12,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: Books on Demand
- Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
- Sprache: Englisch
This project roughly planned to be a kind of modern day normal persons non-stigmatized, non-religious and no-beliefs affiliated "Bhagavad Gita" - a simple dialogue between Justin Allen (the prince Arjuna) and his guide Andreas Müller (Krishna). However, it turned out that Justin is not a prince and Andreas is not a guide. In that sense, this is just a collection of talks about so-called "non-duality" (No-Point Perspective) with no spiritual, religious or scientific intentions. However, amazingly, it turned out to be an apparent "deep" exploration on this topic. The talks took place from October 23rd, 2019 to March 23rd, 2020.
Das E-Book können Sie in Legimi-Apps oder einer beliebigen App lesen, die das folgende Format unterstützen:
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2020
Ähnliche
Acknowledgements from Andreas Müller:
Thanks to Nadine and Soham, Tony and Claire Parsons and Dorothea
Acknowledgements from Justin Allen:
Thanks to my family, close and far friends, Andreas and Dorothea
CONTENTS
Preface: June 21, 2020
PREFACE: JUSTIN ALLEN
Introduction: June 21, 2020
INTRODUCTION: ANDREAS MÜLLER
Talk 01: October 23, 2019
TEACHERS & GURUS
Talk 02: November 4, 2019
TEACHERS & GURUS CONTINUED
Talk 03: November 12, 2019
NO-POINT PERSPECTIVE
Talk 04: November 17, 2019
MY NAME IS NO-ONE
Talk 05: November 25, 2019
“YOU WILL NEVER BE FREE”
Talk 06: December 9, 2019
ROMEO
Talk 07: December 12, 2019
BLINDLY AWAKE
Talk 08: December 18, 2019
EXPERIENCE IS I AM
Talk 09: January 21, 2020
MY IMAGINARY FRIEND IS ME
Talk 10: January 30, 2020
“THANK YOU FOR YOUR SILLINESS”
Talk 11: February 5, 2020
THERE’S NO ONE IN THIS ROOM
Talk 12: March 4, 2020
THE NO BANG THEORY
Talk 13: March 13, 2020
REVERSE FUNNELING
Talk 14: March 23, 2020
ENDING AT THE BEGINNING
June 21, 2020
JUSTIN ALLEN
PREFACE
Yet there are illustrations, and it is possible that the reader relates to and identifies with myself as an apparent person trying to figure something out unsuccessfully. Maybe reading these talks triggers an apparent clarity regarding the absurdity of seeking in which ever form it comes, through teachers, gurus, jobs, family, relationships, location, rebellion, diet, meditation, therapy, drugs, partying, sport, a combination of things or giving up or “letting go.” At least, this book captures the absurdity of my seeking.
I consider myself to be average. I am of an average age (40), an average upbringing, an average social status and a sort of well-rounded every-person of sorts. I have dabbled in several paths to fulfillment as mentioned above, and I am unconvinced of every path I have tried. I was even unconvinced while trying them and unconvinced of my “unconvincement.” By “fulfillment” I mean that search for the thing or things, in whichever form or forms they may come, that you think will end the search for fulfillment and leave you contented. For example, when I finally find the right place to live, with the right partner and a good job, I will have it all (and be done searching). And even though I am confessing that I am unconvinced of the search for fulfillment in whatever form it comes, I still can’t stop searching.
This project that I have undertaken with Andreas Müller was a setup to share this dilemma of seeking, which you can’t seem to stop and doesn’t seem possible for you to end, even when you know it’s basically futile. I use the word “basically” because it softens the seeming fact that there is no point. In our talks, in this sense, I am the experimental lab rat or the average Joe, and I wanted to share my dilemma in the form of a chronologically ordered series of talks between myself as a self-confirmed person or a “me” and Andreas Müller as a non-person or a “no me,” to see what happens. In a sense we have put the dilemma on display with me as the mannequin.
Originally, before we started our talks, I thought of this project as a modern-day, normal-people, non-stigmatized Bhagavad Gita in that it follows a similar framework of the Gita, which is that of a dialogue between the prince Arjuna (Justin Allen) and his guide Krishna (Andreas Müller). But I am not a prince and Andreas is not a guide, and this is just a collection of talks between two apparent people with no spiritual, religious or scientific intentions, which took place from October 23, 2019 to March 23, 2020.
June 21, 2020
ANDREAS MÜLLER
INTRODUCTION
This book is a collection of talks between Justin Allen and myself. To suggest that we had a goal or purpose was not my intention, although there might have been one originally for Justin. In the end, we talked about the nature of apparent separation in an undefined outline beginning broadly with teachers and gurus to “getting down to the point,” even though there is not really a point.
When Justin contacted me with his proposal, which was to start a dialogue and possibly turn it into a book to share, I was surprised and curious. We had never met before, so I only heard his voice on the telephone. On the one hand, there was this instantaneous “yes,” but on the other hand, there was a bit of skepticism. To me, Justin seemed to have had some kind of picture and idea of what he wanted to achieve or what he was hoping may or may not happen. Usually, I am open for having a conversation on this “topic,” especially when it comes from a genuine and sincere interest, but there seemed to be a potentially disingenuous aspect as well – a personal goal maybe or the “making a of book.”
However, as the conversations started, I liked them right away. And as they continued, so did my own interest and enjoyment. In the early talks, we addressed deceased and current spiritual teachers as a place of reference and in order to compare apparent differences to the “no-point perspective.” Looking back, there seemed to have been an apparent movement from rather superficial aspects (like comparing teachings and gurus) to a rather distinct examination of this apparent topic. Now, having the text in my hands, I am very happy with it.
October 23, 2019
Talk 01
TEACHERS AND GURUS
Justin Allen:
So, one thing is that I’ve started reading this Ramana Maharshi book called
Be As You Are
.
Andreas Müller:
All right.
Justin Allen:
I haven’t read that much of it yet, but what I notice is that it’s almost verbatim what Rupert Spira is talking about.
Andreas Müller:
All right.
Justin Allen:
So, last time we talked, kind of an interesting thing that we came upon was that if there is only “oneness,” then it seems logical that there would only be one message.
Andreas Müller:
So to speak, yes.
Justin Allen:
Yeah, and one of the things that Ramana Maharshi has already talked about and also Rupert Spira talks about a lot and probably they all do in some sense is this analogy of the “screen.” Have you heard this?
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
So, it’s more or less like you watch a movie, and there’s the screen and there’s really nothing on the screen. It’s just light.
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
But it creates the image as if something’s happening, but nothing can happen without the screen.
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
And there, the message is that we are consciousness – “me” as myself and “you” as yourself, you’re just a screen, and I’m a screen –, and as consciousness we somehow create our physical body and this idea of being separate and there being objects and that there’s things happening.
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
And that’s what I’ve always understood. That the illusion is not realizing that “you” are the “screen,” even though that’s all that you are and that’s all that you can be. Somehow you’re not aware that “you’re” the “screen,” you’re only aware of the objects and things appearing on the screen.
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
And so, when I hear that, it all seems logical ...
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
And then I think, “Okay, how do I realize that ‘I’m’ the screen?” And then that’s where it all gets ... I don’t know if it gets illogical, but that’s where the kind of practice comes in, in a sense of ...
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
Somehow trying to abide as that, like abide as the awareness and somehow deny the ...
Andreas Müller:
Whatever the technique is, “to bring the awareness back,” “to abide as awareness,” “to bring awareness to awareness,” “to just be,” or “to learn how to consciously be awareness.”
Justin Allen:
Right.
Andreas Müller:
All that stuff, yes.
Justin Allen:
Right, and then that’s where I see that even that seems so convincing in a way, but at the same time you realize that you’re still ... There’s still somebody that’s doing all that.
Andreas Müller:
Oh, of course, and as far as I would see it it’s a complete personal teaching. Because in a way, they state, or the statement in that picture is that there is something which you are and something which you are not. So, they give a solution and a promise and say, “If you learn to be how you are or if you recognize who you actually are, then you are free.” What I’m actually saying is that there is no screen either. I would say exactly that’s the illusion: that there is something which you are, namely awareness, and that there is something which you are not, the options in awareness or the appearance in awareness, all that stuff. And I would say, that’s the reason why it’s logical and understandable because it perfectly reflects and describes the personal experience.
Justin Allen:
Yeah, that’s true.
Andreas Müller:
All that comes out of that again is another teaching (laughing). There is no other possibility, because it’s a personal teaching right from the start. The whole picture is personal.
Justin Allen:
Well, but at the same time it still seems kind of ... It still does seem possible. Of course, it’s possible because there’s no formula and there’s no real way to recognize when it’s equally … In a sense, it’s possible that you might follow these teachings and somehow come to a recognition, and you might attribute it to the teachings then and say, “Ah, I can’t say for sure that it’s because of this teaching,” but you would think that there was a correlation, possibly.
Andreas Müller:
I wouldn’t really say so, to be honest. Not if the apparent recognition happened that it’s an illusion. For me, it’s rather impossible to come to the conclusion that it happened because of the teaching.
Justin Allen:
Right, but if you were following Ramana Maharshi for ten years, and then all of a sudden you had this enlightenment experience or this recognition or whatever, some part of you would have to think it had something to do with your meditating or with your inquiring, no?
Andreas Müller:
Not really, it’s a story, but when the “me” dies, it’s ... No, it’s not possible to entertain that idea in the end.
Justin Allen:
So, would you want to say, not that you can make these conclusive statements, but would you say that if someone like Ramana Maharshi is giving this kind of personal teaching, and his and Rupert Spira’s message is that they haven’t really recognized the absence of the “me”? Or is it possible that they’ve understood or recognized the absence of the “me,” but they’re just somehow flawed in their teaching?
Andreas Müller:
Well, it’s really in a way hard to talk about it because there are no “persons” doing that either. But yes, my impression is that whenever that statement was made, it wasn’t really coming from a “no me” position, so to speak.
Justin Allen:
And then I’ve heard of the necklace analogy where there’s a woman that can’t find her necklace, and she goes all around her house looking for it. Then she starts to ask her friends, and then at some point somebody comes along and says, “Hey, have you tried feeling for the necklace around your neck?” And then she reaches for her neck and finds it and goes, “Oh, I found it,” and then she’s happy. And then if somebody later on says, “Hey, did you ever find your necklace?” she again replies, “Yeah, I found it.” And then they use this analogy to explain how she didn’t actually find it, right? Because it was always there. It wasn’t lost in the first place. It was around her neck all the time.
Andreas Müller:
Yes. I mean the dilemma with all those stories is that they’re fine, but in the end you’re just left with “someone” seeing something.
Justin Allen:
Yeah.
Andreas Müller:
And that’s just what remains for the seeker: That there is something to be seen and something to be found, and that there is “someone” who can see or find something.
Justin Allen:
Okay.
Andreas Müller:
In a way, that’s the dream. I mean, one could say, “Yes, it’s already there.” Me too, I sometimes say, “What you are looking for is already what happens.”
Justin Allen:
Right.
Andreas Müller:
So, maybe this part would fit the analogy, but this can’t be found and it’s not to be seen for “someone,” and that’s where the analogy doesn’t fit anymore.
Justin Allen:
Okay, and that’s why I wanted to bring up that analogy.
Andreas Müller:
The dilemma for the seeker is that the only thing he or she can do is process that analogy. That’s totally fine, but of course, the seeker will always be left with the assumption that there is another circumstance to be seen. Namely, “Oh, I have the necklace already around my throat.”
Justin Allen:
Or to realize that I am already the thing that I’m seeking.
Andreas Müller:
Exactly. Seen by the seeker, this would just be another circumstance that “I” have to realize, probably beating up himself because it sounds so easy (laughing).
Justin Allen:
Right, yeah, it’s making it worse.
Andreas Müller:
Yeah, exactly (laughing).
Justin Allen:
But that’s the thing they point out in this book ... That’s what’s so confusing to me, because they also point out the exact same thing, always. There’s even this, “Hence I say no; you are really the infinite peer being the self,” and by self he means consciousness. “You are always that self and nothing but that self. Therefore, you can never be really ignorant of the self. Your ignorance is merely an imaginary ignorance, like the ignorance of the ten fools about the lost tenth man. It’s this ignorance that caused them grief.” Do you know that analogy about the ten men?
Andreas Müller:
No, I don’t know that.
Justin Allen:
That’s where ten men cross a river, and when they get to the other side, one of them counts off how many there are to make sure nobody was lost in the river, but he forgets to count himself, so he only counts nine men.
Andreas Müller:
Alright.
Justin Allen:
And so, he says, “We’re only nine,” and then somebody else does the counting and makes the same mistake. It’s only until they meet a passerby that lines them all up and says ...
Andreas Müller:
“You are ten.”
Justin Allen:
“State your name and then count ‘one’, and then the next ‘two’ and so on,” and then they realize. Then they go, “Oh, we didn’t lose somebody.” Throughout this book, so far it’s saying that the whole point of trying to find yourself or realize that this is the ignorance is already the misstep. And that’s what causes all the suffering and all the pain because you’re just kind of inflating the problem the whole time by trying to figure it out, but there’s essentially nothing to figure out. You’re already that which you’re seeking.
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
And that’s where there’s a correlation. That’s why I think people can read this and then also find similarities with your message or Tony Parsons’s message.
Andreas Müller:
Yes, yes.
Justin Allen:
And that’s why sometimes I’m not sure if maybe this teaching is the same as yours in a way, but it’s ... Or not that yours is a teaching, but that the message is the same as your message, just maybe that the strategy there is to try to ...
Andreas Müller:
I think it’s hard to say, and this is only referring to Ramana Maharshi. It’s really hard to say because all we have
from him are those few books. And he was sitting there for, I don’t know, thirty, forty years?
Justin Allen:
Yeah.
Andreas Müller:
Speaking, talking to people every day?
Justin Allen:
Yeah.
Andreas Müller:
Talking to people about all kinds of stuff and all kinds of concepts during these forty years. And it’s possible that at the beginning he said something completely ... Not completely, but he said something different than twenty years later. Maybe there was a subtle movement away from an awareness teaching to what I would call non-duality, and that’s what I mean. You have those few books extracted from those forty years, from someone who chose exactly those dialogues, maybe from someone who felt much more attracted to this awareness thing. But maybe Ramana was just pointing out the concept.
I do that too in my talks. Not the concept, but I describe the personal experience. That’s why I think it’s very hard to talk about Ramana and every statement of his because it’s the same for me. I see statements which would exactly fit that, and then there is this awareness stuff mixed in, to which, if I just got the statement, I would definitely say, “No, that’s not what I would say.”
Justin Allen:
Yeah, and another topic that’s running like a thread throughout this whole thing is the continuity through the waking state, the dream state and the sleep state, yes?
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
So, this is being talked about a lot, and the point is that you ... Or at least the point is that in the wake state you feel like you are yourself. And in the sleep state you could be sleeping in your bed in your home or wherever, but you’re dreaming that you’re in London, right?
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
And in the dream, you think that you’re in London, and it’s all real to you until you wake up in your bed and then you think, “Oh, it was just a dream.” So that’s one of the analogies they use to try to explain this. And then when you’re in deep sleep, supposedly there’s no objects that exist. There’s no ...
Andreas Müller:
Subject?
Justin Allen:
Yeah, but you still know that while you’re sleeping that’s you.
Andreas Müller:
Well, I think no.
Justin Allen:
I mean like you do in the sense that somebody from the outside still says, “That’s you sleeping,” even though you can’t relate to them while you’re sleeping. And then when you wake up, you don’t feel like you’re a new person. You feel like, “Oh, I was sleeping,” or like, “I had a good night’s sleep.” To be able to say that, their argument is that it’s because somehow there was an awareness while you were sleeping ...
Andreas Müller:
Yeah, which is utterly (laughing) ... I think that’s just made up. That’s assumptions. It’s logic. It’s thinking how it could be. It’s philosophy, in the end. It’s thinking about, “Hmm, which story would fit my experience? Which story would explain that? Which story would explain that I was there in the night, too?” (laughing) It’s inventing a story to prove that I am.
Justin Allen:
But I don’t think that they’re saying that “you” as a physical body are there in the sleep, but that “you” as an individual are there in the sleep.
Andreas Müller:
Yeah, just as something.
Justin Allen:
As “being”. That’s like Ramana saying, “There is continuity of being in all three states, but no continuity of the individual and the objects in all three states.”
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
So, the individual and the objects are continuous in the waking state, so I feel like I can touch things and see objects. But in deep sleep, all objects have disappeared, or apparently there’s nothing there, and there’s no way I can even know what happened in deep sleep because there’s no memory. There’s no time, because time and memory only exist in the waking state.
Andreas Müller:
I would say there is no experience.
Justin Allen:
Yeah, they also say there’s no experience, but they still might say that there’s the awareness of no experience or something like that.
Andreas Müller:
Mm-hmm (affirmative), yes. But yeah, I wouldn’t say so.
Justin Allen:
But still, wouldn’t you say that there’s a continuity of being or the continuity of ...?
Andreas Müller:
No, I wouldn’t even buy into that idea of continuity, because in order to know continuity you would already need someone to experience continuity. For me, change and continuity are two sides of the same coin. Something is constantly changing and moving, and something is going on continuously. Both would, for me, imply time. That’s why I sometimes say it’s timeless, but there isn’t really something going on. Again, that’s another thing. Maybe continuity was meant to be timeless. Maybe … You know, that’s what I mean. Again, it’s hard with Ramana. It’s seventy years ago. It’s translated. I don’t know how he actually used the words. But for me, continuity is definitely an experience. And again, it’s an experience that the seeker is looking for to find something that’s always there as a conscious experience.
Justin Allen:
But even “oneness,” if you take it as a message, is also ...
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
It can be seen as continuity of “oneness”?
Andreas Müller:
That’s how the “person” would understand it, yes. That
there is something called “oneness.” Meanwhile, I actually say “noneness.”
Justin Allen:
“Noneness” …
Andreas Müller:
But yes, the “person” will always turn it into something which is in time and space. Always.
Justin Allen:
And even if the “person” isn’t there, we say that without the “person” there’s nothing, or without the “person” there’s just “oneness” or “noneness.”
Andreas Müller:
Oh, but in the end, nothing can be said when there is no “person.”
Justin Allen:
Right, but then even in that case there’s no waking state, dream state or sleep state. There’s just ...
Andreas Müller:
Yes, exactly. The waking state is the illusion. And when something wakes up in the morning, when the illusion wakes up in the morning, that’s the only thing which makes a break. That’s the only thing which has the experience that, “Oh, now something else is happening,” or, “Now something is happening.” And then all the ideas start, of continuity, of what really is, et cetera ...
Justin Allen:
But they have to because that’s the ... But even that’s a change. So, it’s saying that before that, let’s say, there’s no experience.
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
And then the illusion is the experience?
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
So, there’s a change from no experience to experience.
Andreas Müller:
But I would say that’s the illusion; that waking up in the morning or having the experience of waking up in the morning makes for a real change. No, it doesn’t.
Justin Allen:
But the illusion is a change?
Andreas Müller:
Yeah, but it’s not a real change. It’s not real. “Me” isn’t real, so the illusion isn’t real either (laughing).
Justin Allen:
But it’s apparently different. It’s an apparent change, or it’s an apparent experience even though it’s also not an experience.
Andreas Müller:
Exactly, and it’s not a change. And it’s a bit conceptual now, but it’s not a change for wholeness. But to experience oneself as “I’m here now” is the apparent experience of the change. Nothing else experiences that change. Nothing else does experience a change in “me” waking up. It’s only the “me” that believes itself to have woken up which makes the difference. “Oh, I’m here.” But there’s nothing else that experiences a “me” waking up.
Justin Allen:
Right, unless you’re in the illusion; then there is (laughing).
Andreas Müller:
One could say it’s only the illusion itself that experiences itself as “I’m here.” Nothing does that. Nothing knows about the existence of “me,” except the “me.”
Justin Allen:
Yeah, except that’s also … It’s so absurd.
Andreas Müller:
Yes, it’s wonderful (laughing).
Justin Allen:
Because it doesn’t make any sense either, right? Because it doesn’t make sense that an illusion which isn’t real could even have ...
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
I mean, it makes sense, and it doesn’t make sense.
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
Because an illusion can do whatever it wants because it’s an illusion. But logically you’d think that something that’s not real could never be real or never think that it’s real.
Andreas Müller:
Yes, that’s the thing. It can’t even do that. It’s what apparently
happens. It can’t do. It can’t think it’s real. That’s just what happens. And it’s interesting what you just said because that’s when we come to that message: It’s not logical. Seen from the separate perspective, it’s totally without sense. It can’t be comprehended. It has nothing to do with these logical awareness teachings where everybody who can follow it a bit can say, “Yeah, true, true. That’s right, mm-hmm (affirmative). I understand. I get it. Yes, mm-hmm (affirmative), right.” All that stuff, that’s all within the person. But what this is pointing to, apparently, is really beyond. It’s almost difficult to say, but it’s not within that setup. Because exactly that question is the impossible thing for the person: How can I experience myself to be here and hearing this message that I’m not here? Eh? How is that?
Justin Allen:
I mean, even that ... But I think there’s even something more subtle that ... It’s like when you watch a movie on a screen: From the audience’s perspective you know that nothing is real. You know totally that this is all an illusion.
Andreas Müller:
Yes, but there is someone who really knows that.
Justin Allen:
Yeah, right. But I’m just saying, you know that it’s an illusion, so you know that when you’re looking at a mountain in a movie. Even though sometimes you might forget for a second and really think that the mountain is real. Or with this new 3D technology: Sometimes I’ve been in those 3D movies where you see people trying to grab something (laughing).
Andreas Müller:
Yes, yes.
Justin Allen:
And so when they’re trying to grab something, they’re at least momentarily convinced that there’s something floating one meter in front of them.
Andreas Müller:
Yeah, yeah.
Justin Allen:
So, when you look at them, you think, “That’s crazy that they’re reaching out for something. Don’t they know?” And it’s the same thing here. Even though you know
that it’s an illusion or a fake – something that doesn’t really exist, so it doesn’t make any sense to try to grab it or touch it –, it still seems to be there. And it’s the same with this: How can an illusion create anything, in a sense, because it’s just ... It’s not real.
Andreas Müller:
Exactly. That’s why I would say, in that sense, there isn’t an autonomous illusion. That would again be the dream; that there is something autonomous at all.
Justin Allen:
But then in the same way, would you say that there’s only illusion?
Andreas Müller:
No, not at all.
Justin Allen:
So, you’d say there’s only not … I mean, you can’t say that there’s only not illusion.
Andreas Müller:
Well, the word “illusion” in a way only applies to the illusion. I would say that everything just is what apparently happens. There is no real illusion anywhere, so if people think they’re someone, that’s not an illusion in the end. That’s just what apparently happens. And it would be the apparent illusion to think that there is someone who is in an illusion and could or should wake up from that.
Justin Allen:
Right.
Andreas Müller:
In that sense, there is no illusion at all. Or if you go into the story, you have to say the only illusion is that there are separate people; that there is something autonomous. Call it people, call it an autonomous illusion, call it “I” – whatever. That would be the only illusion. This conversation is not an illusion. It’s “wholeness” or “noneness” or “oneness” or whatever you want to call it.
Justin Allen:
But the illusion is also “wholeness” or “oneness,” yeah?
Andreas Müller:
Yes, and one of us would believe, “Yeah, but I’m a separate person.”
Justin Allen:
Which would also be an illusion.
Andreas Müller:
Yeah, but as you said, it would be an apparent illusion.
In the end, it would just be what apparently happens.
Justin Allen:
Right.
Andreas Müller:
It would be “noneness” or “wholeness” or “oneness.” It would be what is.
Justin Allen:
Yeah, but that ... I mean, that applies to everything.
Andreas Müller:
Oh, yes, exactly.
Justin Allen:
I mean, you can say whatever’s happening, that’s what’s happening. You can apply that to everything.
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
And you can apply the “whatever.”
Andreas Müller:
Oh, yes. This is what this message does. It addresses everything, but seen from the “person,” it’s just a dead concept.
Justin Allen:
Right.
Andreas Müller:
Because the “person” says, “Yeah, but ...” Like you did. Sorry, I’m not mocking, but the “person” said, “Yeah, but you can say that to everything.”
Justin Allen:
Right. That’s what I was trying to point out: For the “person” hearing that it’s just the same as how I hear about God, or when you hear a Christian talk about something. They say, “Everything’s God,” or, “Why do children die of starvation if God’s real?” And then they answer, “Because that’s part of God’s plan.” “But why is there a God’s plan?” And they can just keep on, and so it’s not satisfying. That’s why I never was interested in religion because I was like, “Well, I don’t see God. None of this makes sense.”
Andreas Müller:
Yes, it’s the same here, but the thing is that this doesn’t try to answer your seeking with this concept.
Justin Allen:
Right.
Andreas Müller:
The “person” can only understand that as a concept,
and religions, for example, do that. They try to answer the “person’s” needs. They see a “person” and try to provide an answer. I mean, in Christianity they say, “You have to believe it.” That’s their method.
Justin Allen:
Yeah, you have to have faith.
Andreas Müller:
Yeah, “Just have faith. Believe that it’s like that,” which is very elegant, I think, to be honest.
Justin Allen:
But that’s also the same as Adyashanti’s and Rupert Spira’s message. This notion of grace or faith, like you said, is their elegant escape maybe, or a concession in a sense ...
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
Because they also kind of say that you can’t do it; you’re not going to figure it out, because they also say that there’s “no one” there to figure it out. But they also say that nothing’s going to happen if you don’t do anything, so you have to do something in order to somehow “prepare.” But at the same time, you have to do nothing, and then it’s like a matter of grace. Either the grace comes down upon you and awakens you, or you have to have some kind of faith.
Andreas Müller:
Yeah, yeah.
Justin Allen:
So ...
Andreas Müller:
So, this doesn’t try to ... There is no answer to anything.
Justin Allen:
But still, I don’t think that the difference is only that. Because there’s plenty of people that also say, “There’s nothing ‘I’ can do,” right?
Andreas Müller:
But this is not what I’m saying.
Justin Allen:
Yeah, but I think a lot of people would like to hear this message, actually. I think some of the spiritual people, like the seekers that have been meditating for ten or twenty years or going to these retreats, definitely don’t want to hear this message. But I could imagine my father
hearing this and saying, “Oh, cool. So, my whole life I haven’t been trying to do anything, and I’ve never thought that there was an enlightenment to be attained. I also thought that life’s just chaos; just whatever happens is what’s happening, and there’s nothing we can do about it.”
Andreas Müller:
Yes, but it won’t really work. That person or your father would maybe just hear those two or three sentences and try to use them to confirm his theory.
Justin Allen:
Exactly.
Andreas Müller:
That’s fine, but it has nothing to do with what I say, because he just uses his theory as a method for him as a “person” to make his way through this illusory life. So, that’s possible, and of course, that’s what the seeker does, or that’s what the “person” does. At first, it tries to confirm its concept, maybe in spirituality or with this message or with science or whatever. But it wouldn’t be what this message is saying or what I would be saying.
Justin Allen:
Right.
Andreas Müller:
He would immediately take sides. He would immediately think that I say something, and he would go to his wife and say, “See? I always said that it doesn’t make sense. I knew it all my life.” (laughing)
Justin Allen:
Yeah.
Andreas Müller:
Like that, yeah.
Justin Allen:
“I knew nothing mattered.” (laughing)
Andreas Müller:
Exactly, it would be coming as a conclusion and knowledge from a personal standpoint.
Justin Allen:
But also, somebody could think they could proclaim this message. Because if I read enough ... Actually, I might have read all your books already. So, if I read or listened to everything that you said, if I listened to Tony Parsons, if I listened to as many of these people as possible, I
could easily conduct a talk where I just keep on telling everybody the message that you’re saying.
Andreas Müller:
Yes, that’s true, but ...
Justin Allen:
Because it’s a little ... Not that it’s formulaic, but it’s a clear message, and one of not taking a stance, kind of not taking a side.
Andreas Müller:
Yes, but then it’s understood as a state of clarity. It looks clear from the “person’s” perspective. But in the story, one could say that the clarity comes from the apparent death of “me.” It’s not repeating those words. It’s not coming from a person providing a concept of non-duality. It’s not coming from someone trying to be a guru or trying to save poor people. No, that’s just what apparently happens; that this message or these talks with me or with Tony come out of this apparent death of the “person.” And yes, that’s apparently different than just repeating the concepts.
Justin Allen:
Yeah, because you’re saying that there’s no continuity, for example.
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
So, if there’s no continuity, there is also no repetition in a sense. Even though it’s repetitive?
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
And ...
Andreas Müller:
Like almost everything.
Justin Allen:
Right, so no repetition even though your message is the same over and over again, so far.
Andreas Müller:
Yeah, well said (laughing).
Justin Allen:
Right? I’m good at qualifying everything (laughing). So like you’re saying, if there is no continuity and only “oneness” or “noneness” ...
Andreas Müller:
“Timelessness,” yeah.
Justin Allen:
And if there’s no “me” constantly ... Well, no, you can’t even say “constantly.” There’s the death of the “me,” kind of, but you wouldn’t say there’s the death of “me” constantly happening, would you?
Andreas Müller:
Exactly, because the only thing that lives in the illusion of happening is the “me,” so you can’t take an opposite. You can’t turn the end of “me” into another happening. The end of “me” itself is a story, you know?
Justin Allen:
Yeah, but do you feel like the end of “you” happened? I don’t know if “feel” is the right word. It’s not happening constantly, or is it?
Andreas Müller:
Well, you know, that’s all a story. But in the story, that’s what seemed to have happened.
Justin Allen:
One time.
Andreas Müller:
So to speak, yes.
Justin Allen:
Yeah, okay. So then from that time on ...
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
There’s no more … There’s just no relationship with the “me” anymore. It just isn’t there.
Andreas Müller:
Exactly, it turned out that there is no one ... This is all in the story, but yes, it vanished. This experience to be something that’s now here ...
Justin Allen:
Just isn’t there anymore?
Andreas Müller:
Isn’t there anymore.
Justin Allen:
But you don’t ...
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
There’s some kind of recognition that ...
Andreas Müller:
It’s an apparent recognition.
Justin Allen:
Okay.
Andreas Müller:
That happens when we talk about it, but it’s not that something recognizes that, and that it’s a continuous state, and that recognition is liberation, no. One could say when we speak about it, it’s apparently recognized.
Justin Allen:
Okay, so, not that it has to, but that does mean in a sense that every conversation that you have … Or let’s say we take all your talks and somehow re-record them from whenever you started giving talks, and I would be watching it, from my perspective I would be like, “Oh, look. That talk, he’s just doing the same message in this talk one year later, and one year later it’s the same, and this goes on.” And then I would also kind of think, “Doesn’t he get bored doing that?” And isn’t it boring for the other people that you see in the talks again and again? I might ask myself, “Why does this person go and get the same message ten times in a row?” But from what you’re saying, if there’s no continuity and no “me,” then what’s kind of happening is that it’s new and fresh every single time?
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
Even though from the outside it might apparently be the same message over and over again?
Andreas Müller:
Yes, exactly. It still could end at some point. Apparent boredom could come up, in ten or in five years, for example, and I would ... I don’t know, but there being boredom about saying it again and again would be fresh and new as well.
Justin Allen:
Yeah, or it’s also possible that it could apparently evolve or change or something.
Andreas Müller:
Kind of.
Justin Allen:
I mean, in theory it could.
Andreas Müller:
Yeah, exactly. In theory, yeah. Not really. The message hasn’t really changed. The words and the concepts have
changed a bit, apparently, but the message has never changed, basically because there is no real message (laughing). And in a way, even though that’s a bit in the story now, it’s always the same. Sun goes up, sun goes down, breakfast in the morning and dinner in the evening (laughing). In the story, everything is kind of always the same.
Justin Allen:
Yeah, except that ...
Andreas Müller:
But that’s in the story.
Justin Allen:
Yeah, that’s in the story. But there’s still something about that because that’s the reason why people come: That they seek enlightenment or an escape from the apparent “self” is because everything does seem to repeat itself; the same routine every day, and they hate it. The “me” hates it because it thinks that life shouldn’t be this way or something like that.
Andreas Müller:
Well, it loves it and it hates it.
Justin Allen:
Yeah, but kind of the advertisements of non-duality and spirituality are that life will still be repetitive, but you won’t be there to care anymore, either way.
Andreas Müller:
Yeah, but that’s not really what non-duality is about. I would make an apparent difference. Spirituality provides or at least promises a way out. It tries to provide that “thing” which makes the real difference: enlightenment. Or finding yourself or losing yourself or whatever. In the end, non-duality doesn’t do that, even though it may sound like that.
Justin Allen:
So what do you say it does?
Andreas Müller:
Non-duality is apparently ... You know, it’s all in the story because there is no such thing as non-duality. It’s not the answer. See, I’m speechless here (laughing) because it doesn’t do anything in the end.
Justin Allen:
But that ...
Andreas Müller:
It’s a ...
Justin Allen:
But that’s a major change for somebody that, from a previous ...
Andreas Müller:
Yes, yes. The “person” will process that as a change and as a new something. The “person” will hear that and say, “Oh, that’s the answer,” or “It’s like that,” which is totally and utterly fine. But it will turn out that there just is no answer, and that there is no one. But see, when I say, “It turns out,” seen by the “person,” this sounds like another promise, like another answer. “Oh yeah, at one point it will turn out like that, for me, of course.” And it just isn’t like that.
Justin Allen:
But what is it like?
Andreas Müller:
This can’t be said.
Justin Allen:
Right, and then even that answer; even if you say, “There’s no answer,” or, “If you just do this,” that’s a whole different way of relating to life.
Andreas Müller:
But again, yes, the “person” would see that as another way of relating to life.
Justin Allen:
Yeah.
Andreas Müller:
Yes, I understand.
Justin Allen:
And without the “person” ... Yeah, I mean without the “person,” there’s no way that the “person” can understand what it’s like to ...
Andreas Müller:
Exactly, yes. Yes, it blows up the whole idea of “with a person” and “without a person.”
Justin Allen:
But spirituality does the same thing, at least the apparent goal of spirituality is to die as the “self.”
Andreas Müller:
Exactly. Yes, yes, assuming that there is a “self” in the first place.
Justin Allen:
Right. Well, that’s the illusory “self.” It’s not that there is a “self.” It’s that there’s an illusion of the “self.”
Andreas Müller:
Exactly. They say there is a real illusion of the “self,” and now we’ve got to work on that.
Justin Allen:
Yeah.
Andreas Müller:
I wouldn’t go that far.
Justin Allen:
Yeah, you’d say there’s not (laughing). You’d say there’s nothing that you can do.
Andreas Müller:
There is “no one.” I would say there is “no one.”
Justin Allen:
Right, there is “no one,” so there’s nothing that somebody can do or not do.
Andreas Müller:
Yes, and that’s already a conclusion in the end. If you say it as a conclusion, then it quickly turns into something: “I can’t do anything.”
Justin Allen:
Oh, okay, okay, okay.
Andreas Müller:
In the end, just yes, yes, yes. It’s not making conclusions and saying, “Oh, you can’t do that because there is ‘no one’, beep, beep, beep.” It’s not meant like that. But yes, there is ‘no one’, which also means that there is no illusion. And I think we talked about it the last time. All you end up with is having this religion and this focusing on dying and on killing the illusion. And suddenly you end up with religions because the “person” and the teacher and the seeker all focus on the illusion trying to make it go away. And it doesn’t work, because it’s already part of an illusion.
Justin Allen:
But you want to ...
Andreas Müller:
I think you have thousands and hundreds of thousands of people around the world right now trying to get rid of the “me.”
Justin Allen:
Yeah. Fuck, yeah, that’s what I’m waiting around in the shadows doing (laughing).
Andreas Müller:
Yes, and I think hundreds and thousands of those have been trying to do that for several years. Some people
have built their whole life on the idea that they have to kill or transcend the “me.”
Justin Allen:
Yeah, I’ve lost my girlfriends because of that (laughing).
Andreas Müller:
Well ...
Justin Allen:
But this is an ... I think ...
Andreas Müller:
You tried to lose “the one” that they fell in love with, I mean (laughing).
Justin Allen:
Yeah. Like the sentence, “There is no one,” right?
Andreas Müller:
Yeah.
Justin Allen:
And then what was that sentence that I said? I said, “There is ‘no one’ to do anything,” right?
Andreas Müller:
Yeah, but you said it like a conclusion. And because there is “no one,” then I don’t know ...
Justin Allen:
There is “no one,” therefore there is nothing to do, because there’s “no one” that could do anything.
Andreas Müller:
Yes, and in a way it’s right, but not as a conclusion. I could say the same sentence, but I had the impression that when you said it, it sounded like a conclusion in the sense of, “You are not allowed to do something, because there is ‘no one,’” and all that stuff.
Justin Allen:
Yeah, as a conclusion. But that’s where I see how difficult it could be, in a way.
Andreas Müller:
Yes, because it’s not in the words. It’s not the words themselves. It’s not the concepts that are provided in the end.
Justin Allen:
It’s like something energetic, no?
Andreas Müller:
Yes, and that’s the thing. You can say exactly the same sentences, and in a teaching or in a personal setup there would be “someone” saying that sentence, hoping that it will answer the personal need of the other person. This
would be a teaching. It would be exactly the same sentence.
Justin Allen:
This is how I kind of relate it. Maybe this is a bad example, but let’s say you have a girlfriend that asks you, “Do you love me?” And then you don’t know how you’re feeling, you think something like, “What is love? Everybody has a different idea of what love means. I don’t even know if I love somebody.” So, if you were going to be honest, you’d have to say that this stuff is going on. You’d have to be like, “Well, what does it mean? I don’t want to say ‘I love you’, because I do love you, but I also might love somebody else the next day.” And then somebody has the idea, “Well, if you love somebody, you can only love one person. It’s not possible that you love several persons,” right? So all these things come in. And so, when somebody asks you that, generally you just don’t want to disrupt their illusions of life ...
Andreas Müller:
Sorry, something is missing, the picture and audio got sticky ...
Justin Allen:
Well, I said that you feel uncomfortable sometimes saying to somebody, “Yes, I love you, too.” But in a sense, I think a lot of times you do it as a concession to let the other person stay in their illusion.
Andreas Müller:
Yes, I know what you mean.
Justin Allen:
You know what I mean? And I feel like something about spirituality and these kinds of messages is that it’s ... I can imagine it’s really difficult to take such a kind of non-concession stance to not cater to the “self” ever.
Andreas Müller:
And no, because it’s not a standpoint. No, that’s completely unimportant in the end.
Justin Allen:
For you it is, but maybe for a Rupert-Spira-type teacher it’s that they have to make concessions or that they make these concessions for that reason, to avoid being so directly controversial to the audience. You know what I mean? Because when I’ve seen you sitting there, you seemed to be different.
Andreas Müller:
You want to save Rupert Spira (laughing).
Justin Allen:
No, no. I don’t. I don’t want to.
Andreas Müller:
No, I’m sorry.
Justin Allen:
I’m just trying to play the devil’s advocate.
Andreas Müller:
Yeah, right (laughing).
Justin Allen:
But if you say that there’s “no one” … Right?
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
That’s like the worst thing that somebody can hear.
Andreas Müller:
Yes and no. Yeah, I’d say it’s in a way the worst thing the “person” can hear, but the “person” isn’t real. So, for some people it’s pure joy to hear.
Justin Allen:
Yeah, it’s pure joy, but I bet that these people are misinterpreting it (laughing) and are going, “Awesome. There’s ‘no one.’ I’m not there. That confirms my whole philosophy of life and means I don’t have to do all this hard work and all this stuff that I thought I had to do.”
Andreas Müller:
Yeah, I know. Yeah, yeah.
Justin Allen:
But that’s not true either.
Andreas Müller:
No, that would be another concept. Anyway, they can’t keep up that conviction for a long time.
Justin Allen:
That’s like when I feel there’s a certain relief when I listen to Adyashanti or Rupert Spira and say, “Holy shit. I have to abide as this awareness, and how do I do that? That’s so hard.” It doesn’t seem possible that I can just abide as this awareness all the time. And then I even question that and ask, “Well, what is this awareness?” It’s also that I’m still actively trying to do something, and they’re giving me the message that whenever I’m trying to act or there’s an intention or an agenda, it’s still the “me” operating. And then I listen to your message, which is saying that there’s no one there, and the way the mind
or at least my mind interprets it is “Oh, oh, this is such a relief. So, I don’t have to struggle and abide as the awareness.”
Andreas Müller:
Yes, it’s both. It’s both, because yes, on the one hand the “person” will hear that sentence as another truth or as another conviction, like you just said. But of course, energetically it’s exactly what’s being said. This whole attempt, this whole need to do life, to find an answer, to struggle for fulfillment, to be someone, is an illusion. Of course, that’s the energy of it, and this can be a huge relief. In the end, it doesn’t matter if you believe one or the other. But of course, that’s the underlying message, so to speak, an apparent message, but this is apparently being said all the time, of course.
Justin Allen:
Okay, so then is there some way that you can kind of tell how it was for you? You were going to Tony Parsons and listening to this message that you’re now giving.
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
And did you see anything? Could you recognize anything kind of happening to you as you were listening to Tony Parsons? How do you relate to it now, in a sense? You were on one side of the fence, and now you’re on the other, so to speak.
Andreas Müller:
I don’t really relate to that. I know when “I” died (laughing), so to speak, which is such a story, it was a bit like, “Oh, damn it.” No, not even that strong. It was a bit like, “It fucking just is like that.”
Justin Allen:
But do you feel that it was like the repetition of going?
Andreas Müller:
I never felt like repeating, to be honest.
Justin Allen:
Maybe not repeating, I don’t know … I’m having a difficult time coming up with an analogy. Let’s say you keep on trying to build a house on soft ground, and you keep on adding more material to the wall, and as you do so, it keeps on sinking. Because your structure keeps on
getting heavier, so the house just keeps on sinking into the soft ground.
Andreas Müller:
I don’t get what do you mean by building up a structure? Where do I build the walls? I’m not getting the picture.
Justin Allen:
(laughing) I mean, if you’re trying to build a house, and you’re building it on a soft ground.
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
And you keep on adding material to the walls. Let’s say you’re building a stone wall, and every time you add a new layer, the wall drops.
Andreas Müller:
Yes, but ...
Justin Allen:
So, your house never gets higher because it keeps on sinking into the soil.
Andreas Müller:
Okay, so but ...
Justin Allen:
And so because that keeps on happening, at some point you go, “I’m never going to build this wall. It’s just impossible, at least on this area. I can’t do it.” So you stop building the wall.
Andreas Müller:
Yes, and now (laughing), what does this analogy apply to?
Justin Allen:
So, for me, if there was some kind of working or potential effect of your message, it’s that I would keep on going to Tony Parsons or to you. I feel like the conversation will always be, “There’s no one there.”
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
Right? And I’m going to hear this repeatedly, and I might try to come up with all kinds of different avenues or arguments or ways to (deny or argue against) ... And if I keep on getting disproven over and over again, and I’m copying it, like it’s sinking in to me somehow, that’s where I can imagine maybe it’s possible where you go like, “Holy shit. Yeah, okay.”
Andreas Müller:
Yes, but this would still be what apparently happens because that’s the thing. The vanishing of “me,” so to speak ... Now, let’s stay very superficial. So why I got it, or when I got it, or “me” getting it, was just what apparently happened. It was almost like happening along the way. While I was working on “me” being alive and “me” being a happy person and all that stuff, “I” vanished along the way. That’s just what apparently happened, for no real reason. It might look like, and on the other hand that was what happened, as if it was sinking in. It was wiping me out. I didn’t ...
Justin Allen:
Right, like exhausting your ...
Andreas Müller:
You know, I wouldn’t bring it so much on the “me” side, like I tried to build the walls, and it didn’t work, and I saw that it didn’t work. And because I saw that, I stopped seeking and all that stuff. It’s not really like that. That’s what I mean. While I was still trying to live my life as good as I can, I was being wiped out along the way, not noticing.
Justin Allen:
Yeah, like unknowingly.
Andreas Müller:
So, that’s how it was for me a bit, yes.
Justin Allen:
But ...
Andreas Müller:
But one more sentence. There are people who have been hearing this for fifteen years or more, or there are people, not only in non-duality, who have been dancing around this idea that there is “no one” for forty years, when they read Ramana Maharshi for the first time or some Zen or whatever “kind of seeking” around this idea, and apparently nothing really was happening, in that sense.
Justin Allen:
Yeah, but did you also kind of recognize a little bit that there was the chipping away of your “sense of self”?
Andreas Müller:
Yes, but only looking back because ...
Justin Allen:
But during it, you didn’t recognize anything?
Andreas Müller:
No, I recognized that things fell off, that in that period I felt better and better, and I cared less and less in a positive sense. This message didn’t really give me a hard time. I had my hard time before that.
Justin Allen:
Yeah, I had my hard time before and maybe still to come, also. This doesn’t ...
Andreas Müller:
So, but yeah, until the end I thought that whatever is falling away and whatever happens, it was still happening to “me.” So, of course, I recognized things changing, but I mean, in the “person’s” way, always things are changing, or that’s the hope. But yes, things were changing, but in the end, until the end, for “me.”
Justin Allen:
And do you see ... I think I mentioned this yesterday: What the message might do to people is that it feels like it starves the kind of conventional food that you give to the “self.” Maybe Rupert Spira’s or Adyashanti’s message also starve the ego, but at the same time they give it something.
Andreas Müller:
Exactly. It’s in a way no different ...
Justin Allen:
It gives it a vegan diet instead of an American diet, you know (laughing)?
Andreas Müller:
Yes, one could say so.
Justin Allen:
It’s just a healthier diet than what we’re conventionally fed.
Andreas Müller:
Yeah, let’s stick to that. I wouldn’t go to the starving thing. I mean, people eat (laughing). I mean, maybe accidentally, people starve on vegan food (laughing) automatically. But actually, I would say these messages provide “food” – apparently ... I think it’s still about diet. It’s still about eating.
Justin Allen:
I mean, they say it’s about diet, too.
Andreas Müller:
Yes, they say so. But it fits the picture. I think they say they have the better diet. “This is the healthiest diet for you.”
Justin Allen:
Yeah, yeah.
Andreas Müller:
Yeah, I mean there’s nothing right or wrong with anything. It just is what seems to be happening. That’s my impression of that. In a way, what seems to be happening is that, on the one hand, something is being said, and on the other hand, something else seems to happen. On the one hand, it’s being said that there actually is “no one,” and on the other hand what’s being said is, “And now let’s feed that one the healthiest diet.”
Justin Allen:
That’s an interesting premise though, to not feed you a diet.
Andreas Müller:
Yes, but the thing is that’s not another idea coming from a “person,” so to say. It’s not about, “I don’t feed you anything, because that’s the best for you.”
Justin Allen:
Right.
Andreas Müller:
Then it would just be another diet with nothing to eat, but it’s not an idea. That’s the important thing. It’s not coming from an idea that this would serve you best.
Justin Allen:
Right. It’s just coming from the message that comes out of this “nothing understanding.”
Andreas Müller:
Exactly. In the story, it’s really coming from that absence, not being able to recognize someone who could be fed with anything. It’s not intellectual. It’s not because I thought it all through well.
Justin Allen:
Yeah. No, but that’s what I think is refreshing about it; that it feels from an energetic perspective that there’s almost no energy in it, or that it’s an un-agenda-ically energy.
Andreas Müller:
Absolutely, yes. It’s that natural. It doesn’t ... There isn’t ... Because in spirituality, there would be an agenda about having no agenda. It would be the right intention to have no intention. No, there naturally can’t be any intention in that sense when there is “no one.”
Justin Allen:
Right.
Andreas Müller:
And yes, that’s just how this energy is. Not because it’s right or wrong or serves best or whatever. It’s just not there.
Justin Allen:
Yeah, that’s what I was trying to ... I think I might get it. I might be able to express this at some point, and that’s what I was trying to get at with the analogy of being with a lover. At least for me, I always recognize that I’m making some kind of a concession or saying something with a little bit of a lie or untruth to it to make a concession to myself or to the other person.
Andreas Müller:
Yes.
Justin Allen:
And there’s a huge fear to just be really honest, you know? Or with a child, when a child is crying or something like this, and you say something like, “Just go to sleep and tomorrow everything will be okay.”
Andreas Müller:
Yeah.
Justin Allen:
We all say that, but we all know it’s not going to be okay (laughing). And that’s the message though; the truthful message is to say, “I don’t know if it’s going to be okay. It might get worse. It could get better. Who knows?”
Andreas Müller:
Yeah.
Justin Allen:
But nobody ever says that.
Andreas Müller:
Yes, yeah.
Justin Allen:
Which is fine, maybe it makes sense that we don’t. But at some point, especially if you start getting interested in, for lack of a better word, spirituality, then I do think that it becomes ... Maybe it’s not dangerous, but it’s potentially going to keep somebody just on another diet instead of really ... Well yeah, I don’t know.
Andreas Müller:
Yeah. As I said, yes, you can’t really bring right or wrong in that. And, I know that wasn’t really right, yeah, yeah.
Justin Allen:
Yeah, you can’t bring right or wrong into it, but there’s still ... Well, then you can say it’s refreshing to hear this message because it feels or it seems so clean.
Andreas Müller:
Yes. Oh, it is, yes, yes.
Justin Allen:
And it feels like there’s less wiggle room for the self to grab onto something or to believe something new.
Andreas Müller:
Or yes, in the end there is ... Yes, yes ...
Justin Allen:
