Is there a time?

Are you experiencing yourself as the emptiness in the mask of form? Or are you experiencing the form but you know that it's not real? Well, the knowing and experiencing, everything takes place in the knowing and experiencing. Seemingly appearing as something. But investigating the thing, the thing, the concept, all the concepts are a word or a label. What was I before I learnt words and what were you before you learnt words? Can you remember your birth? Can you say you were born? You can't actually remember your birth because you had no words then. You hadn't learnt any words or learnt any language. And there was no image to relate it to.

So whatever was appearing sensations. You can feel it as a little, little, little baby. So see they're all happening spontaneously. They're coming and going. But he's not fixating on anything for very long. Something else will turn up and take his focus and attention away from what's seemingly going on. He's got no lobes but he sees another place in the form which he's more attracted to and likes it much better than the ones going on. But if I realise myself as emptiness, will I not lose the interest of my intention? No. The interest of maintaining my personal life? Will I not stop loving my husband for example?

Why would you? Because that's the way it's expressing. What brought your husband? What attracted you? And brought the two of you together? Was it a different way? Not just a natural way of expressing again? The one seemingly becomes two. The two becomes the many. It's never away from its oneness. It's always that oneness. When you learn words, you're taken on the belief that you are something other than the emptiness. Pure spontaneous functioning. You became a separate entity. You're not just a thought. I or me. Which is the primary thought. Thinking is happening. When you learn words, thinking is happening. Seeing is happening. Hearing is happening.

When you say, I think, I feel, I see, I experience. You've formed a subject out of the words. And what you see here and then, I see this or that or whatever it is, that's what you're seeing. The concept you have on that becomes the object. And seeming, seeing, has been divided. Can there be a subject, a seer, without seeing? Can there be the object, the scene, the chair, the table, or whatever you're seeing, without seeing? There can't be. It all takes place in the seeing, which is a natural, spontaneous function. The hearing, the tasting, the touching, the smelling, the feeling. They're the actuality. The I-A-G on it gives us something.

The sense of the moment, the moment. The sense of the moment is the sense of the present moment. The sense of the moment is the sense of the present moment. That's what's happening. That's what's really happening in the moment. But it has no substance to it or no independent nature. And because it's spontaneous, there's no duration to it. And we seem to be fixated on it and keep it there longer than it should. When you look at time, when distance, time begins. And you try to grasp it from this moment, you say, well it's beginning right now. And as you're saying that, it's already ending, isn't it?

And as you're saying it's already ending, it's beginning again. And as you say, it's already ending. It's beginning again. And so you're thinking, well, I'm going to try to imagine. When you look at time, when does the time begin? And you try to grasp it from this moment, you say, well it's beginning right now. And as you're saying that, it's already ending, isn't it? And as you're saying it's already ending, it's beginning again. And it's ending again. So it's really got no, no, any duration to it whatsoever. And when we fix onto one part, I'm seeing this, we give it semi-duration, and this moment we're saying it's semi-lasting, and the concept of time becomes duration, lasting more than the spontaneity.

If you ask yourself, is there a past, if we don't think about it, what can you say without a thought? You say there's a future, future without a thought. And when's the past and future happening? When it's being realised. Have you moved away from this present moment? Can you live in the past? Go back and try and live yesterday. See if you can. Try and live tomorrow. You can't. Trying to live in the past, you can imagine and anticipate or remember what you did yesterday or five minutes ago, but you can't go back and actually live in it. And what you're imagining and anticipating is taking place right in some agency.

So you're not going back to the past at all. You're only remembering some personal past memory in the future. You can't anticipate or imagine what you're going to do tomorrow again and anticipate the future because you can't live a moment. And if you're not anticipating and thinking about what you're going to live, where is it? So it's still in this immediacy. So where is it? Where is the past? Where is the future? Where is it? Well, there's remembrance. And you can recall the past. The only action you're giving is recalling it in this moment. Because if you're not recalling it in this moment, can you remember what you did yesterday?

Remember what you did in the past? What you said a moment ago? Or what you thought a moment ago? What you did a moment ago? Unless you recall it, you can't. And can you anticipate? You can anticipate and imagine what you're going to do in the future, but is it the actual? It's only an anticipating and imagining idea or concept. Which you're seeing in a future time. But you've never moved away from this immediacy. Only conceptually. Only with the concepts. The ideas are going on in your mind. The time is only conceptual, it's only in the mind. Yeah. You've got to meet and understand. All your past events and experiences and conditioning are now dead images because they're past.

What conditioning is there right in this moment if you're not thinking about it? What past is there in this moment if you're not thinking about it? So it's all thought-based. What future is there if you're not anticipating it? And anticipating it. And anticipating it. But if I'm not thinking, I still have personality. Have you? How real is it? Is it a spontaneous functioning? But you put the label, personality. Where did the word person come from? In ancient languages, the persona is a mask. But a personality is a mask of concepts that we believe in when we learn words from our parents. Two years, tell me whatever it was.

Two and a half before you had that reading. You had no person. There was no person there. It was just a spontaneous going on because you couldn't translate it into words because you hadn't learned any words. You couldn't reason it out because the capacity of reasoning hadn't developed. It doesn't develop until you're about two, two and a half and that's the capacity that reasoning develops. Which is a capacity more developed in humans than what it is in other animals, birds, insects. But they have different capacities developed. A bird can see better than we can. It can fly. We can't do those things naturally. But through the capacity of reasoning, we've learned to build ourselves eyeglasses and binoculars and telescopes.

We've learned to build ourselves plane helicopters and balloons and things. The dog has the capacity of smelling. We can't smell. What are the sensations that are going on? We can form sensations, concepts about them. And all the sensations, birds, insects can sense them better than what we can. But we've taken on the belief that we are the civilization. That's what it is. It's hard as individual without investigating or questioning. Yes, so you're talking about different capacities as if we humans weren't superior. Well, in the know things, in the pure essence or intelligence energy, take space of a non-conceptual basic space of awareness or pure intelligence or whatever labor you like to put on it.

Who's ever superior to you without a concept? Who's inferior to you without a concept? Because you've got this concept about yourself and you've got the concept about them and you're relating to those concepts what you think about yourself as compared to what they are. You can either think yourself superior or inferior. But who's superior or inferior to you without a concept? If it's all that emptiness, the cognizing emptiness, the emptiness, the fuse of that knowing, who can ever be superior to you or inferior to you? And what would you want of the other person without having this concept? You think, I've got something that they haven't got and so I am superior to what they are.

They've got something that I have. They're superior to me. Without that concept, where does it lead you? In that equilibrium, the non-conceptual awareness, which you're told again in the scriptures, the basic space or the great perfection is non-conceptual awareness. Awareness without any concept. Or the absolute, the great perfection. What can you add to the absolute? Not a conceptual thing at all because it wouldn't be absolute. Absolute, you can't even do it. What can you take away from it? Nothing at all. It wouldn't be absolute if you could. The same with the great perfection. You can't add anything to it. It wouldn't be perfect. You can't take anything away from it, would you?

You are that. You are that. Don't forget that.