Q: What came to me was that in being there is no time in the way that we know it, and somehow that’s related to what you said about the illusion of certainty. I know, somewhere, that has to do with having a real relationship with time. Is it also to do with the illusion around what death is? It’s like when you said to me in the informal meeting that in any relating to a filter or a boundary, there’s time. Did you mean that's part of the whole illusion of what time is? And somehow, when we’re being here, there’s also no time. Can you say what you meant by the illusion of certainty?
John: Certainty makes much of your self. Relating to certainty comes from your self. As you relate to certainty, that relating eclipses knowing.
Q: Is that a certainty around any conclusion at all, related to any filter or any boundary?
John: Relating to certainty makes your self more than what you know. Certainty in any regard exists because of the reality that precedes certainty.
Q: That would be a make-up that’s been made in the self and conclusions made in the self?
John: Where something is made up, yes. But even where it’s not made up, it is illusory because it then eclipses what it is dependent on. You don’t need certainty for you to know.
Q: You only need response.
John: You don’t need certainty for you to be in what you know.
Q: It seems to me you don’t need certainty at all in this because it changes all the time, and certainty would be a block to responding, an element of control.
John: When the need for any certainty is gone, awareness is relaxed.
Q: And in any relating to filters and boundaries there’s time? So, if there’s no filters and boundaries, there’s no time, there’s just being?
John: When your being is in time, it doesn’t engage certainty. It isn’t dependent on it.
