Apparently…

I’m fascinated by the concept of non-duality. Or rather I should say I’m fascinated by non-dualists.

Now there are some problems here already, or rather I should say questions. Who am ‘I’ to be fascinated anyway.? And what is ‘fascinated’? Surely it’s a subjective label – but that’s a subjective statement in itself, isn’t it? And what’s a ‘concept’ – something conceived – by the mind. And who or what are these non-dualists?

Look up the term non-dualism and you’ll find something along the lines of : ‘the recognition that underlying the multiplicity and diversity of experience there is a single, infinite and indivisible reality, whose nature is pure consciousness, from which all objects and selves derive their apparently independent existence.’

Now that sounds like a concept. I can go with that; it means something to me – ‘…a single, infinite and individual reality…pure consciousness..’ – terms which have become familiar and embedded over time and as a result of meditation and philosophical study.

But these are words. What do they mean in practice. How does one ‘live’ non-dualism?

There is a fine little book by Philip Jacobs of The Study Society, simply called ‘Being’ which I came across relatively recently, and have used several times with our Thursday Philosophy Group. It’s subtitled ‘The teaching of Advaita – A Basic Introduction’. ‘Advaita’ is a Sanskrit word which literally means ‘not two’ – hence non-dualism.

The book is divided into 31 short and very accessible chapters, each dealing with an aspect of Advaita, such as, ‘Being and the Eternal Now’, ‘Stillness and Manifestation’, ‘Liberation’, ‘Not the Doer’, ‘Life as a Journey’, ‘Realisation’ and so on. It can be read straight through or just dipped into, as each chapter is self-contained. At the end of each is a collection of quotes on the topic of the chapter, from a variety of spiritual adepts including Rumi, HH Shantananda Saraswati, Dr Francis Roles, P.D. Ouspensky and Eckhart Tolle, amongst others.

What makes the book so appealing is its clarity and simplicity; it makes a potentially daunting subject accessible and very practical. Here’s a quote from the chapter on ‘Liberation’ :

‘…Each person should find the truth inside and for him or herself… Perhaps the central point of the teaching is the nature of our essential divinity and the illusion of our separation. The fact that we already are that which we are seeking and yet do not see it. And, in not seeing it, we go on looking, unaware that we already are it.’

The charm of the book I think is the way it very gently and delicately nudges the reader towards an awareness of the unity and presence that is Advaita.

Before discovering this book, I’d had a rather mixed experience of trying to ‘understand’ Advaita, from a number of sources.

I discovered Tony Parsons and ‘The Open Secret’ some years ago. I had no idea at the time that Parsons could be considered a non-dualist, as I didn’t know what a non-dualist was (the entity referred to as Tony Parsons rejects the label), but someone had told me about the book and that it was based on an ‘awakening’ experience. I was intrigued, not least by the title, which suggested a mystery that was not actually a mystery. It took me just a few hours to read it. It’s not very long but I was absolutely gripped and overwhelmed by it and I literally couldn’t put it down.

Radical and sometimes disquieting ideas seemed to jump off every page :

‘…We remain locked within the apparent experience of being separate individuals…we live in a state of dreaming.’

‘For I am already that which I seek….There is nowhere else I have to go, and nothing else I have to become.’

‘Life is not a task. There is absolutely nothing to attain except the realisation that there is absolutely nothing to attain.’

‘Essentially the realisation of enlightenment brings with it the sudden comprehension that there is no-one and nothing to be enlightened. Enlightenment simply is. It cannot be owned, just as it cannot be achieved or won like some trophy. All and everything is oneness, and all that we do is get in its way by trying to find it.’

There followed a dramatic and profound description of an experience of ‘awakening’, in a park in London. Whilst walking through the park, Parsons became aware of each footstep he was taking :

‘What happened then is simply beyond description. I can only adequately say in words that total stillness and presence seemed to descend over everything. All and everything became timeless and I no longer existed. I vanished and there was no longer an experiencer. Oneness with all and everything was what had happened. I can’t say that I was at one because I had disappeared.’

What Parsons appeared to be describing here was something deeply transformative on a visceral level – literally ‘life-changing.’ Disturbing but also exciting – though these words seem inadequate, describing something which can’t be described. Perhaps most disturbing, but also intriguing, was the notion that he had ‘disappeared’. It was only later that I came to an understanding of this, and grasped the idea of the ‘death’ of the ego and some sort of ‘rebirth’. But that only apparently happened. Apparently.

Likewise, the prospect of there being ‘nothing to do’ to ‘achieve enlightenment’ seemed paradoxical, but I was to discover that paradoxes abound in this realm. Parson’s comment – There is absolutely nothing to attain except the realisation that there is absolutely nothing to attain.’ explains this apparent conundrum perfectly – yes, there is nothing to ‘do’, because we never actually ‘do’ anything; things happen. But in order to realise this you have to ‘do’ a lot of spiritual work!

Next I discovered that Mr Parsons has a website, called ‘The Open Secret’, the home page of which begins with the words ‘All there is is nothing apparently happening’- so that includes the words themselves, the reader of the words, the website etc etc etc.

All quite challenging but absolutely intriguing stuff. As are his Youtube appearances, which are numerous and prolific. Like many teachers, Tony travels a lot, communicating his message at ‘an evening with…’ type of events, a good many of which are on Youtube, together with interviews (E.g on Conscious TV, a channel worth exploring :

https://youtu.be/V1FBFX39uEs)

+ his famous ‘meetings’ in Hampstead.

What usually happens is that Tony will appear in front of a packed house, sit down, and then nothing happens. Well actually that’s not quite correct – nothing, or something appears to happen, or not to happen…anyway, silence reigns, punctuated by odd murmurings, shuffling about, noises off …Tony sits, occasionally smiling vacantly and this goes on until he has something to say, or an audience member may speak up.

On one memorable occasion in Hampstead he was questioned by a lady who was very interested in his ‘experience’ in the park, to the extent that she had actually visited it and claimed to have found the actual location where he ‘disappeared’. ‘Oh,’ replied Tony ‘Are the scorch marks still there?’, followed by a volley of his madcap laughter.

One of the things you end up doing with Youtube is following the prompts and suggestions which pop up around the clip you’re watching. Watch a TP clip and you might be directed towards, for example, Jim Newman :

https://youtu.be/tMrwed1MMIg

Or Paul Morgan-Somers :

https://youtu.be/QMHEDd0H3WQ

What do you think? Helpful or confusing? Both are contemporary examples and ‘exponents’ of what I’ve seen called ‘Radical Non-Dualism’ or ‘Post Non-Dualism’ and if you look at recent Tony Parsons events, he seems to have shifted a bit into that territory. He’s basically communicating the same message he’s always done, but the language seems different.

There are many ‘non-dualist teachers’ (seems a contradiction in terms) knocking around & to my mind the most ‘out there’ of them (e.g. Newman) seem to spend a lot of time bogged down in semantics and tricksy, heavily qualified statements, full of paradox and super-confident in delivery.

‘Nothing, being everything. It has no meaning or purpose of any kind. It just is what it is. Apparently.’

I remain somewhat confused, but still intrigued. And anyway, there is nothing to do. So.

By Bob Heath