The Map of Life. Conclusion: The Tao
October 12th, 2009 by Wayne (Wirs)
The former seeker–having negotiated the Lands of the Instinctual Body, of the Noisy Thoughts, of the Divine Soul, and the Serene Witness–can now travel freely. At once One and Separate, at once Whole and Empty, he is no longer anchored–no longer bound to any one land. At once Divine and Human, he is now free to wander wherever the Light and the Wind lead him.
There’s nothing special about him–anyone can cross the Bridge.
With determination and patience, any spiritual seeker can transverse the Void and find the absolute freedom of their True Nature.
See Also: Enlightenment, Oneness
Note: Though it's not necessary for leaving a comment, if you'd like to show your photo or other 'avatar' next to your comments, go to 
October 12th, 2009 at 8:42 pm
One silly question that always comes up: Do I have to be a spiritual seeker to find my True Nature? What is the definition of “spiritual seeker” anyway? How do I know when I am indeed crossing the Bridge? What are the telltale signs? The “Bridge” is not necessarily identical to every being. Regardless, interesting map for the wanderer!
October 13th, 2009 at 11:19 am
@Santosh: I’ll talk more on the Bridge in an future posting, but as for “do you have to be a spiritual seeker to find your True Nature?” The answer, as in Eckhart Tolle’s case, is “No.” But don’t hold your breath using the “I’m going to kill myself” technique.
By “spiritual seeker” I mean someone who is seeking inner peace (a component of enlightenment) via something that is “bigger” than themselves – prayer, meditation, magic, energy work, etc.
But can you find your True Nature/inner peace via just logical rationality? No you cannot. This is because rationality is just more thinking, and thinking just creates Hortons and Hortons block the “whisper” of You – much like a noisy party blocks the whisper of someone from across the room.
You need to actually experience it – live it. You need to re-train your way of seeing yourself – and that is what the Bridge is for.
Good question(s)! Thanks.
October 13th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
Thank you for good clarity in the response. May be I should have asked my question slightly differently, but I did not mean to suggest logical rationality (which is limited to mental knowledge – “I know what I know and I know what I do not know” paradigm which excludes the vast potential of accepting the fact that “I don’t really know what I don’t know”). Thus far the Hortons have been tangible signposts which have been useful in making me realize my attachment to things and thoughts (only while I am semi-awake). Anyway, keep writing, your work is of great service. Thank you.