’s where all my expectations would then arise from this configuration, this construct of thought forms. If you just start to see the futility of that, start to see that all of that, all of those associations are an attempt to maintain the subject/object split, that I am distinct and separate, that everything is an attempt to do that. Once that can be seen and grasped then one can start to dis-identify oneself from those thought forms and constructions. Then one can start to let go of those things without feeling that all will be chaos if I let go of that. For in fact all is peace when that subject/object split is let go of.
Participant: I noticed before when I was saying that it’s impossible to let go of all those thought-form-associations, was also because I was thinking of it in terms of it’s all or nothing, you know total wipe-out. It’s never going to be that way it’s always going to be what the mind can let go of at any given time. In a way I don’t have to fear that I have to, in a moment, let go of every single association. Ultimately I guess I do, but my experience of it is that little by little I am able to let go.
Speaker: Well the fear arises just from the intimation that in an instant it could all be let go of. When the mind becomes very attached to those thought-form-associations, this personhood, this important person that it calls “me”, then it does seem like this is a leap into the void of what will happen to me, who will I be if I’m not who I think I am, if I’m not this person in this world, there’s this fear that arises. And in a sense the idea that I can do this piece by piece is a projection of the mind because of the fear. It’s going to project this shift or this change into time.
Participant: This is because it’s believed as gentler as opposed to an abrupt, total sweep of things.
Speaker: Yes, in a sense it’s a metaphor for the mind; that I can watch my feelings and can gauge by my feelings when I start to get off center or feel uneasy or uncomfortable. Start to use that as a clue or something to notice, to bring it back and train the mind. All the while there is some awareness that it just takes an instant, even the vague awareness that it is all or nothing, that it can be let go of in any instant. You could look at it from two perspectives. To one mind it could be a fearful thing or as the mind starts to really embrace that and starts to see that idea as a reality then it’s welcomed with joy. For one person the mind could think “wow, good thing, I’ve got some time to think this thing out in a gradual way because it seems so enormous and I’m just going to have to chip away at this piece by piece”. From another perspective the Holy Spirit was given immediately as an answer to the separation, and God isn’t giving this torture chamber of time that one has to go through before you can finally accept that answer. The answer has been given.
Participant: So the idea that it can be gradual is just another construct of the mind...
Speaker: Which involves time of course, time involves intervals which in reality don’t exist.
Participant: But is it a helpful construct?
Speaker: It’s helpful depending on the use to which it’s put. Once again we really have to get back to that idea of purpose. If time is given over to the Holy Spirits’ purpose then it’s helpful, it’s not seen as a trap or something that has to be escaped from, it’s not seen as I’ve got to count the hours and minutes and seconds, it’s not seen as I can’t wait to get this over with. It’s used. Time has been given to God’s teachers, it’s in their hands, it can be used by their minds. You get into the idea of trying to save time or collapse time. So in that sense it is given a connotation of being helpful.
Also that brings it back to what we keep talking about: this instant, how do you feel right now? In that sense time is helpful to keep focusing on how do I feel right now because that is the aspect of time that touches on eternity, the present. How it could be unhelpful or used in a way that maintains the separation is the linear view of time where past, present and future are seen to be continuous. In that view the past and future are given some sense of reality. For instance there really is a view that they have an existence. One always can find a reason to feel guilty if one looks at ones’ past, something that one did and feels guilty about, or something that another person didn’t do or didn’t follow through on etc. One can always find something to worry about when the future is believed in, whether it’s how can I get another job or will I find a relationship that can satisfy me or is more satisfying than the one I’m in. Will I find a career that will allow me to do what I really want to do?
Participant: It’s always a matter of looking for something to be different than the way it is.
Speaker: Yes the future like the past is a defence against the holy instant. The holy instant being that all is perfect right now. There’s such a sense of rest such a sense of stillness, in that idea, of contentment. It’s an idea that if it’s grasped by the mind, if the mind focuses its attention on it all the striving and the pursuing are let go of. The thought-form-associations we have been talking about are always past thought-form-associations. They can be projected into a future but in that sense the past and future are both part of those thought-form-associations. You need thought-form-associations, a self concept or a construct, before past and future can have any meaning, because they are literally one and the same.
Participant: So with the undoing of a self concept there’s also the undoing of that whole linear time concept?
Speaker: Yes. Let’s bring it back to the specific
example you used. You said it seemed to make a difference whether this
tape was something that just you would listen to as opposed to others
listening to it. We’re definitely talking about a future construct
that not only is there a self apart from others that subject/object
split there, but it’s also been projected to the future to how
this tape will or will not be used. You said that there was some tension
or uneasiness along those lines. That thought is a projected thought,
a self concept thought. It’s a thought of an association of what
may happen. Two different constructs were made up. One where it’s
just you, the small you, listening to the tape maybe in the privacy
of your own home, you can see that’s a construct, or the second
alternative would be perhaps the tape being passed on to others to listen
to, maybe even in groups, and that’s another construct.
Home | About this Website
| Study Materials | Contact | Donate | Resources - Order