As the apparent nature of all perceptions, actions and objects is penetrated and seen through, their most subtle nature is revealed. Within this revelation the inherently interconnected and interdependent nature of all phenomena is clarified. This clarification reveals their essential nonseparateness, within which their apprently separate identities are seen to be simply limited perceptual conventions having no absolute value or substance.

All phenomena are seen to be inherently empty of any separate (self) nature. All perceived and perceptible objects are seen to be nothing other than acts of perception. All phenomena are seen to be actions (vrtti) taking place in the mind (consciousness-of (citta)).

Within that insight the true nature of all objects and actions is clarified. All phenomena, all ‘individual’ objects and actions are nothing other than localised expressions of the totality of all actions and objects. All objects and actions have as their source the totality of all actions and objects: the matrix of manifestation. Which is, itself, nothing other than the spontaneous manifestation of consciousness. Therein the dynamic of causality is revealed.

The unfolding of manifestation, through the agency of action, has a single governing principle: causality. The simple, and irrefutable, law of cause and effect. This law is universal. It is the Order of the Universe: as applicable to galaxies and stars as it is to amoebas and multicelled organisms.

According to this Unique Principle of existence all actions are simultaneously effect and cause of other actions. All actions take their place within a network of other actions. Each of which has been caused by a specific prior set of, and relationship between, other actions: while at the same time contributing to the unfolding of a consequent set of, and relationship between, other actions.

Any particular arrangement of  specific actions, taking place within the same context, will always produce the same result. A ball thrown into the air and left to itself will come down. An object with a mass greater than water will sink when cast into it. While knaves and fools can dispute such facts, noone honest and sincere can do so.

It it were not so you would not be reading these words now. You would not be able to. You would not exist. The laws of physics are irrefutable, irrevocable and inescapable. The laws of phsyics are nothing more than specifc explications of the Unique Principle of Causality.

When the universal simplicity of causality is recognised actions and objects take on a very distinct and perhaps surprising aspect. Quite clearly they are each and all conditioned by prior actions. Totally conditioned by actions that have actually taken place. Any action that actually takes place is actually taking place as it does so. It is not, and cannot be, any other action.

Any action that is actually happening is actually happening. It is actualy happening just exactly as it is. It is always and only exactly what it is. It is not anything else. Not even something so very slightly different that our perceptual apparatus cannot detect the difference. All actions, that actually take place, are exactly what they are and nothing else.

The causation of any action is composed of actions that have exactly the same character. They were exactly what they were and nothing else. All actions that have actually taken place, have actually taken place. Even if we do not, can not, know exactly what they were.

It is an irrefutable fact that that which is actually happening is actually happening (even if only as an appearance). It is an equally irrefutable fact that that which has actually happened has actually happened (even if only as an impression). Even if we can not (and we can not) know exactly what they are and were. These irrefutable facts mean that all actions are inextricable from the totality of actions within which they take place. They are all totally irreplacable.

For any one action that has actually happened to have been any different, there would have had to have been a difference in the prior actions that brought it about. But, there was not. What has actually happened happened exactly as it did. If all actions are caused by a network of prior actions, and all actions are inextricable from the network of causation, then all actions are irrefutably irreplacable.

If all actions that have actually happened were and still are irreplacable, and they are, then they could not have been any different. They could not have been sooner or later, faster or slower, easier or harder, longer or shorter. They could not have been in any way at all different. For the network of their causation was just as it was, and so they were just as they were.

If all actions that have actually happened were and still are irreplacable, and they are, then they could not have not happened. In fact, they did not not-happen. They actually did happen. That they could not have been in any way different means that they could not have been either better or worse. All actions that have actually happpened, and all actions that are actually happening are completely imperfectable.

If all actions are inextricable, irreplacable and imperfectable in the network within which they take place, then they could not have not happened. They could not have not happened even to the tiniest conceivable degree. They did actually happen. Which means that they had to happen. They had to happen because their prior cuasative actions had already happened just as they did. So they, likewise, had to happen just as they did.

If all actions are inextricable, irreplacable and imperfectable then they are also inevitable. They had to happen. They did happen. They did happen because they had to happen. This stark and irrefutable fact does not require any sentimental, emotive reaction. It does not imply the presence of some immannent or transcendent anthropomorphic entity deciding what must and will happen.

Actions are not predetermined by some conceptualising power that has decided what they will be and lead to. Actions are simply caused by prior actions. And they go on to cause future actions in exactly the same way. Just as all past actions were inevitable, imperfectable, irreplacable and inextricable from the network of causation; all future actions wil also be inextricable from the network of causation in their irreplacable and imperfectable inevitability.

This is of course so. For if what is actually happening is actually happening it is because what actually happened did actually happen. The present is totally and irrevocably conditioned by the past. The past has totally and irrevocably conditioned the present. Likewise that past is right now conditioning the future, through the conditioned agency of the present.

Furthermore, what is now future will become past once it has happened. Just as what is now past was future once. The laws of causation, the dynamic of causality do not change simply because of location on the arrow of time. It is not only universal but eternal also. What is actually happening is actually happening. What has actualy happened, has actually happened. What will actually happen, will actually happen. Which only a knave or a fool can dispute (many though there may be of both). And noone at all can refute.

What might have happened, what could have happened, what ought to have happened, what should have happened did not actually happen. That they could, or might, have done does not stand up to honest and open enquiry. That they should, or ought to, have done is even more prejudiced and dishonest.

What could have happened did not happen. What might have happened exists only as speculative, conceptual abstractions. An existence that is hypothetical rather than actual, subjective rather than objective. The actual, objective fact remains that only what did actually happen did actually happen.

The clarification of causality leads to the, initially perhaps painful, but eventually necessarily liberating, realisation that all actions are totally, irrevocably and inevitably conditioned. They were, still are, and always will be, conditioned by the total matrix of actions within which they take place. Nothing more: no external magical or divine agency is required. Nothing less: every single action within that matrix is required.

Any modification of the matrix requires a modification of the action: no matter how subtle. Any modification of the action requires a modification of the matrix: no matter how subtle. However, no modification is possible. Except in the purely speculative realms of abstract possibility or wishful thinking.

What this means is that no action, no thought, no idea, no choice, no decision, no feeling arises out of the blue. Even though so many of them seem to. This is simply a function of the limitations of our perceptual faculties. As we look closer and closer at external physical actions, and internal psychological events, the less arbitrary they turn out to be. If and when we look closely enough they turn out to be totally and inescapably conditioned.

A conditioning that takes place through the simple dynamic of causality. The stark law of cause and effect. Which is simply that each and every action is both cause and consequence of other actions. Each of which is also both cause and consequence of other actions. All of which sit precisely within a network of actions and objects to which no end, beginning, or any other limit, can ever be found.

The significance of the dynamic of causality for being human is huge. The unequivocal and thorough recognition of the conditioned nature of all actions and objects strikes deep into the fabric of our learned (conditioned) beliefs. Its most potent impact is on our assumptions about choice. In particular our assumptions about the relationship between choice and action.

So many of our actions obviously follow a process of deciding. We choose what to do by selecting between our apparent options. Actually all of our actions can be seen to take place in a similar way. Even our unconscious ones. But when we look more closely we see that the taking of a decision, the making of a choice is totally conditioned also. Choosing, deciding do not constitute a special category of action that is not subject to the dynamic of causality. The law of cause and effect applies as much to the mind as to the body.

Choosing, deciding are simply functions of our ignorance meeting our vulnerability. Not knowing what is coming, and not wanting it to be unpleasant, we do our best to ensure that it will not be. Sometimes of course it appears that we succeed. However this is only an appearance.

If an action happens it happens not as a result of a decision or a choice. It happens as a result of an immeasurable matrix of prior actions that may well include a fulfilled decision and a process of chooing. Nevertheless actions often happen, ones that we take ourselves, in total contradiction to decisions and choices that we made beforehand with regard to them. This happens all the time to everybody.

While choices and decisions do often participate in the unfolding of actions, they are not their cause. They are simply a tiny though obvious part of their causation. That they are taken to be their unique or main cause is simply a matter of proximity. The proximity of a decision, a choice to any action is taken to be an indication of its significance. However this is a function of ignorance.

We are not able to be aware of all the specifics of the causation of any action. Our awareness, and our knowledge, are always limited. Accordingly we associate actions with decisions, actions with choices in a causal realtionship that they do not have. There is a causal relation, but the causality of any action is so much bigger than any decision or choice. A decision, a choice can never be honestly given ownership of any action.

Besides which, of course, any choice or decIsion, like any other action is totally conditioned. It had to be made, it had to be taken, it had to happen. Its fruition or not, its results, whatever they were or will be, also had or have to happen. There is no escape from causality. And therein lies freedom. Freedom from guilt; freedom from blame; feedom from pride; feedom from resentment; freedom from shame: freedom from regret; freedom from anxiety, doubt, envy, malice, hostility and manipulation.

The huge bounty of this freedom rests on a single solitary fact: the illusory nature of volition. Volition is an illusion. Freewill is a concept based on assumption. Making choices, taking decisions voluntarily is an impression. An impression that leads to guilt, blame, pride, resentment, shame, regret, anxiety, doubt, envy, malice, hostility and manipulation. For all these feelings arise as a result of the assumption of deliberate intent on the part of the instrument of any action, the doer of the deed.

However close examination of the origin of actions, and the functioning of choice, dissolves these illusory impressions and assumptions. If all actions, perceptions, choices and decsions are totally conditioned they do not belong to any particular, partial aspect of that conditioning. They are caused by it all, they belong to it all, they are in effect done by it all.

Actions, then, do not belong to their instruments: they belong to the totality of the matrix. Actions are not, then, caused by their instruments: they are caused by the totality of the matrix. Actions are not, then, done by  their instrments: they are done by the totality of the matrix. “All actions are performed by the dynamic of the matrix” (Bhagavad Gita iii.27) “Actions do take place, deeds are done, events do happen: but there is no individual doer thereof” (Gotama the Buddha).

This does not mean that the instrument does not participate in the doing of the actions it can be clearly and indisputably seen to be taking. But it is a participation that does not have the significance which the conventional, prejudiced mind gives it. The issue here is one of intent, will, volition. We forgive, we are able to accept unintentional actions, no matter how unpalatable. We so easily do not forgive, do not accept actions that we consider to have been intentional.

And into that tendency pour guilt, blame, pride, resentment, shame, regret, anxiety, doubt, envy, malice, hostility and manipulation. A tendency that rests entirely on the deluded assuption of volition which is nothing other than an illusory impression. Will is always conditioned: it is never free. Intention is always conditioned: it is never autonomous. Volition is always conditioned: it is never voluntary. There is no such thing as free will, except as an impression. There is no such thing as personal intent, except as an illusion.

The ongoing pragmatic recognition of the illusory nature of volition takes place as an erosion of the power and sense of self. For volition is the foundation of the self. Intent is the justification of independence. Freewill is the proof of autonomy. As volition dissolves into the light of clear, unprejudiced awareness of the dynamic of causality, so too does autonomy, independence: the separate self.

All actions and objects turn out to be without autonomy: they are totally conditioned. They turn out to be without independence: they are totally dependent. They turn out to be totally without a self: if a self is taken to be an autonomous, independent, volitional entity. Which is of couse what a self is taken to be when it is human.

Then it turns out that all actions, perceptions, thoughts, decisions, choices and feelings are totally impersonal. They do not happen as a result of personal intent. They do not happen through independent agency. They do not happen as a result autonomus processes in their instrument. They happen because everything else that is happening is happening, because everything that has ever happened has happened, and even because everything that is going to happen is going to happen.

There is no one to whom any action, perception, thought, decision, choice or feeling can belong. There is no individual doer of any deed. They all belong to the impersonal and indivisible totality of which they are a fleeting, limited, but absolutely necessary and indispensable, expression. They belong always and only to totality To the eye that is open they point always and only to the dynamic of causality.

An open, honest and commited enquiry into the causal nature of action eventually and inevitably reveals the interconnected, interdependent, irreplacable, inextricable, imperfectable, inevitable and impersonal nature of all actions and objects. This insight depersonalises all actions which are no longer attributed to their objects or instruments but are seen to be simply the localised fruition of the total matrix of manifestation itself.

The matrix is nothing other than the body of God. Which is itself totally conditioned by the inexorable dynamic of causality: the will of God. It is only by the dynamic of causality, the will of God, that any action, decision, choice, perception takes place. Within this insight the sense of self dissolves into the surrender of selflessness

 

NOTE.

There are five facets to the true nature of any object or action: its functional, apparent nature; its operative, subtle nature; its relational, dynamic nature; its fundamental, potentiate nature; its inherent, essential nature.

In its apparent nature it functions as if separate from all other actions and objects. In its subtle nature it operates in connection to other objects and actions. In its dynamic nature it interconnects with all other actions and obejcts. In its potentiate nature it is fundamentally one with all other objects and actions. In its essential nature it is inherently empty of any defining attribute. Each of these aspects of the true nature of any phenomenon is a projected function of a specific perceptual perspective.

From the realm or realisation of separateness phenomena are perceived in their apparent form. From the realm or realisation of connectedness phenomena are perceived in their subtle form. From the realm or realisation of interconnectedness phenomena are perceived in their dynamic form. From the realm or realisation of nonseparateness phenomena are perceived in their potentiate form. From the realm or realisation of emptiness phenomena are perceived as formlessness.

What we actually are, then, is multifaceted. We each have our apparent, subtle, dynamic and potentiate natures. Our esential nature is emptiness. At our most subtle depths we are nothing other than the dynamic of causality. Which is quite simply consciousness expressing. Beyond the most subtle there is no existence, no identity, no awareness, no phenomenality. Nor is there not.

This paradox can never be satisfactorily explained by the dualities of word and concept. Nevertheless we exist, we live from and within its manifestation. This manifestation is consciousness in movement. It manifests to that which it is manifesting: pure consciousness. These two verbalised conceptual expressions exist only in the mind. What they refer to is inherently not two, nondual.

little rock arkansas, november 2004