Sometimes AI doesn’t work for me.
The above was the result from the prompt:
A simple book with the cover title:
“How to gain instant success by lowering your standards”.
Tangent: back to the original post…
Please let me know where it smells fishy!
– Suffering is self-entertained,
rooted in the false sense of
– This world, pain and pleasure do not touch who I am,
I am not an object.
– Happiness is not in circumstances, but in clarity:
the paradox of spending time with the timeless,
seeing what IS.
Amazing that the intimate sense of “me”
is simply a belief, a mind-construct, I am aware of.
And in my ignorance
I hang on to “me” for dear life,
afraid to be no-thing.
What is different now, what can we be certain
and maybe share with “others”?
So many words, so much time,
only because “me” is resisting,
due to being misguided and
fearing for its fake-life?
What a marvelous teaching:
– I am not what I imagine myself to be,
– I am not what I believe or feel myself to be.
– I am the reality which perceives,
the reality which hears these words
right now; whatever that is.
“I don’t know” is a holy place,
“me” cannot get it.
My Guru’s words are my own words,
to shamelessly debunk suffering, here and now.
Always only here and now!
But “me” loves to imagine a path,
and to entertain a Guru-disciple separation:
Oh, watch out “the Sage”…
oh, one day we will get there.
This attitude is good,
noble and helpful to get started.
but a cozy trap as the endless-seeker-me.
Even the most noble intentions
can be hijacked by the fake me-identity!
“Beginner’s mind” points to an attitude,
it’s not intended as an identity trap.
And to see this experientially.
To feel/allow the shame, the expectations,
the misconceptions, anger, pride, frustration…
“Are you telling me (you arrogant pretender)
that what I was seeking for 5 decades
is always here and now!”
No way, this hurts too much!
… and to bravely continue
the inquiry, to not resist.
What if all of this is true,
and “me” is just doing its surviving game?
“Only what is false can die”.
Yes, no, maybe?
Just a random example:
what is the difference between
i.e. Ron and Nisargadatta?
Besides that both body-minds are conditioned
and circumstantialized differently.
What is common to both?
And to honor this unpretentious, simple truth.
The same sense, reality, I AM;
yOur invisible umbilical cord to/as Source/God.
All words as concessions, as bait
to expose the misguided “ya but”.
To relax our childhood fantasies
and misconceptions of enlightenment,
to experience clarity and peace,
Not to mistake the messenger for the message:
(and no one else can
sense/think/say “I am” on my behalf.)
It is not personal.
Mind cannot touch it.
“me” is not who or what I am,
but I am aware of “me”
and effortlessly go with the flow.
I am before and after
anything appears and disappears.
I simply am;
all the rest are concepts,
ingrained habits I don’t need to worship or fix.
God created the mess, let God fix it.
And it is so natural, simple and effortless
that mind – trained for struggle – cannot process it.
It is all Love, nothing personal.
What hinders you to fall in love with I AM?
Not the “I am this or that”, but simply I AM.
naked, empty, open.
Just as an invitation.
It might feel like betrayal for the good old “me”.
PS: I still say that the “that” in “I am that”
can also point to the person, the root of suffering.
Who cares? Both, “absolute” and “me”,
merely as words, are only toys for the mind.