Bondage is being dependent, tied up, limited. On, to, by, what? Is it not attachment to a supposed 'will', which is the exercise of personal, independent choice by that supposition with which what-I-am is identified and which is called 'me'?
This merely means that I use the pronoun 'I' wrongly. I use it as though this objectivisation here were free to do as 'it' wished, whenever 'it' wished, and wherever 'it' wished. But such a possibility has never arisen, and never could arise: there is no such possibility - for an objectivisation can do nothing of itself, any more than any piece of mechanism can act autonomously.
How has it been possible to avoid seeing the absurdity of this notion? It has only been possible by imagining or assuming an invisible, imponderable, untraceable 'entity' which takes charge of this mechanism, like the driver of an automobile, and which refers to the machine and its driver together as 'I' and 'me', identifying itself entirely with the apparatus. Is it difficult to recognise that this assumed personality is factually inexistent, that this supposed 'entity' is just a concept?
This exercise of supposed choice and decision, this series of perpetual acts of will or of wilfulness, called 'volition', is what constitutes bondage, and the ensuing conflict, experienced as suffering, is due to the supposed need to act volitionally.
The abandonment of this nonsense must abolish the cause of bondage, bondage being bondage to volition expressed as 'I', and implying the phenomenal object concerned. With the understanding of the incongruity of this notion nothing is left to be bound, and nothing is left that can suffer as 'me'.
For I - as what I am, as all I am - am no object. The word 'I' says it. So what is there to be bound, where is there any me-object to suffer, when could there be any conflict and with what?
This assumed 'entity', unidentifiable and an unfounded supposition, acts only as 'volition'. I, as what I am, have none - for I am no object that could have 'volition'. I do not act, there is no actor - for an 'actor' is a concept in mind which could not act as such. What I am is devoid of any trace of objectivity. In short, and once again - in no circumstances am I any sort or kind of 'entity'.
What I am is expressed phenomenally as see-ing, hear-ing, feel-ing, taste-ing, smell-ing, think-ing, but there is no objective 'I' that sees, hears, feels, tastes, smells or thinks. How then could I exercise 'volition', choose, decide, accept, refuse, or play the clown in any such phenomenal performance?
Objects 'live' sensorially or are 'lived' sensorially, and what I am is their sentience. If I so function, objects live as they must - and there is no need for the notions of bondage, conflict, or suffering - since I do not, and can not, exercise 'volition' which alone is responsible for these.
What absurd clowns 'we' are whose joke is to 'want', to 'wish', to 'desire', 'hope', 'regret'! No wonder clowns are notoriously tragic figures at heart!
Wei Wu Wei
The challenges we face and the changes underway signal a genuine transformation of the world
What constitutes the essence of a true relationship?
Life is allied with myth in order that we may advance along an evolutionary path
Francis answers Jeanric's questions in this touching interview
Francis Lucille answers questions at SAND19 US.
Everything in the universe is shakti and spiritual life is the discovery of shakti.
The emptiness of existence finds its expression in the flitting present as the only manner of real existence.
"There are so many teachings on the internet today – How am I to choose?"
I praise the Supreme Goddess Parā, the Illuminative Insight Intelligence Force of Consciousness
Yoga does not bring us to truth, truth expresses itself through yoga.
While we have unlocked the potential of a single atom we have yet to unlock the full potential of wise, loving and compassionate action
The complexity of the present time seems to demand a deepening of our nature if we are going to survive.
Lama Tsomo teaches us the ancient Tibetan compassion practice of Tonglen, one of the Four Boundless Qualities
Being fully human requires the awakening of the deep Heart as well as the full embrace of the vulnerable human heart.
Is there still something we can learn from the traditional use of psychedelic medicines?
Francis Lucille answers questions at SAND19 US.
Everything is not a thing
In most spiritual traditions, love is seen only as universal or cosmic love.
The path to transcendence is through compassion and through compassion one is led to oneness
While the personal level is an important foundation, the next level is to bring our practice to the interpersonal realm
Knowledge is Different in Different Levels of Consciousness
Love is the refusal to separate —Nisargadatta Maharaj
Is it possible to live a life of activity while holding the perception of unity and fulfillment?
The yogic sages anticipated quantum physics by noting that a subtle vibrational energy is the substratum of everything we know.
Love is the highest and most precious "asset" of human existence.
Our primary evidence, our only certainty is consciousness.
Silent awareness is mostly drawn to light, sound, color, beauty, movement, patterns and contrast.
Sam Harris speaks with Roland Griffiths about the current state of research on psychedelics.
Please enter your email and we’ll send you instructions to reset your password