#4952 - Wednesday, June 19, 2013 - Editor: Jerry Katz
Loving What Is
by Colin Drake
A friend is always talking about `Loving What Is' and it is something I can relate to. In an earlier essay I defined Love as `No Separation', which implies that "Loving What Is' means "No Separation From What Is'. In absolute terms we are never separate from `What Is' as there is only consciousness manifesting in many varied forms, thus everything (that Is) is of the same essence and so there is no separation. `What Is' is defined as the manifestation (of Consciousness) as it actually is and not as overlaid with any ideology or personal `story'.
However, to exhibit, and feel, this love one needs to feel no separation, that is to say that one needs to be identified as (a manifestation of) Consciousness itself. Now Consciousness has two `modes' - at rest as Pure Awareness and in motion as cosmic energy, the manifest universe. So if one can discover that at the deepest level one is the constant conscious subjective presence, Pure Awareness, negotiating the physical world in a particular manifestation of cosmic energy (this human body) then this correct identification has occurred. This is extremely simple to do, see appendix, by investigating the nature of our moment to moment experience.
Moreover, any objective label we apply to ourselves which implies separation, or identification of ourselves as a distinct object, will impede the above process and result in us feeling separate from `What Is' and thus losing this `loving feeling'. Now my friend is really into astrology, which many people use to define themselves and those around them, in which case it labels us in the way just considered. His response was that astrology is part of `What Is' and thus one can love that too. I have no problem with this or any other system of classification if they are held in context as just entertainment, or ways of defining personality types, whilst being aware that what they are labeling is just the ephemeral manifestation (body/mind) and not the essence of what one is. However, astrology falls foul of the definition of `What Is' being an ideology, that is to say that it is a framework through which the world ( and especially humanity) is perceived.
The danger is that people tend to identify with these labels and each adds another level of misidentification which needs to be stripped away to discover our essential being and realize `No Separation from What Is'. Another danger is that if one accepts that all human ideologies are part of `What Is' and can thus be loved then this means that Nazism, Sadism, Masochism, Racism, etc. also fall into this category
Whereas, these are actually all ways of viewing the world which prevents one from experiencing `What Is'.
Actually one only truly experiences `What Is' when the mind is still and is not judging, comparing, analyzing or seeing through any previous framework of reference.
How freeing to see with a clear mind,
No concepts or labels to obscure the view,
Once our true identity we find,
Pure Awareness, when we see the world anew!
So if you identify with any ideology, or objective label, and see the world from this point of view you stop seeing it as it truly Is. In which case one is unable to Love `What Is'.
This article produced some interesting responses. One from my friend who phoned to say that he isn't 'really into astrology' and another from a lady who is and was somewhat incensed that I should denigrate it. What she appeared to overlook was that I was not saying anything about (the validity of) astrology per se, but was just using it as an example of an ideology (or way of looking at the world) which could prevent one from 'Loving What Is'. However, to be fair to her she did say that everything that one clings to with any identification is a misrepresentation of Self which showed clear understanding.
Appendix: Investigation of Experience
Life, for each of us, is just a series of moment-to-moment experiences. Any moment of experience has only three elements: thoughts (including all mental images), sensations (everything sensed by the body and its sense organs) and awareness of these thoughts and sensations. Thoughts and sensations are ephemeral, that is they come and go, and are objects, i.e. `things' that are perceived. Awareness is the constant subject, the `perceiver' of thoughts and sensations and that which is always present. So the body/mind is experienced as a flow of ephemeral objects appearing in this awareness, the ever present subject. Thus this awareness exists at a deeper level than body/mind and we are this awareness.