Free Will, Time, and the Knowing You Already Have
Libre albedrío, el tiempo y el conocimiento que ya posees
A student who has studied non-duality for forty years raises the classic question of free will, leading to a wide-ranging exchange about the nature of time, the difference between intellectual understanding and direct experience, and the recognition that realization may already be present beneath layers of inherited concepts.
Free Will, Time, and the Knowing You Already Have
A student who has studied non-duality for forty years raises the classic question of free will, leading to a wide-ranging exchange about the nature of time, the difference between intellectual understanding and direct experience, and the recognition that realization may already be present beneath layers of inherited concepts.
When I first became interested in spirituality forty years ago, the first question I had was: do we have free will? For forty years I did not get the correct answer. Now my answer is that it cannot be answered. The question has a hidden trap, because in order to frame the question, we must first define what we mean by "I." Do I have free will? Depending on what you take the "I" to be, the answer will differ.
If we take the "I" to be the personal, illusory self and ask, "Do I have free will?" then no, zero free will. But if an awakened being asks whether he has free will, then he has one hundred percent free will, because his will is the divine will. He and the divine are one.
You can refer to that also as "I," because the word is the same, but it means something entirely different. When I say "I," I mean the ego, the personal self, and it has no free will. But for the enlightened master, when he says "I," he means the divine, because he is one with the divine.
The question of time
And there is the matter of causality. For an enlightened being, time doesn't exist and space doesn't exist, though we live in space and time. Since time doesn't exist, all events are, in a way, happening simultaneously. It is as if everything is already recorded on a DVD. To us it appears as though everything is already scripted, and there is no causality. It is like cartoons: when we watch a cartoon, it appears as if there is causality, but in fact there is none. It is just a sequence of images that appears as causality to us. So to say time doesn't exist may also mean that all events are already predetermined, right from the Big Bang.
What is your experience of time?
I am not enlightened yet. I have searched for forty years. I understand non-duality intellectually quite well, but only intellectually. Perhaps I live it to some extent, because if it were merely intellectual it would not have interested me. But I have changed a lot. There is no seeking now. I do not wish for things to be other than what they are. In Hinduism they call it surrender. Effortless surrender.
What was your question again?
What is your experience of time?
For me, time is just a succession of events. This gives the impression of time. They say time doesn't exist, and it appears logical. It is as if time is flowing, one event after another.
Intellectual understanding versus direct experience
You're explaining time. What are these things you call events? What is actually happening, experientially? You mentioned the distinction between intellectual understanding and direct knowing. What you've described is an intellectual understanding of time. But do these events exist?
Apparently, yes.
Do they exist outside of thoughts?
No. Maybe you're saying they don't exist.
This is what I'm getting at. You've said a few things: that something doesn't exist, that something else does. What do you mean by existing or not existing? We need to agree on some semantics.
That which is changeless, as the teachers say, that exists. Sat-chit-ananda. That which is changing doesn't exist. That is the only way I know to explain it.
The mirage
Whether it is real or illusory. Now, if you look at a mirage (I think we talked about this last week), the reflection of the sky on a road or on sand, what appears to be water. That is a mirage. Does what you see exist?
No.
Why not? The water doesn't exist, but the mirage does. There is no water, yet the mirage exists. Water is the false interpretation. We mistake the interpretation of what we are perceiving and assume it is water, but it is actually a reflection of the sky. The water doesn't exist, but the reflection of the sky does.
This is a metaphor to illustrate something. If we go into the question of time, there is a similar issue. Something appears to be something that it is not, and so its true nature is different from what we assume. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist. What we assume it to be doesn't exist, like the water. We assume it is water; it is not. The water doesn't exist, but its true nature does.
This applies to time. This applies to everything. The problem is the misinterpretation of true nature.
I have a sense that you know experientially more than you know intellectually.
Maybe. Thank you.
Knowing more than you think you know
What you need is clarification on the intellectual level, so that your intellectual understanding aligns with your experiential understanding. Then something is going to connect. There is a knowing already. There is still a misinterpretation of the knowing, and almost an assumption that you don't know. Perhaps even a resistance to knowing what you already know.
God pretending not to know.
And what are you doing?
Playing the character.
Still fun, isn't it? You said something earlier. I asked you about your experience of time, and you said, "I am not enlightened." How do you know?
When I compare myself to enlightened teachers, then...
Then you are definitely in ignorance. You play a character, you imagine another character, and you compare the two. Therefore, ignorance. What happens when you don't do that? Do you have a choice?
No choice, no free will, no choice.
Are you sure? How are you so sure? Who are you?
If I take myself to be the individual self, then no choice.
Don't choose to be the individual self
Don't do that. Just you. Who are you? If you can see that you are choosing to take yourself as the individual self, then that means you are choosing. Don't do that. By that I mean: don't choose to be the individual self, if you can see that you are doing it.
But it happens automatically. I take myself to be the individual self automatically. And if I take myself to be the divine, in a way, then I have choice.
Does that happen automatically?
Yes. It is not of my choice. It is something that happens through grace, and that grace comes from the divine.
And who brings about grace? The divine. And who are you?
I am the divine.
So who brings about grace? Are you confused?
We are the divine, but we don't know we are the divine. Most people don't know.
What about you? Are you confused? Who are you?
I am the divine. This is what one teacher was telling me. I am the divine, but I play the character.
I don't understand that. Who are you? Don't tell me what a teacher told you. What do you most deeply know in your own experience? Not intellectually, not through a teacher.
Just the sense of "I exist." I exist. That is consciousness, impersonal consciousness. I exist. I am.
And what is the nature of that "I"? What are its qualities? How does it feel?
Nearly limitless. Infinite. Nearly limitless.
This is your experience?
Partly what teachers have said, and partly I get it directly.
Sweeping away old assumptions
Just clarify. Don't make assumptions. Don't do anything based on what has been told or said. Check your own experience now. You have enough to guide yourself. I am not saying don't come; I am very happy to talk to you anytime. But I feel that the next step for you is to clarify by looking at the assumptions and verifying them with your own experience.
"I'm not enlightened, therefore..." That is an assumption. How do you know? What is your experience? What is the nature of the "I," of yourself? You spoke experientially just now: "I know that I am." That is realization. We can break down realization into stages, but there is no need to do that. The most important thing is the awakening of knowing that comes from your own self. And that has happened.
So now, simply bathe in that, in your own joy, and clarify. You have a lot of intellectual leftover assumptions that need sweeping away. It is important to do that, but it is more of a playfulness. A playful clarification.
I have referred to your contagious joy a few times because it is very important, very meaningful. When you have that joy, forget the rest. There is no need. If God wants to give enlightenment to you, very good. If not, that is okay too.
That is my feeling exactly.
Non-duality is not two
But notice: you are referring to divinity and "I" as if they are separate. That is an assumption. It is part of the baggage of old intellectual frameworks for mapping your experience. How do you know there is divinity and then an "I," with divinity granting enlightenment to "I"? What is that? In fact, non-duality means there is only one. Now bring this to your experience. Pay attention to that.
There is no obligation, no "have to." Just for fun. If you want to keep playing, keep playing the game you want to play, and keep spreading your joy.
Whether to do a practice or not, there is no free will in that either. I did not choose to practice. The transformation of energy happened, and I am grateful for it, but I did not practice as such. So it is clear there is no freedom in that. It is all happening.
Yes, exactly. Thank you.