Qs and As
Posted on Mar 28th, 2006
by 
Rob
Rob
4 + 3 = 7 The left hand side of the equation is equal to the right hand side of the equation. The same principle can be applied to virtually all questions and answers. By understanding the question(left side), we have the answer(right side). The question is equal to the answer. One cannot even formulate a question if he's not aware of the answer that the question is seeking. One does not ask if cows are green when he wishes to know about sports cars. As such, an extremely useful spiritual practice is to observe, document and analyze our questions. Explore the field that they have arisen out of. Can I move on? = Courage Can I remain unbiased? = Neutrality Can I deal with this? = Acceptance Should I go on? = Willingness What does it mean? = Reason Question = The Field Then there are also fields that bring about questions of less integrity: Am I better than you? = Pride Why don't I get what I want? = Anger Can I have it? = Desire Is it safe? = Fear Can I ever be more than my mistakes? = Guilt It is extremely useful to examine the field that a question arises from. The only acceptable answer to any question is going to be one that arises out of the same field. For those familiar with the Map of Consciousness, it is an especially helpful reference:
Between 500 and 600 there is a massive drop-off when it comes to the arising of questions. Beyond 600 it becomes very apparent that Truth can only be validated by identity with it and not by knowing about it. Complete surrender of one's beingness to the Allness of existence is the process which carries him further. Contemplation occurs spontaneously, but there is no longer attatchment to questions or answers.
A boddhisatva deals with questions that arise out of the collective field rather than his own individual field(A boddhisatva is an enlightened one who remains in this realm by the will of Divinity, to lend assistance to mankind and the raising of its overall level of consciousness).
One of the main techniques of the boddhisatva is to simply recontextualize a question so that it becomes meaningless. On the map of consciousness, a question that arises out of Pride is quite meaningless once one looks at it from the perspective of Courage, or Neutrality, or any of the higher levels.
This is a technique that we can practice for ourselves once we have examined the field that the question has arisen out of. We can look at it from the perspectives of (in the context of: ) the higher levels of consciousness, and subsequently practice the surrender/release of those questions as they appear unimportant in this new light we have shone upon them.
-Rob
Access: PublicTagged with: questions, answers, release, context, Map of Consciousness, surrender, allness, oneness, fields, boddhisatva
allness
January 2008 
“One cannot even formulate a question if he’s not aware of the answer that the question is seeking.”
Please qualify this statement, which seems to summarize your entire blog. You claim that a person is already aware of the answer to the question, otherwise they could not ask it in the first place. You state this as if it is an irrefutable fact.
“One does not ask if cows are green when he wishes to know about sports cars.”
Yes indeed, it would be entirely foolish to ask if cows are green when one wants to know about sports cars; it would seem though that no question would ever have to be asked, according to you, because all answers are already self apparent.
I understand that for every question there is an answer. It is also a fact, however, that all questions do not have readily available answers for all who wish to have them. If I am wrong (and I often am) maybe you will be able to clear a few things up for me that just have me stumped. I would love to see the supporting documentation you have for these answers you have (apparently all of us do) for the questions I am about to pose.
Please explain to me what String Theory is and why the mathematicians who figured it out cannot fully comprehend the math.
What happens at the singularity of a black hole? It would seem that scientists have been asking this question for some time and the answer seems to have eluded them; it is sure to be said that they would be eternally grateful for the answer. Something a bit more on the surface may be…What happens at the event horizon of a black hole?
A simple math problem should be easy enough to answer: What is the square root of -25; now don’t take the easy way out and pull out an irrational number because those are just there because it is unanswerable for all but those with the magic question to answer ratio working for them. I am sure you can come up with the right answer if you just take the time to ask the question.
It is a fact that all questions have answers, but are you honestly going to have people believe that they already have the answers? Why even bother asking questions if we already have all the answers?
I honestly do not want to offend you, but I need better answers than the ambiguous ones you have given so far. If you are going to make a factual statement, at least have the courtesy to back it up. To believe that your personal opinion is fact is simply arrogant.
Where are the questions coming from? do they need answers?
Are we looking for answers, or examining the questions?
Needing to know is often just a vanity. Is there something wrong with ambiguity? If you can identify it, is it still ambiguous?
Why bother asking questions at all if we have all the answers? ;-)
-Rob
Data is meaningless if we don’t understand what it means.
Examining the nature of the question helps enormously.
-Rob
The nature of a question is the desire to know the answer.
Data is often indecipherable by most because of the complexity of the answer to a seemingly simple question.
The anser will be given in the form of data because that is what will formulate the answer as information is mearly data srung together in recognizable terms.
As far as the ambiguity that you seem so fond of, this is often used by those who do not have answers, but claim knowledge of them.
“The nature of a question is a desire to know the answer”
Actually, the definition of a question is a request for an answer. The nature of THE question, is the ‘need’ that the request arises from.
Why would one ask those particular questions in these particular circumstances?
Looking at the big picture…examining the true purpose of those questions…
The questions were asked in order to make a point, were they not? Upon examining the field that the questions have arisen from, it would be like talking about the colour of cows in response to a question about sports cars to answer them with an explaination of black holes or quantum mechanics.
The words don’t express the meaning of the questions so much as the context does.
The questions were posed as a challenge.
“Am I better than you? = Pride”
The same wording when asked from humility and genuine curiosity can be examined just the same, to reveal the answer that the individual needs. The answer that he thinks he needs may be totally different….which again, is reason to really examine the question. Forget about answers ;-)
Am I better than you? no.
Love,
-Rob
What if we were to both answer questions and forget about answers? What if after the need for the question has been dealt with the question is still there? Though there may be pathologies present lurking in the background of a question what if after these pathologies, these ‘true questions’ as it were, were dealt with, a question still remained? What if Isaac Newton, a fellow who it seems was fraught with his own personal problems, had given up on answering questions just because he knew that his need for answers was steeped in some sort of childish insecurity or something? How do we progress if we only answer the nature of the question as opposed to fulfill the definition of the question as well? Why not both (particularly as applied to the large questions that medicine and science are answering.. as in ‘how can we cure cancer?’ … perhaps some differentiation is called for)?
lol, I’ve asked a lot of questions. And what is great is that because of your post, Rob, I’ll be doing some introspection with regards to these questions, to try and solve the equation. But what if at the end there is a remainder that requires you to give an answer?
I don’t think you’re arrogant or anything. I don’t think there’s anything particularly wrong with ambiguity and neither do I think it is a correlate of disguised ignorance. I do, however, think it’s just one side of the story… an oft-ignored side, of course and consequentally a side that deserves more attention.
The truth, however, after all of this is that I don’t really know a whole lot with regards this subject. I thought I might open it up a bit if I could but I really look forward to what you have to say.
Your friend-with love,
Brian David
Well, to shed some light, Isaac Newton himself calibrated at 499 on the map of consciousness…so the questions he was asking arose from that field…the height of the linear realm….the realm of the intellect(The same field of Albert Einstein and Sigmund Freud).
It’s interesting actually, since fields that arise in the 500s, and especially above 540, have healing properties…but they don’t operate on the same linear principles that are dealt with in the 400s. For example, Alcoholics Anonymous calibrates at 540(the beginning of unconditional Love), and its long-term efficacy in treating alcoholism is far better than any medical ‘cures’ that science has discovered.
In the 500s, it’s not unusual for illnesses to go into remission….
Actually, Mozart’s music calibrates in the 500s as well…which sort of validates the notion that his music had healing energy(People supposedly play it for their plants too, to inspire them to grow!).
Point being, that we can embrace the realm of the intellect…the realm of understanding…but to let it go in pursuit of that which is beyond the intellect(and in many ways inclusive of the intellect, but not dependent on it), we open even greater doors of possibility.
From the realm of love, Love, by virtue of being that which is is, appears to be reasonable and appropriate….few questions arise to be solved….since situations are viewed more as opportunistic than problematic.
Have you ever done something entirely in a state of Presence? work that you didn’t have to think about? that you just were the work and the worker as one? no questions, no answers…..just that which is unfolding?
That’s sort of the field where the duality of question and answer is transcended.
Seeing the root, the source, the field that our questions arise from, helps us to align and recontextualize our own experience so that we might experience more expansive awareness…questions and states of higher integrity.
…with that said, no state of being is less good than any other…each is perfect by virtue of being that which it is. This is all just useful in the context of the pursuit of enlightenment…which isn’t necessarily for everyone.
in Peace,
-Rob
Ahhh… I understand. That’s actually pretty cool… using questions as measuring sticks, and then transcending the realm of measurement (as it is defined by duality) and then after loosening your identification with your stage-specific questions, re-emerging in a nondual framework to be both more aware of your postulations as well as more aware of that which renders them unnecessary.
Thanks.
Brian David
PS: When you say the pursuit of enlightenment do you mean invidual consciousness evolution/development, because if so I would think that it is an inevitable path. But I think you might mean more like enlightenment as transcendance or seeking of cessation or something like that in which case a person could always opt out and settle down with their workable translation of life, the universe, and everything.
Sorry just thinking out loud.
yeah, I think Buddha said that all who hear of enlightenment will eventually pursue it, and all who pursue it will eventually have it….so really, it is an inevitability.
In terms of the linear mind, you might say that the pursuit of it might hasten the onset of the experience….while looking at it in a less linear way, pursuit of enlightenment might simply be an intentional alignment with highest Truth and an intention to serve highest Truth….and then, the actual transcendence is up to the will of the divine, which may or may not facillitate a hastening of that transcendence, though whatever the case, since one has resolved to serve the will of the divine, either situation is satisfactory.
…like when the guru asks his student “would you be upset after all this seeking if you were not granted permission to have enlightenment?” to which the student replied “no”…so the guru says “excellent, then you have permission to become enlightened”.
-Rob
There have been so much commenting, and I will confess that I did not read it all.
Because all I wanted to say was thank you.
The map proved incredibly useful to me. Your question = answer analogy as well.
I have been going through a cleanse and have one more week to go. This is the only week I actually feel good. Its funny, I noticed everything plummit during the cleanse - psychological balance, emotional etc. And now that I look at the map I can say where I was.
Its funny that we as humans like diagrams because they are easier to understand than plain text. Its funny that we have arrows and lines to express levels of understanding.
However that map helped me. Surprised me because my first reaction was “not ANOTHER map of consciousness.” But that was the bomb!
Thanks Rob, you da man!
Rainbows,
Katya
I also agree, that all answers come before the questions.
All answer are within.. We just need to push everything else aside.. Seek and ye shall find.
Rob…
Loved your explainations above. Outstanding as usual. It amazes me how different the approaches and expectations of people are. Some want the direct answer… the data / scientific, “verifiable” fact (content)… and others reach for an understanding (bigger context) and absorb and enjoy what they pick up.
The 500's, being non-linear, are ambiguous when viewed by someone wishing a linear, data-based answer.
It might take me a while to absorb some of this… might return to re-read later.
Thanks!
Tim