The Nonduality Highlights, #5134

Hey if you're not part of the Nonduality Highlights group on Facebook, we're having a good time there. You are all welcome to join. It's a fun and safe place. No one's going to jump on you for not being nondually perfect. There's the unspoken agreement that no one really knows anything, no one's wrong, and there is only the joy of sharing, confessing, and expounding.

Galen Sharp
A SMALL SOFTWARE BUG: The only reason we are not all "awake" is only because of a small "software bug" in the mind. Instead of "I just am". the mind has linked the body/mind to "I am" So it seems the body and mind are "I" and that has made all the difference.

Wind Dancer
....and the tree tops play in the wind...and their shadows dance on the cafe walls...and there is no plan or meaning or point of departure or place to reach in this magic...

Geovani Geo
When I was travelling in Morocco (seventies) I met a Tibetan boy who was fortunate to escape from the Chinese domination. He was a bit younger then me and we became good friends. It was in the Southern city of Mirleft. We used to sit on the high cliffs, smoke a few joints and talk. I was profoundly interested in his stories about he and his friends in Tibet and how was the general way of life of those young people. He told me that the main interest among youngsters in Tibet was not just dancing or football, but the search of "wisdom". (Read the full post at the Nonduality Highlights group on Facebook.)

My in-studio guest was Dustin LindenSmith. We discuss a recent interview I did with Gurudatta Dattatreya. Dustin's articulate and amiable insights expose numerous facets of the Gurudatta game and elicit loads of laughter.

I recently received the following question: If we adopt non-attachment to life, how then can we LOVE without the attachment?

To answer this question we firstly need to define ‘attachment’ which (in this context) the OED gives as ‘affection or fondness, an affectionate relationship’. Based on this I would certainly not recommend non-attachment to life, in fact given that once one realizes one’s true nature, that of Pure Awareness (Consciousness at rest), and that the mind/body is an instrument of this, I fail to see how we can have anything but affection or fondness for life.

For, once we stop referring our experiences to an imaginary separate self then all unnecessary mental suffering and existential angst vanishes, and the world is (and we are) experienced in its true glory as a manifestation of Cosmic Energy (Consciousness in motion). In this we cannot but have an affectionate and fond attitude towards life, in all of its various wonderful forms.

This affectionate relationship with the world is one of the definitions of love.To define love is incredibly difficult as all of the definitions given tend to be of one of its various forms. Take for example the definition in the Australian Pocket Oxford Dictionary: ‘Deep affection or fondness, sexual passion, sexual relations, delight in, admire, greatly cherish, like very much , greatly enjoy’[1]hich gives a wide range of types of love. Generally there are considered to be six main forms of love. These are ‘storge’ which is a quiet and friendly attachment, ‘eros’ which is passionate and committed, ‘ludus’ which is playful and not committed, ‘mania’ which is obsessive and over-committed, ‘agape’ which is universal and altruistic, and finally ‘pragma’ which is practical in the sense of looking for a partner with the right qualities for a compatible relationship.[2]

The challenge is to find an overall definition of (the noun) love to which we can apply all of the above adjectives to show its different forms. Taking all of this into account, and bearing in mind that what we are chiefly concerned with here is love between people (rather than the love of a good book, for example) I am going to define love as ‘empathetic attraction’ (for or to). Then the various adjectives, associated with different types, will indicate its nature in terms of strength, commitment, attachment, etc.[3]

This means being attracted to someone with whom we can identify and so ‘fully comprehend’.[4] This gives the clue that to attain (brotherly) love we must be able to identify with everyone we encounter. To do this we must be able to view every person as of the same essence and thus realize that there is essentially no difference between oneself and anyone else. Once we have discovered that in essence we are Pure Awareness then it is apparent that this is true of all humanity (and beyond). In this case we can fully comprehend the essence of what it is to be human without needing to fully comprehend everyone’s individual character traits.[5]

The non-attachment that is praised in spiritual literature would be more accurately defined as non-clinging or non-craving which occurs naturally once one recognises one’s true essence. For in this case one discovers the happiness (or peace and joy) that is inherent in the core of our being requiring nothing to manifest. Then external ‘things’ can be enjoyed (and loved) without clinging to them and allowed to come and go without grasping, as William Blake says about seeing a beautiful butterfly:

Then we may prefer, or wish to acquire, certain ‘things’ without craving (‘having a powerful desire for’ OED) them. In this case we are delighted if they manifest but not fundamentally affected if they don’t as the underlying peace is always present.

As far as Eros, being ‘in love’, is concerned then if this is truly the case one wishes, above all, for the happiness of the beloved. To this end clinging is always counter productive as we all seek freedom to ‘be’ and not to be hemmed in by possessiveness. If we truly wish for the happiness of the beloved we should be sensitive to their feelings and needs and be prepared to fulfil them even if this means sacrificing some of our own. Which is natural and easy in the realisation of all as the manifestation of the same essence, as the previous paragraphs emphasise.

Detachment is defined (in the OED) as ''the state of being objective or aloof'. This means seeing things as they are (not through the filter of one's small subjective self) which occurs when one realizes that the small self does not exist, but that does not entail remaining aloof ... A previous article 'Detachment or Engagement' discussed this and also 'The Joy of Embodiment' and 'Love Loving Itself'. The second of these discusses how awakening leads to being in love (having an affectionate relationship with, or an attachment to) the whole of existence, and the third is an exercise for experiencing this without reference to the illusory ‘separate self’. As these clearly demonstrate awakening does not mean remaining aloof, although it does entail seeing things as they actually 'are'.I would prefer to define detachment as "not allowing one's relationship with any 'thing' to undermine one's identification with (and as) Pure Awareness", whilst also seeing all things as manifestations of the same essence (Consciousness) as This, and thus as they ‘are’. In this way one has an affectionate relationship with all things, as they are of the same essence as oneself, but remains unaffected as they come and go … which all ‘things’ do.

[1]Australian Pocket Oxford Dictionary, 2002, S. Melbourne p.647

[2]V.C. Demunck., Romantic Love and Sexual Behaviour 1998, Westport CT, p.37-38

[3]C. Drake, A Light Unto Your Self, 2011, Tomewin p. 176-177

[4]Australian Pocket Oxford Dictionary, 2002, S. Melbourne p.359

[5]C. Drake, A Light Unto Your Self, 2011, Tomewin p. 182-183

If you are interested in more articles, poems, or my paperback books, including in the new books: Awareness of Awareness -- The Open Way and Poetry From Awareness of Awareness -- The Open Way

If you enjoy the writing style of Colin Drake, you may order his ebooks and hard copy books -- and read lengthy excerpts -- at www.nonduality.com/colindrake.htm