Gordon Paterson’s Response:

Hello again, Michael. Was forced to quit above; ran out of space. To continue a little. While I have no experience as a Yogi might, I am familiar with some of the terms used: For instance, I can, indeed, see the problem with trying to lose core identity when in the Causal State.

Frequently though, at that stage, "I" and "Not-I" became interchangeable. I pondered: is "Not-I" actually "I"? Is "Absence" really "Presence?" Then I got the clue that both these examples were to be negated by invoking the "double absence," the "double negative" of Shen Hui, resulting in "Absence of neither 'Being' nor 'Non-Being,'" or "Absence of neither 'Presence' nor 'Absence'," etc.

The resultant of which would be neither either and the demise of the "discriminating faculty" ("I"), revealing "Is-Ness" as the ultimate "Remainder. "That last action would bring "me" (no longer "me") to the Noumenal Absolute, or to ParaBrahman. At any rate, that's my weak understanding.

But, I wanted to talk to you, as well, about some "forces" that are becoming inimical to further progress? in the area of Pure Consciousness or from the Causal State? Don't know how to handle the problem. Any ideas? Best to Bhagavan

Namaskaram to you as well, Michael. Nirguna

Replies Given Below

Gordon’s Remark

The problem with trying to lose core identity when in the Causal State. Frequently though, at that stage, "I" and "Not-I" became interchangeable. I pondered: is "Not-I" actually "I"

Michael’s Remark:

In the causal state, the I factor or iSelf has no register and is for the most part totally subjective with just an increment of objectivity, as if it is not an objective anything and is surrounded by creative energy which is itself potent but inactive. This is similar to nuclear energy which cannot reach a critical stage because there is not enough of it present or because there is enough but it is not in sufficient proximity.

As you stated the I and the Not-I become interchangeable which leads to the query of if Not-I is I. In this usage, I is the awareness of the coreSelf. Not-I is the lack of assertion of the core. It is present but it has no register, has no intentions. There is a switch from I to Not-I and from Not-I to I. This switch is mostly involuntary.

Gordon’s Remark

? Is "Absence" really "Presence?" Then I got the clue that both these examples were to be negated by invoking the "double absence," the "double negative" of Shen Hui, resulting in "Absence of neither 'Being' nor 'Non-Being,'" or "Absence of neither 'Presence' nor 'Absence'," etc.

The resultant of which would be neither either and the demise of the "discriminating faculty" ("I"), revealing "Is-Ness" as the ultimate "Remainder."

Michael’s Remark:

The double-negative is a movement to erase the register of i-ness. It really means that there is an I which is neutral and there is besides that the same I which may be asserted or applied. When this I remains neutral (indifferent), it is not the projector or recipient of anything. As soon as it is applied it becomes the target of environments and is subject to acceptable or unacceptable feelings (types of awareness)

Is-ness or am-ness (I am) with insensitive awareness may be regarded as an absolute state. The shift from I-ness to is-ness is a maneuver to relax the recuring of I and its consequences but here again that can happen involuntarily, which begs the question as to why it happens in that way even without a prompt from the I. This would mean there is yet another factor which can trigger the shift.

Gordon’s Remark

That last action would bring "me" (no longer "me") to the Noumenal Absolute, or to ParaBrahman. At any rate, that's my weak understanding.

Michael’s Remark:

Getting to the Noumenal Absolute is challenging to say the least, but staying with it even subjectively is a totally different matter. I would suggest practicing to remain as near as possible to it. If however the Absolute causes the proximity to it, then if it acts further to include you, then so be it!

By your action, the only power you have is to be near it. Entry or permanent entry has to by its movement or shift. Otherwise, one will be trying to achieve it and never doing so just like a seaman trying to berth on the horizon. There is no such place, he chases an illusion. (no redicule or insult intended there – just being frank)

Gordon’s Remark

But, I wanted to talk to you, as well, about some "forces" that are becoming inimical to further progress? in the area of Pure Consciousness or from the Causal State?

Michael’s Remark:

The demands of the prakriti, her gnawing at someone’s soul will continue. When all is said and done, the question remains, that wherefrom does the prakriti have this power to engage the jivatmas, to single them out, to assign them identities, to use them in the lila of buddhi, play of intellectual fancy?

If this jiva is brahman or as you suggest parambrahman, what is the necessity for its alliance with prakriti?

Why does prakriti exist in the first place and why is it the alternate reality?

Science is yet to tackle this enigma head on.