Part Two of The Answers to Ah-San Collected Works on Bringing Questions to the Masters.

> I think I am not like most other people,

Hmm… Where did you get that idea from? ;)

J/k…

> and I am strange in certain ways.

Again, you can't judge someone like you using the same yardstick used for average people. So how could you be anything *but* "strange", if the reference to normalcy used is "Joe Sixpack", or even "the girl next door"? Think of it!

> D says that I am not as strange as I think. He says that people in the 60s did a lot of the stuff I am beginning to do now.

True. But that was a time of liberation and questioning. I did not last long. The powers that be got rid of a pesky President and his brother, both influenced by such ideas, put Tim Leary in jail for 30 years (official reason: His daughter had transported 11 grams of weed over the border), made acid illegal, sent unruly kids to have some serious fun in South-East Asia, perfected media control, and got things pretty much in control. So questioning from being relatively common started becoming a rarity.

> F suspected that I took acid and had a trip. S thought I ate something strange. But all I did was waking up one morning and finding myself There.

This indeed could have been the shortcut to somewhat similar experiences. However, you are the best proof that no drugs are needed to *get There*. There is nothing wrong with them at all -- except that they are illegal: Since the use of mind-altering substances puts us even more under the sway of our slavemasters, it is best to be avoided. Otherwise, they’d be a path like another, allowing to shake the belief in an absolutely solid and stolid physical “reality”.

Actually, studying Physics, at some level, could easily have the same effect than psychotropic substances, since contemporary physics definitely questions lots of common assumptions…

> It seems that they (growing up in the 60s) have seen people like me before, or they have done similar things themselves in the past, and they know what they are talking about.

Frankly, I don’t think most of them really have.

What they did see (or did themselves) is have the somewhat similar experiences one gets when using psychotropic triggers. So they automatically used the reference frames they were familiar with, and judged the process they saw you undergo from *that* point of view. Which, besides being a “natural” thing to do, also had the advantage to allow them to avoid contemplating a possibly very, very disturbing concept: The idea that someone else, and in addition, someone *they* know might actually have experienced the genuine article. Something that very possibly they never ever got close to themselves… Remember: No one becomes Prophet in his own village…

However, this is absolutely not the path you took. The path you took was similar to the one the Wise Men and Women of old took: They used their brain to look at the world, and slowly realized that something is amiss and wrong with the pictures they got. Then, when ready, they manifested a “Master” to whom they talked. In turn, that "Master", if they appeared genuine Seekers, used one trick or another to point them in the right direction. What happens after that is that, with a little bit of luck or lots of efforts, or both, "IT" happens. Nothing original in the process, really. It has happened over and over, over the ages.

> I know I am very naive and ignorant of what people do with drugs (I have never tried any, and not particularly interested in it). But, if that drug induced ecstasy is the type of things that I will end up with (without drug use), or if in the eyes of an onlooker I am only seeking that kind of "altered state", then something is wrong with my pursuit somewhere.

Nono. You are going back to your old error, judging the world and your own experience through the eyes of the onlookers, and by the yardsticks they provide. It’s not the way it works.

The only onlookers who know more than you do are the Awakened ones. Once you yourself are Awakened, you can still use “colleagues” as “direction pointers”, or even as crutches, if you wish, and *that* is perfectly legitimate. But they themselves no more really “know” that much more than you do yourself. As for the “average person” type of onlooker, they no more have any claims left to any genuine rights to be normative about *your* experiences.

Think of it: How could they? Since when do the blind have any claim to be the leaders of one-eyed people?

[On the other hand, also remember that looking at “me” vs “them” is just another trick of Maya. Ultimately, you, me, them, Buddha, the Pope and even Saddam and Dubya, we are all one. (I know it can be hard to believe, when you push it *that* far… ;) But it’s nonetheless true. Or, if you prefer, be as proud as makes you *feel really good* about all you accomplished, but always remember that ultimately, a worm or a star, there is no difference.

The Romans in their wisdom had the slave holding the Triumph crown over their new Imperator’s head whisper or yell in the ears of the same to remember the Tarpeian Rock [a place of opprobrium where State-ordered executions were held by pushing the condemned down to their death], as he paraded through to the acclaim of the populace. The Awakened Seeker must learn to be both Imperator and slave, and to follow the Triumphal Way as they are accepting the Tarpeian Rock for their own Ego.

In other words, what *you* got was the genuine experience. What your friends most probably got was the drug-induced ersatz experience. So, if anyone is "wrong" in this matter, it's not you.

Except that personally, I don't think anyone is wrong here. It does not matter how one gets *There*, as long as There you get. Except that they seem a bit arrogant in judging *your* experience by *their* yardsticks. Even if honestly, yes, there are similarities. But how do they know how you got there? Who knows, if not your Self?

> And what happened to those people from the 60s and 70s? Where did they end up to? Did anything go wrong with them and what?

What happened with them? Easy, they are still here They just happen to start getting old. And grouchy. :)

The successful ones are "important" people. Like faculty deans, cabinet members, well-known writers, etc. The middle ranks are just G, and D, and F (and me :) And those who used a bit too much of the heavy fuels, or ate too much junk, are already dead, because too much of a good thing is quite taxing for the body. Particularly if, in fact, it's not that good a thing.

> Are most of the New Age people trying to reproduce the 60s trend in a different style?

Some might, since it was the trendy thing to do, at some point in time. And will certainly be so again. But most are simply pursuing their own paths, which to some extent replicates that of mom and dad. And actually many of the "New-Age" people are simply the same "flower children" of the 60's, but with graying hair on their heads. Some age-old wisdom told us: "There is never anything new under the sun". Indeed.

> OK, I know that each person does what works for them, and I cannot judge the validity of anyone's search.

Words of Wisdom. Actually, you can, as long as you don't take any of your judgments as having any more importance than theirs. ;) (And this, by the way, is *as valid* for my own judgments, as it is for any others!)

> D asked me, "What branch of this is your master (you, F) teaching? What's the name of it?" I believe your teaching has no name (or else I would not want to learn from you, since I don't want to subscribe to any specific branch, not yet).

You got it perfectly right! ;)

And ah! It feels soooo good to be the Master. ;)

Sure, I could put nice labels on it, and have treatises written on the Great Insights of the MahaGuru’s thought (or write them myself, to make sure the hagiographer got it right... :). Hey, thinking of it, I could even put that in a “Little Green Book”, and have the masses quote it in preparation for their Great (spiritual) Leap Forward.

> It is, and should be, more general than any of the spirituality search that can be named. Am I right about this?

Indeed. It’s the spiritual counterpart of the way of the “generalist”.

> I admit that in the course of my 5-day trip, I went through many branches of religious, philosophical and scientific teachings (as much as I can name them), so I was able to name things in terms of New Age, Christianity, Buddhism/Zen, Taoism, science and philosophy, etc. So I believe, or I think I believe, that I had reached something truly general, or as general as my limited experience and mind could comprehend.

You might in fact be smarter than me, because it seems that you went through all this a bit quicker than I did. ;)

> I hope this is true, that I am learning something that can truly satisfy a earnest seeker (I hope I can call myself a serious seeker).

It seems to me that you are... ;)

> Perhaps in the end I will find myself going down one particular path, but that would be when I stop questioning and find contentment.

You should follow the inclinations of your heart. However, in general, be twice as questioning about, and demanding of, "named" paths. Or you might way too soon end waiting for the Second Coming, or even start talking in tongues with the Lord himself. :)

Next installment in

"Part Three of The Answers to Ah-San Collected Works on Bringing Questions to the Masters." Stay tuned! ;)