Greg Goode's book "Standing as Awareness"

I've been reading Standing as Awareness the past few days. Greg Goode addresses questions that might come up for a reader or listener, where other non-duality teachers might just say "Don't over-analyze it" or "You're in your head". A person might indeed be in their head, over-analyzing things, but perhaps they're simply stuck at that place until their questions have been satisfactorily addressed.

On pages 13 through 15, there is a delightfully lucid exploration of how external physical objects can be regarded as awareness. He begins with an examination of vision, and points out that the raw data of vision is nothing more than colors and shapes and the boundaries between shapes. Any sense of distance, size, location, or material properties does not inhere in the visual experience, it is something that you've inferred. Outside of thought, there is no evidence for these additional properties, so if one is to be rigorous, they can be considered inessential to the present-moment experience of the object.

In terms of your experience in the moment, a coffee cup is indistinguishable from the shapes and colors you see. There is no vantage point from which you can see the cup as one thing, and the shapes and colors as another. They are identical in your experience. Likewise, these colors and shapes are indistinguishable from the act of seeing: there is no seeing apart from the shapes and colors seen. Finally, there is no awareness distinguishable from the objects of awareness. There's no vantage point from which you can see awareness over here, and colors and shapes over there. So all these things are identical, and so the coffee cup is a "piece" of awareness.

Within a couple of pages, Goode tackles the objection that will arise in the minds of many people looking at this chain of identity. How can the world's objects not exist physically, outside one's awareness? Is one to believe that objects cease to exist when one stops looking in their direction? Wouldn't we reasonably expect anybody making such a claim to get a clinical diagnosis and a prescription for psych meds? Goode grants that external existence of objects is a possibility but not one that can be irrefutably confirmed in your own direct experience. The apparent persistence of objects is a conclusion drawn from memory, and memory is notoriously fallible.

I once saw a discussion along similar lines between Rupert Spira and Chris Hebard. When I heard these ideas presented, they were so new and so at odds with my notion of an objective reality outside myself that I could barely follow along. I find that when my notion of reality is confronted at such a basic level, I may become sleepy or distracted. Goode's book gave me another angle of attack, with great lucidity and intelligence, and has made this stuff more accessible.

Goode goes on to talk about the recognition of a witnessing awareness once the identity of all things is seen as awareness. The witness arises, then just as suddenly evaporates into pure consciousness. That's what he says, anyway, but I have to admit that at this point I'm well out of my depth. Nevertheless, it's written with clarity and intelligence and accessible discussion of otherwise esoteric topics, and I recommend it. He has another book out, The Direct Path, and I look forward to reading that soon.