CHAPTER SEVEN

THE RADICAL REALITY

OF THE SELF
Q: If the Presence of God as Self cannot be experienced
by the mind or by thought, how can it be known?
A: It is not necessary to know about the Self but simply
to become it by letting go of the non-Self. The
realization comes about as a subjective
transformation.

Q: It is said that the seeker and the sought are one and
the same. Is that correct?
A: It is actually incorrect. 'That which is looking for the
Self' is the ego/self; thus, they are not the same. The
Self has no need or capacity to search for that which it
already is.

Q: Why is this book simply called I?The usual expression

for God-consciousness is "I Am!'
A: "Am" signifies beingness. The ultimate truth is beyond
is-ness, beingness, or any intransitive verb. Any attempt
at Self-definition, such as "I Am That I Am" or "I Am" is
redundant. The ultimate reality is beyond all names. "I"
signifies the radical subjectivity of the state of Realiza
tion. It is in itself the complete statement of Reality.

Q: Is the ultimate truth the same as "void"?

A: The term "void" has created much confusion and has
misled people throughout the centuries. It implies
nothingness, or nonexistence, which is not a possibility
in the Real. There is no opposite to God. Only Truth has
 actual existence. What is more commonly meant by the
term "void" is absence of f<;>rm, absence of substance, or
nonduality. It is often confused with nonexistence. To
confuse the Ultimate Allness with nothingness/void is to
fall victim to the falsity of trying to prove that nonexist
ence actually exists.

Q: There are translations of the Buddhist teachings that

describe the ultimate reality as"void?'
A: Here is where the kinesiologic test of truth can be of great
service. The nonform of the Unmanifest is not to be
confused with nothingness or nonexistence. The word
"nothing" literally means "no thing;' or nonform (i.e.,
unmanifest, the Buddha's anatta). It is empty of all
form, including mentalizations, and thus,
paradoxically, it is everything. Similarly, if you are
nowhere (no position in space), then you are
everywhere. If you are not limited in time, then you are
timeless. That which is unlimited by form, time, or
space is obviously everywhere always, and all present
(omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient).
The "Buddha Nature" is the Unmanifest.

Q: What does it mean that power is the expression and

consequence of context?
A: It is context which defines both limits and possibilities.
Unlimited context is concordant with the Infinite
Unmanifest, whose power is infinite.
In the ultimate definition, God is unlimited context
out of which arises infinite power. We see its
expression in the visible universes which are
expanding at the speed of light. Beyond form, such
conceptions, however, have no concordant reality.

Q: Many questions that arise, therefore, are not really

answerable.
A: That is true. That is because they are often just
tautolo gies. They merely mean what they are defined
to mean but have no corollary in existence.
 The mind presumes that a mentation which seems
logical and intellectually reasonable must have a concor
dant reality. This is a major source of fallacy in human
life. The specious nature of speculative intellectualiza
tion is revealed by the discovery that it has no concor
dant representation in actuality. The validity of truth is
based solely on actual existence and therefore subjec
tively verifiable.
Historically, we see constant examples of this in failed
social policies and political disasters. The error is the
Achilles' heel of Academia whose input to society is
given undue merit and status. The hypothetical is not
the Real. This also gives rise to the gross
miscalculations of failed intelligence agencies of
various governments about the motives and probable
actions of other coun tries. The basic fallacy is the
presumption that 'other people' are ruled by ethics,
logic and reason, which is a grave error. That is why
this country is always 'surprised'
by the response of other countries or segments of society
that have very different agendas.
Academia calibrates in the 400s. Other societies and
major segments of society calibrate much lower and are
far below 200. Such societies are ruled by expediency,
hatred, greed, selfishness, emotionality, etc. Thus, 'food
for the poor' sent to other countries is customarily
commandeered by the rich who feel no obligation to the
'undeserving' lower class.

Q: If the ultimate reality is radical subjectivity, how can it

be meaningfully conveyed or communicated?
A: It is not verbally communicated. It becomes known by
being it. That propensity is facilitated by the Grace
(consciousness level) of the teacher. It is a self-existent
identity. In Reality, there is not the triad of me, you, and
a message; all are the same. The Self is the message. For
example, to experience sunshine, nothing needs to be
known or spoken or communicated about it. Existence is
 already complete and total. All definition is already an
abstraction and therefore pet the reality that it
describes.
The source of all that exists is Divinity; thus, all that
exists is already perfect. Without that perfection, nothing
could exist. From the viewpoint of enlightenment, one
might say that the linear is observed from the context of
the nonlinear. To put it differently, existence is the
manifestation of Divinity as form. In and of itself, the
universe is therefore harmless. The viewpoint from
enlightenment transcends the experiencer, the observer,
the witness, and even awareness itself.

Q: Why the word "Self"?

A: The experience of the Presence is radically and pro
foundly subjective. It is commonly presumed by the
mind that God is 'elsewhere', namely, above, beyond,
transcendent, in heaven, or somewhere back in history
or in the future. Traditionally, however, God is described
as both transcendent and immanent. The term «Self"
emphasizes that God is discovered within as the ultimate
reality that underlies one's actual existence in the 'here
and now' (e.g., «Heaven is within you.").
The Buddha is said to have avoided using the term
«God" because of the prevalence of misconceptions
surrounding it. He wanted to avoid all the limitations
that that conceptualization confounds. The Self as
Awareness is often referred to in literature as Light. As
recounted in Genesis, the Unmanifest became Manifest
first as Light, which was the radiance of the energy of
God that took form as the universe.
The term« Self" also overcomes the dualistic notion
that one is separated from God. Historically, the
picture that there is a sinner down here on Earth and
there is a God up there somewhere in heaven is the
viewpoint of the ego. Thus, to most people, the term
«God" implies
«otherness." However, there is no separation in the
Allness of Creation, so it is impossible for the created to
 be separate from the Creator. Enlightenment is therefore
the revelation of the Self when the illusion of the reality
of a separate self is removed.
The constant awareness of one's existence as 'I' is the
ever present expression of the innate divinity of the Self.
This is a universal, constant experience that is purely
subjective and of which no proof is possible or neces
sary. The 'I' of the Self is the expression of Divinity as
Awareness which is therefore beyond time and form.
The truth of this identity is obscured by the duality
created by perception and disappears when all
positionalities are relinquished.

Q: How does one find Reality?

A: Truth is radical subjectivity. With the collapse of the
illusions of duality, including the supposed 'reality' of a
separate 'self', there remains only the state of the
Infinite 'I', which is the manifestation of the
Unmanifest as the Self.
There is neither subject nor object. Like infinite
space, there is no distance, time, duration, or locality.
All prevails simultaneously. All is self-evident, self-
aware, self-revealing, and total.

Q: If Reality is without division, how does form appear?

A: Form is an expression of the potentiality of conscious
ness as it evolved as an aspect of Creation. The
substrate of form is formless and yet innate to the
expression of form as creation. Thus, form and
creation are an obser vation.

Q: What is the relationship of the term "Truth" to God?

A: The source of infinite power is infinite context. God is
infinite context, which is the unmanifest Divinity termed
"the Godhead." Out of the Unmanifest infinite context
of the Godhead arises God as the Creator of the manifest
universe, which is therefore without beginning or end.
The appearance and disappearance of universes is an
 illusion of perception. This illusion is referred to in the
Vedas as «Indra's Dream." I,nd. ra, as the Supreme Reality,
manifests a universe as a·dream. When Indra breathes
out in the dream, a universe appears, and when Indra
breathes in, the universe disappears. At the next breath,
another universe appears, and so on, infinitely.
Current scientific research has come up with an
approximation of the age of the universe and the «big
bang" theory. It claims that the big bang occurred
billions of years ago, or so. In infinite time, billions of
years are equivalent to a microsecond. Thus, there is an
infinite series of universes and dimensions, without
end.

Q: Is form then perception?

A: Perception, like awareness, is an impersonal quality of
consciousness. The absolute Reality is the substrate of
consciousness. Consciousness is an impersonal quality
of Divinity expressed as awareness and is nondualistic
and nonlinear. Consciousness is like infinite space that is
capable of awareness. Conscious awareness is a quality of
the Divine Essence. In Reality, there is neither subject
nor object.

Q: Explain again what is meant by the term "I;'

A: The statement «1" is the only complete and accurate
sentence by which absolute truth can be accurately
described. To add the term «am" is redundant as well as
inaccurate because «am" implies beingness, and absolute
reality is beyond beingness or is-ness. (Calibrated level
997.) These terms would inherently create a polarity of
opposites, such as existence versus nonexistence or
beingness versus non-beingness.

Q: Is the Self the "I"?

A: It is difficult for the mind to understand absolute self
identity. The mind is used to thinking in terms of a
subject and a predicate in which a statement adjuncts a
noun with a verb, such as beingness or is-ness or
 doingness. That which has existence is already total and
complete or it would not exist. Existence does not
require dependence on some other condition. Condi
tional existence is therefore an illusion of the ego/mind
which believes that nothing exists except as dependent
on something outside itself. Existence is self-complete
and unconditional. Existence is solely by the grace of
God, by Divine ordinance. (This statement verifies at
calibration level 998.) Appearance reflects conditions
and is therefore transitory.
Explanation
The mind is used to descriptions and definitions in
terms of qualities, conditions, and presumed causes.
Thus, to perception, nothing is complete or total in and
of itself but is always dependent on other
considerations. This is due to the dualistic mind's
proclivity for separa tion in time and space and the
superimposition of the supposed and imaginary
explanation of a mysterious operant called "cause."
Thus, to the mind, everything is both dependent on
conditions and seen as a temporality which therefore
requires explanation for understanding. Mental
statements presume a separation between subject and
object or conditions, namely, subject, adverb or
adjective, and predicate. (Causality calibrates at 426.)
In Reality, nothing requires an explanation. Nothing is
caused by anything else. Existence requires no explanation
nor does it have any dependence on any other state or
quality. This understanding is clarified by the realization
that nothing in and of itself has any 'meaning'. Therefore,
neither does it have a 'purpose'. Everything is already
complete and merely self-existent as its own self-identity.
As an example, 'space' just 'is'; it just 'stands there',
doing nothing at all. It cannot be measured because
measurement is solely an arbitrary mentation. No
reason is necessary. It would be lapsing into pointless
mentation to ask "Why is space," or "What is its
purpose?" There is no "why" to any reality. Nothing in
the universe requires
 a "why," nor does any truth reveal itself by even asking
the question. To pursue the, ':why" question is to chase
one's tail and end up with merely entertaining
mentations.
Let us look further into the question of "when." In
Reality, which is timeless and infinite, there is no
"when"; neither are there any events or happenings to be
ex plained, nor are there any sequences, durations, or
causes.
It can be seen that all explanations, descriptions,
discus sions, and conditions are merely abstract
mentations. To escape these mentations, it is necessary to
go beyond duality because the mind habitually chooses a
positionality from which it creates a perceptual illusion
based on that position which obscures Reality.
The Self is not conditional; it has no qualities and is
not dependent or explicable. The Self has no duration,
beginnings or endings, location, form, or limitations. It
is the radiance of the Self that illuminates existence,
without which there would be no awareness. The Self is
beyond process. All descriptions are inappropriate and
inapplicable to the Self.

Q: What is meant by the term "mystic"?

A: The mystic knows, experiences, and identifies the Self as
both context and content, that is, context is the content. The
content of the ego is transitory and a product of perception
and, like a movie, it has no independent existence. The
content of perception is an automatic byproduct of
positionality and goes hand in hand with the creation of
the illusions of perception. Science is the authority of the
linear domain and the Newtonian paradigm; the mystic is
the authority of the nonlinear domain.

Q: Since language is form, how can the mystic, who

lives in the reality of nonlinear formlessness,
transmit information?
A: Teaching actually takes place simultaneously on two
levels. The first and most important is silent and form-
 less, which occurs beyond the level of the mind and is
nonverbal. This transpires as a consequence of the
intrinsic power of the level of consciousness of the
teacher. It could be likened to a carrier wave that accom
panies the teachees words and is a quality of the Pres
ence as Self.
The inspiration and spiritual power of the truth of the
mystic are accompanied by and are a product of Divin
ity, the energy field of which becomes entrained in the
studenfs field of consciousness. This Grace has been
traditionally referred to as the «transmission of no
mind,» (paradoxically termed «mind,» which means
nonform and non-ego). This was described in The Zen
Teachings of Huang Po, and also by the Buddha, who
transmitted nonverbal awareness to his student when
he gave him a flower. The spiritual aspiranfs desire for
truth is the assent that makes the acceptance fruitful.
The energy field of the teacher is a manifestation of the
Presence. It is that field which accounts for the miracu
lous, for healings, for various mystical phenomena, and
for sudden realizations that occur spontaneously in the
presence of the teacher. The silent transmission could be
likened to the phenomenon of entrainment. This is a
consequence of the power of the field itself and is imper
sonal. The effect of the teacher,s field of consciousness
on that of the student is demonstrable by simple
calibration (this is routinely done before and after
lectures).

Q: If Truth is formless, how can it be conveyed through

words?
A: All form is concurrently based on that which is
formless, and it is the formless that accompanies the
form of words which accounts for the transmission.
The same words spoken as a mere intellectual learning
lack the power of the carrier wave that facilitates the
comprehen sion by the listener. Words transmitted with
power bring about a transformation in the listener.
 A more specific explanation is that the transmission
from the teacher to the stupent is via the higher spiritual
energy systems that are beyond that of mind, namely,
the so-called causal, Buddhic, Christ, and Atmic
'bodies' which in turn have energy fields within them
compa rable to the chakra system. The verbal content
and information is recorded via the higher (abstract
thought) and lower (literal thought) mental capacities,
but the higher frequency energies from the presence of
the teacher activate the student's dormant spiritual
energy systems.
Thus, the transmission of'no-mind' (paradoxically
called "Mind" in some literature) really means that there
is a higher energy system that, like a tuning fork, is set
into vibrational action by the silent process. This facili
tates experiential knowingness rather than just intellec
tualization.
Many spiritual students are widely read and already
mentally know about many spiritual truths, but the
information is stored in the memory of the mental body
only and thus awaits activation by the actual presence
of a teacher in whom those higher spiritual bodies are
highly energized.
The serious desire to reach enlightenment will drive
the student until such a teacher appears. To be success
ful, however, the aspirant needs to be able to discern
the false from the true. Many naYve seekers are
mislead and with hope travel long distances to be with
what they have been led to believe are true teachers
because of their fame, glamour, or reputation. Many
such 'teachers' who may well have even millions of
followers calibrate in the high 200s or even below 200.
A few do calibrate in the 400s. More peculiarly is that
some widely known spiritual leaders did calibrate as
high as the 500s when they began to teach but have
since fallen way below 200.
The true teacher does not identify with names or titles
for there is no 'person' present. Teaching is a function.
Q: Is the student's comprehension then dependent upon
the teacher's level of consciousness?
A: The comprehension is based on the effect of the Self or
represented by willingness, openness, intention, and the
level of consciousness of the listener as well as that of the
teacher. It is a common, everyday experience for people
to know of something, but many years may elapse before
they suddenly 'get' it. This readiness is often a conse
quence of periods of reflection, contemplation, prayer,
and karmic potential.

Q: What is the benefit of learning teachings that seem

incomprehensible at the time?
A: They only seem obscure to the intellect. They plant the
seed, and the aspirant's spiritual aura incorporates the
transmitted energy field of the teacher's aura. Certain
information is transformational in itself. Exposure to
high truth initiates a yearning in the psyche. The
Buddha made that observation when he said that once a
person has heard of enlightened truth, he will never be
satisfied with anything less, even though it takes
innumerable lifetimes to attain it.

Q: What characteristics facilitate comprehension and

transformation?
A: Dedication, devotion, faith, prayer, surrender, and
inspiration. When the barriers are relinquished,
Truth reveals itself spontaneously.

Q: How is the position of the mystic throughout history

explained?
A: The mystic has been both revered and persecuted as a
heretic. The mystic's authority stems from the
Presence, the Divine 'I' of the Self. This has been
viewed as sacri lege by authoritarian religions whose
beliefs are limited to a transcendent God only (e.g.,
Meister Eckhardt); mystics have thus been
excommunicated, burned at the
 stake, or even crucified by religious authorities. Most
mystics retire from society.-.Some, by virtue of great
effort, return to the world but are silent about their
inner state.

Q: After such a major event as sudden realization, why

would the mystic choose to remain silent?
A: It is not a matter of choice but of capability. There is
really nothing that can be said. To verbalize that state is
difficult and requires favorable circumstances as well as
some innate propensity or karmic momentum. To
communicate about this state requires reenergizing
form, which requires a considerable expenditure of
energy. It is much easier and more natural to merely
remain silent. Silence also serves in a different, peaceful
way. There were many years of silence before there arose
the ability to speak of these things.

Q: Does a mystic retain a personality?

A: This is somewhat difficult to explain. The remaining
'personality' is actually impersonal. It is an interactive
'persona' that is capable of seemingly ordinary
participa tion in ongoing human affairs, but it is merely
witnessed and allowed to do so, and it is not obligatory.
It is a useful instrument or tool of the Self. The degree
of participation is arbitrary and generally just serves the
moment. Like the body, the personality is of no real
importance; it is a transitory, voluntary, partial activity
similar to going to the movies. At the movies, one can
get up and leave at any time, and so it is with the per
sona. If participation is of service, it is allowed to
occur.
Like the body, the personality is not identified as 'self'.
It is actually a useful 'it'. The involvement of the person
ality as activity goes on of its own but can also be de
energized by simple, volitional detachment. To allow the
personality to participate also requires recalling how the
world sees things and adjusting to it in order to appear
 appropriate.
The world's affairs appear as theater which overvalues
the inconsequential and ignores that which is profound.
The communications of the mystic, therefore, are often
reflective of the paradox, and life is recontextualized as
the humor of the 'theater of the absurd'. Thus, the
mystic often mysteriously laughs at what the world
considers great tragedy. This is due to the absurdity of
the com parison between illusion and Reality. The mystic
is aware of the intrinsic reality and tries to reflect it back
in a style that is catalytic to activate the latent capacity
for spiritual awareness.
As we ascend the Scale of Consciousness, there is a
progression of a calibratable level of power; however,
even more importantly, aside from power, there is a
change in the quality of the essence of that level. It could
be said that the information at the lower end of the Scale is
like lead, whereas information near the top of the Scale is
like platinum. Lead is relatively inert; however, a minute
amount of platinum can catalyze many tons of ore.

Q: It is often difficult to understand the meaning of

spiritual information.
A: Spiritual truth is beyond meaning; it doesn't 'mean'
anything. It can only be known, and that knowledge
can only come about by becoming. Meaning is a
mentation and a definition. Spiritual truth is a
subjective awareness which is innately beyond
intellection. For instance, what does a beautiful sunset
'mean'? It doesn't 'mean' any thing; it is just startlingly
that which it is, complete and total in and of itself. God
is a direct awareness and experience, a realization, a
revelation, and the absolute perfection of pure
subjectivity.

Q: What does the Self feel like?

A: It is central, solid, profound, still, immutable, nonlocal,
diffuse, all encompassing, peaceful, tranquil, comfort-
able, secure, emotionless joy, infinite lovingness, protec
tion, closeness, safety, complete fulfillment, and ultra-
familiar. •
It is radically innate. It is the ultimate cat home', the
core of Reality and Awareness. It is the total and com
plete <me' of All That Is or ever was or could be, beyond
all time, place, and conditions. It is the comfort, warmth,
and security of total, unconditional, and everlasting
Love. It is unconditional and without pain or vulnerabil
ity. It is beyond all mentalization, question, doubt, word,
or emotion. It is peace, silence, and stillness, profound
and infinite. It is of the quality of Divinity, which is
radiantly self-evident and all encompassing. The Love
and Power of God are one and the same.