Peter Ralston On LOVE - Newsletter Response

[Breakingthewall]

Ralston's problem is the problem of many schools of Buddhism: they don't understand love as a path to openness. For them, love is a mammalian feeling, and ultimate realization is empty consciousness. This is a total mistake.

Empty consciousness is a prerequisite, not the final realization. Love is understood as devotion or the absolute surrender of the individual to reality.

The empty mind is still closed; total surrender is necessary, and this surrender is an act of total love. In it, emptiness opens, and in doing so, it reveals the totality. The totality is enclosed in your heart; it is your heart. Not in the sentimental sense, but in the sense of that which lives, that which is.

Ralston is closed to glory, and like all those who are like him, he doesn't want to listen. Precisely because he is closed. As a Christian would say, they lack faith.

Edited Thursday at 08:16 PM by Breakingthewall

[CARDOZZO]

Ralston knows that Love exists. 

He does not want LOVE to be on your way to realize Absolute Consciousness.

When I say LOVE, I am talking about human love, what humans say that LOVE is not what LOVE really IS.

[UnbornTao]

@CARDOZZO

Quote

If it were true that love is an inherent aspect of the Truth, then we'd imagine that all people who've had direct consciousness would be pretty loving, no? Yet we see this isn't true at all. Only the loving ones are loving. But I hear your point, beyond an emotion perhaps there is something we might call love that has some relationship to absolutes. Let's consider this. 

If the absolute has no form whatsoever, then where would something that only shows up as a disposition and in relationship exist there? We see it couldn't. Nothing but the absolute could. So, love can't be a quality of absolute truth. Yet, perhaps we are talking about the effect knowing the absolute has on a person.

What effect does becoming conscious of the absolute nature of existence have on a person? Primarily, consciousness. After that is more or less up in the air. But generally, it seems freedom accompanies this consciousness. The mind grasps its own activity as a fabrication and unnecessary when it comes to the Truth and although necessary for survival it becomes clear(er) that the bulk of our mental and emotional activities are unnecessary and often dysfunctional. This certainly clears the decks for a different experience to arise.

As I've said before, the lack of fear and the acceptance of others, as well as a sense of connection, allows a different disposition to take place. Acceptance being foundational for love, as well as a sense that oneself includes another or others in some way, makes some universal and impersonal "love" or compassion more likely with this kind of consciousness. But let's balance this observation with the likelihood that we like the idea that the Truth and love go together. It makes it a “feel-good” and totally positive fantasy, tying our already “perfect” ideals into a great bow. This preference is based on our suffering and fears and the desire to feel safe, loved, and accepted. Such a preference shouldn't bias our look into the truth, love, or anything else.

In the end, the Truth is only the Truth, there is nothing attached to it and whatever changes might occur as a result of direct consciousness is secondary and should not be the focus of any intent to experience the Truth.

Peter

Edited 4 hours ago by UnbornTao

[Breakingthewall]

56 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

If the absolute has no form whatsoever

The absolute has form. Its positive, affirmative. 

Let's see, you can reach a state of empty mind and think: this is the absolute, the boundless expanse of consciousness. But it's not like that; there's something more. Reality is generative; it's the creative source of universes and life.

The true absolute isn't emptiness; it's what lies at the bottom of emptiness. This is the real revelation, accessed through absolute surrender. Absolute surrender implies accepting absolute emptiness. When this happens, what you are is revealed. It's the absolute power that emanates from boundlessness and creates universes.

Ralston is on the surface level. Christ touches the depths. The bleeding heart of Christ represents absolute generative power. Opening yourself to it is opening yourself to glory.

Brahman, Shiva, and Kali are good analogies. Ramakrishna is a good mystic, Christ also. Both point to the source. Neo advaita point to "consciousness", just empty mind, nothing more than a mental state.