We all want security or some kind of stability in life. If someone asks you — such as is done in this blog — to consider transcending beyond the image(s) of a central “I” or “me,” it is normal to have reservations about doing that. Since very early childhood, images of there being a central “I”, “me,” or “central controller,” have been poured into us and have been heavily reinforced. People have a psychological defense mechanism regarding protecting that supposed “center” that allegedly controls everything that each one does or decides upon. That defense mechanism is built around the need for stability and security. The “I” or “me” seems quite permanent and seems to be what one can always identify with (and depend upon).
For centuries, many of us have each existed in a country that we identified with and looked to for security. “Our country” will keep us safe; “our country” is better and has the right systems and traditions. “Our country” is protecting us… providing the necessary security for us. However, these countries, worldwide, have not really given us security to any very significant, long-lasting degree. The world remains full of conflict. Crazy leaders, who are power-hungry and who have child-like minds, still (in this so-called modern age) pull people into deadly wars. Separative countries, for eons, have contributed to conflict and wars between humans. We are so programmed into following leaders (who promise security) yet who merely maintain the separative division that puts man against man. Countries are essentially, by the way, manmade. There really isn’t such a thing as Scotland; it is what man concocted.
Organized religions, too, are what man concocted. Just like with countries, they have plenty of leaders who (like deceptive politicians) offer you security (especially in the after-life or in their “here and now” that is promised). Like the image of a central “I,” one’s religion is what one can identify with and depend upon. Like with countries, organized religions have caused much friction between human beings. There have been many wars in the name of religion. This still goes on.
These things that promise security may, with closer more vigilant observation, not provide much real security at all. The world is not a safer place to exist in currently (with these manmade systems full of rigid practices and formulations that separate one group of humans from another). Ignorance constructs walls and barriers to separate people and this inevitably causes conflict. It may be, in reality, a small world… a global world.
Many may easily think that going beyond the concept or idea of a central “I” will somehow negate our security. We are afraid of giving up what we think is so fundamental, so very permanent and lasting. That “I,” however, creates psychological walls (and a bounded circumference) that can (and easily do) cause conflict in the world (and internally). It may be that real security and real relationship with eternity can take place, however, without the illusory (limited) circumference and psychological wall that the image of “I” or “me” manifests as. The reaction of “I” or “me” is a new projection or reflex of thinking each time it takes place, yet we take it to be the same-old, reliable (egocentric) essence of what we are. Like a cigarette lighter flame repetitiously brought into existence, the flame is new and a bit different each time it burns; however, we tend to identify with it as being always the same, permanent thing… which it isn’t. The “I” causes walls of indifference, walls of callousness. Intelligence and a real sense of bliss and eternity can live quite nicely (thank you) without dependence upon the “I,” “me,” or a spurious center… (except during times of superficial conversation where it is still commonly used).
Beyond its limited circumference exists what is beyond borders and concocted walls. Real love transcends the “I,” transcends walls and borders that divide and cause conflict.
Thank you! 🙂
The leaf on a spider web is cool. It looks like it’s playing the harp.
Yes, W.R., it was a unique find! Thank you much! 🙂
Good points! Really enjoyed reading.
Thanks, over there (and here too)! 🙂
Profound words. When “I” stand within a limited circumference, the conception of security motivates “me” to deference. There isn’t much choice when we think we are alone.
🙂 The “I” maintains and “is” the circumference… and the circumference is a product of thought that we were taught. Question whether that is from an education based on fact or, instead, based on abstraction.
Powerful words, as always! 💚
Means a lot; thank you, Roda! 🙂
Seems to me to be a rise in narcissism worldwide. Scary times…
Well analyzed, Tom. Your photo speaks that…
Thanks much, Amy! 🙂