The Non-dualogues Session 1: Truth

Taking empiricism seriously.

The Non-dualogues share the conversations between slumberfogey and the pilgrim (Gary), in slumberfogey’s flat in London.

slumberfogey: Welcome, pilgrim. I’m glad you could make it.

pilgrim: Thank you, slumberfogey. Is that what I should call you? What sort of a name is that?

s:

p: slumberfogey? slumberfogey. SLUMBERFOGEY!

s: Sorry. Did I drift off? Please, no words in caps. Let’s keep it peaceful.

p: Sorry. Bad night?

s: Is it evening already?

p: No. I mean last night. You seem tired.

s: No, no. I’m just being efficient with my energy. So, what would you like to talk about?

p: Well, the ad said I could get enlightenment, or something like that?

s: Is that what I said? Bit naughty of me. Felt like I needed to talk up the product to get people’s attention. Do you want your money back?

p: I didn’t pay anything.

s: Ah. Just as well.

p:

s:

p: So…

s: Yes? What would you like to discuss?

p: Well, in the ad, your picture made you seem quite, um, old, like you are. And sort of peaceful and wise. And it said your teachings could point me toward my true nature. That’s why I came. Sound familiar?

s: Relax for me. You can make yourself anything you like.

p: So what do I do — breath deeply?

s: No. You make us tea. I’ll have a Pukka Relax blend. You can have that or anything else I’ve got. Everything’s in the kitchen. Go on — that’s the price of admission. In the meantime, I’ll get started. The first thing we need to discuss is the main obstacle to our understanding one another.

p: (Over his shoulder from the kitchen…) What’s that?

s: Language. Well, actually just words. Our body language and tone of voice will be quite helpful.

p: So… words might stand in the way of our having a good discussion?

s: There’s no ‘might’ about it. They’re an absolute nightmare. Still, at least for a while, they’re what we’ve got. The first thing to learn is that nothing I say is true.

p: You’re a liar? Here’s your tea.

s: Thanks. No. That’s not it. What does the word ‘truth’ mean to you?

p: I don’t know. Something like accuracy, I guess.

s: Accuracy regarding what?

p: Reality?

s: Reality? Right. So, a true statement represents reality.

p: I’m going with that. Yep.

s: How different do you think it is to view a map of London or read an article about it, versus spending a week walking around and seeing it?

p: There’s all the difference in the world. They don’t even compare.

s: The same chasm exists between even the most exact description of reality and reality itself. Reality can’t be pinned down and captured by words. That’s why nothing I say is true. The best any of us can do is point toward the truth. Some statements point more accurately than others, but none are true.

p: Okay, but you’ll give me, like, knowledge, right, of my true nature?

s: No. Sorry. I can, though, point you toward understanding. But that understanding has to be something you experience for yourself. You’ll avoid knowledge at all costs.

p: But I want knowledge!

s: You think you do, but as you learn, you’ll see that knowledge is heavy and slow. It’s yesterday’s news. You’ll come to value lived understanding, which refreshes itself with every tick of the clock.

p: So, you’re not going to speak the truth, and you’re not going to give me knowledge. What else should I know about the product?

s: With any luck, by the time we’re through, you’ll stop hoping for enlightenment.

p: So I’ll stop caring about the thing I came here for?

s: Yes. You’re catching on.

p: No, I’m not!

s: Okay, the product differs from what you thought it was. Decide whether you want to come back next week. Only return if you want to pursue the understanding I’ve hinted at, for its own sake. If you do, and if you’re willing to look at — to meet and face — whatever truth you find, then I’ll see you next Thursday. You can bring biscuits if you like.

Visit me at www.doug-fraley.com.