Second Dialog with Charlie Hayes

The following is an essay posted by Charlie to his blog in Nov 2007, followed by a brief dialog.

Buy Charlie's book from Amazon.com or Amazon.co.uk

Visit Charlie 's website;
or his blog.

In the discussion below, my words are in blue (Dennis Waite) and Charlie's are in red (Charlie Hayes).

Charlie: This appeared on the website of Dennis Waite (Advaita.org.uk) recently. There is a response bubbling up in Presence-Awareness, surprisingly …

A seeker writes to Dennis, I just have to comment on Charlie Hayes essay: I REALLY have a problem with ANYONE, (and I 'know' Charlie, we've talked and emailed in the past) who writes: "Correcting the error is simple, A little investigation is all it takes." These are the kinds of statements that have made my life HELL for so many years... because, if this is TRUE, then there is something SERIOUSLY flawed with "me". Because I have been 'investigating' this error for about 20+ years now, and no matter how much I KNOW the Truth, the error still runs my life 99.9% of the time. Maybe some people are just not 'meant for' Advaita. Very discouraged.

Dennis answers, The fault is not with you but with the neo-(non)teaching. And you are not alone! Many (most? all?) seekers whose exposure to Advaita has only been via the modern Western satsang and neo-style of teaching are similarly frustrated and confused. My next book (with the publisher and due for publication next summer) is all about this and will hopefully clarify the situation once and for all. All of our lives, upbringing, education, experience are dualistic in nature. This teaching is contrary to all of that. It is scarcely surprising that it takes time (the scriptures talk of lifetimes, of course, but it is not really that bad!) Self-knowledge is needed to remove the self-ignorance and that has to be taught by someone who not only has the self-knowledge but is able to utilize proven methods to convey it to others. The vast majority of Western teachers do not have this capability and the satsang medium is unable to provide the environment in any case.

I am sorry to say, sir, that this is a totally false load of crap.

This story that seekers and so-called “teachers of one” tell about time and practice, about teachings and education and experiences and all that, is the STORY and what is ignoraed by this utterly ignorant arrogance is the INESCAPABLE Being, Awareness that is ever fresh and ever present HERE AND NOW ALWAYS.

Tell the seeker he or she needs “time’ and a “teacher” and you stick that poor sucker right back into the never-ending story of a “me” who must do all sorts of stuff to “arrive at self-realization.”

The reply to that question that arose in Nothingness Here was left off of this dialogue (although it did appear in the original (fruitless) ppointing-dialogue with Dennis … (why, Dennis?) … it was this: I would respond to that reader with this: What is this ME that you claim some words "make your life hell?"

I would ask you, dear reader: Have you really looked into that sense of being a "me" whose "life is hell?"

I assert that in clear seeing, all suffering is seen to be imagination. But that ain't "the truth." So in answer I would add, "This is NOT "the truth." It's a pointer that YOU might use to actually DO the investigation rather than judge and evaluate some words appearing in your awareness. As a wise man said, argue for your limitations and sure enough, they're YOURS."

You limit yourself in language, the mind, therefore the investigation has to happen in the mind. I would say, as I recently said to a seeker who was indulging in this brand of self-pity, CUT THE CRAP.

That's how John Wheeler and "Sailor" Bob Adamson attacked MY false beliefs and my assertions of limitations. I spent a year so depressed and in that Hell, seeking on the Internet for some painless sure fire way to kill myself, because I did what you are doing, dear reader: Ignoring the pointers and refusing to really cut the crap and LOOK.  

Thank That I Am for John and Bob being totally straight with me. The suffering can end. I stand by what I share from my direct experience: That with no kidding cut-the-crap investigation it will end. Full stop.

I AM That and you ARE That. I now beyond doubt there is no separate entity in you that can suffer. As Nisargadatta put it all that can trouble you is you own imagination. Why don't you look where the pointers are pointing rather than pass judgment and remain in the ignorance of your own self-limiting conversation with yourself?

What have you got to lose? Hell. What have you got to gain? Freedom, your Eternal Natural State.

That's all I can say about this except for one last pointer: It's an essay I wrote some time ago that has helped some set themselves free from their delusion. Whether it sets YOU free is entirely up to YOU. The ball is where it always was, in YOUR court.

Dennis: I’m certainly happy to add your comments (or start a new dialog) but, if we do, we must keep the Q & A’s short and concise so that the points being made and contradicted are not lost in a mass of verbiage. (And perhaps you will also add my responses to the statements on your site?)

You seem to be saying that it is all so simple. We just ‘cut the crap’ and ‘do the investigation’ and all will be revealed. I think you need to be a bit more specific if anyone is to concede that you actually have a valid argument.

You say that “You limit yourself in language, the mind, therefore the investigation has to happen in the mind.” This sounds to me like you are admitting that our problem is one of ignorance and the only solution is knowledge. We agree entirely! The question is: from where is this knowledge going to come? It cannot come from our own mind since the initial premise is that we are ignorant. The ‘inescapable Being-Awareness’ has always been ‘here and now always’ but the ignorance remains. Simply saying that this is the case is clearly insufficient. So what exactly is it that you are suggesting that the seeker do?

Charlie: Don't Just "Agree or Disagree." LOOK!

Dennis Waite Responds: You seem to be saying that it is all so simple. We just ‘cut the crap’ and ‘do the investigation’ and all will be revealed. I think you need to be a bit more specific if anyone is to concede that you actually have a valid argument.

I have NO interest in such nonsense as a "valid argument." There are NO "valid concepts or arguments!” THIS is NOT about "agreement!!"

You say that “You limit yourself in language, the mind, therefore the investigation has to happen in the mind.” This sounds to me like you are admitting that our problem is one of ignorance and the only solution is knowledge. We agree entirely!

I repeat, I have NO interest in your agreement. Nor any “other’s” agreement!  

And I am NOT saying “the solution to ignorance is knowledge." That’s YOUR concept! I AM saying in essence that ALL our "knowledge” IS the ignorance -- the IGNORING of the FACT of Presence-Awareness as our True Nature, AND the habit of trading the Unborn Presence-Awareness  for thoughts and fancy spiritual notions … meanwhile the suffering continues because the root cause … the idea of a "me," a “knower” … goes on unchecked, and adds more and more beliefs in all this arcane “knowledge."  

In direct NON-Conceptual Seeing-Awareness IT IS SEEN that ALL “knowledge" is FALSE because the “knower” is false. The knower is a concept and ultimately, UNREAL. 

The question is: from where is this knowledge going to come? It cannot come from our own mind since the initial premise is that we are ignorant.

Actually the "initial (False) premise" is that "there IS" a "me" or a "we" and that "we" own a "mind." That is ALL based on one false premise, the belief in a "me" apart from the whole! That's akin to a belief in the earth being flat.

The ‘inescapable Being-Awareness’ has always been ‘here and now always’ but the ignorance remains. Simply saying that this is the case is clearly insufficient. So what exactly is it that you are suggesting that the seeker do?

1. Start from the undeniable FACT that Existence IS. 

2. LOOK. Actually LOOK FROM I AM TO I AM to see if a "separate entity" can be located. Rather than collecting ten thousand pages of pointers, LOOK where the pointers POINT.

Dennis: If what you say is not amenable to reason (you say: “there are no valid concepts or arguments”) then why should anyone listen?

If “the knower is false”, who is it who knows that?

You say that what we should do is to “look... to see if a separate entity can be located”. Who is it that would be looking? If no such entity exists, what can it mean for you to say ‘look’? Who is saying this?

Do you not see that none of what you say actually makes any sense?

Charlie: If what you say is not amenable to reason (you say: “there are no valid concepts or arguments”) then why should anyone listen?  

“They” should not! If there is no interest in ending suffering there will be no real looking into this! THIS IS TOTALLY UNREASONABLE!!!!

If “the knower is false”, who is it who knows that?

Oneness Knows Nothing.

You say that what we should do is to “look... to see if a separate entity can be located”. Who is it that would be looking? If no such entity exists, what can it mean for you  to say ‘look’? Who is saying this?

Oneness. I AM.

Do you not see that none of what you say actually makes any sense?

Only a mind ... the idea of an "I" apart from the Whole ... wants This to "make sense."

To paraphrase Wittgenstein: All of these propositions must ULTIMATLEY be seen to be NONsensical.

NON-Sense is what IS. Sense is mind. That's all.

Now Dennis, YOU could stop and look. Why don't you? "Advaita-speak" just won't cut it, man! How about it? Shut Up And LOOK?

I am now disengaging from this. There is no interest here in “arguments that have nothing to do with THIS. Argue with yourself or look. That’s all there is. Full Stop.

(See “basics” page at www.theeternalstate.org to read the essay.)

Return to list of essays on Traditional vs Neo-Advaita.
See the list sorted by Topic.
See the list sorted by Author.