A group of young students saw the sagacious Lo Zu sitting upon a big boulder with a contented look on his face, a face that seemed to radiate much wisdom and clear perception. The students approached Lo Zu and asked him why he never entered the temples.
Lo Zu replied, “I do not enter the temples because they are primitive, manmade fabrications that have nothing to do with the truly sacred. Besides, that vast, timeless sacredness does not have an ego that wants to be worshipped by men or other strange creatures. What is trapped in time and limitation cannot adequately communicate with the timeless and the unlimited. He or she who has a limited ego cannot be communion with that which is beyond boundaries and confinement. True intelligence goes beyond fabrications and limitations. Go to the temples if you wish… but that ineffable sacredness isn’t there (in a limited space).”
There are different levels of love. Superficial love is constituted of motivations for the limited self. That limited self is what was learned (from miseducation) and it is primarily unreal, unintelligent, and fictitious.
There is a profound love that exists beyond the illusory framework of the self. It is a vast intelligence that breaks through the limitations of boundaries and fragmentary, learned perceptions (including the distance that is, in actuality, inherited ignorance). Selfless love is of bright truth, not of shady falsity and erroneousness.
Beyond the shadows of “thought/thinking” exists a sweet openness wherein what most people would call “the sacred” can come pouring through for a visit (if you are very lucky). Thought/thinking is incapable of describing or inviting that eternal sacredness. That immensity is too ineffable, too extraordinarily and profoundly beyond what limited, fragmentary words are capable of. Words — all words — are only about energy; they are never the actual eternal energy. Yet we human beings exist in (and “as”) transitory words… and what we see is dictated by a screen of potty-little words and learned mental accumulations. Words are intrinsically like empty shadows. Words are concocted, representative symbols that are essentially empty and void of real life. (Words are often necessary but many times words need not exist.) Merely existing in (and “as”) words is a kind of death… a mental death/decay situation that isn’t good. Most people, unfortunately, are stuck in that little, psychological hole (habitually) and are extremely uncomfortable about going beyond it.
Note: (Below is a short excerpt from one of my earlier blogs about Socrates’ Cave. It may shed some light on our current dark situation… if you are perceptive.)
In Socrates’ parable of the Cave — within Plato’s Republic — people were born in a cave, and they were fettered with chains… and forced to merely see and learn the details about shadows cast on the cave walls from puppets and a fire that they didn’t see behind them. One of them was taken — at one point, by force — first to see the fire… and then out of the cave into the true light of day… into a more genuine reality; then he came back down into the cave with the others. When he — the man who returned back — pleaded with them to look beyond the shadows, they called him a fool and continued giving prizes to those who could best guess which shadows came before or after.
Pretty much everybody is conditioned in myriads of different ways. It’s a big factor in why there is so much conflict in the world. Humans have different beliefs and ideas about how things should be done, and about what is best to do. All of our beliefs and ideas involve — and are the result of — time. These beliefs and ideas often result in conflict and friction. To go beyond this conflict without another method (in and “as” time) may involve negation and silence. Such silence is a wonderful negation (mentally) that does not involve time or methodology.
Most people, unfortunately, are conditioned to remain in time exclusively (in the mental sense). They habitually go from one set of symbolic sequences to another (unceasingly). It’s how they were educated (or miseducated) to be.
Great beauty and awareness exist beyond repetitive, sequential, mundane, symbolic mental patterns but most people are too afraid and conditioned to go beyond what they were programmed to be. And being afraid in such a way is just another extension of the stifling, dead conditioning.
A very intelligent mind often questions in dynamic ways that shatter old, traditional acceptances and assumptions. Albert Einstein, for example, often questioned standard assumptions, and his ground-breaking theories were proven correct by subsequent testing. Einstein once said, “It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education.”
Organized religions and society (in general) do not want us to doubt much and question much. They want us to fall in line and follow unwaveringly. And most of us carry loads of deep-rooted conditioning, much of which we would never think of questioning. For instance, our very perception of the world around us (and of ourselves) is largely based on fragmentation, separation, delimitation, and learned distance and time. Most of this is fallacious and delusory, not holistic and of deep insight. When most of us cling to fallacious suppositions and presumptions then disorder is what ensues. And look at what is going on worldwide. (For one thing, if more people questioned wisely, the grocery stores wouldn’t be full of sugar-oriented products and adulterated foods that are shelf-stable but very unhealthy; and we wouldn’t dare dump sugar and crap into our automobile gas tanks.)
If one is fortunate enough to have a good, healthy brain, one can — perhaps — question wisely. Then going beyond crippling conditioning is a tremendous joy, adventure, and blessing beyond words, beyond limitation, beyond mediocrity, beyond time.
From E.E. Cummings: “Always the beautiful answer who asks a more beautiful question.”
There is here We are them “I” is not When is where Past is future Future is past We are water Up is down Uncurled is curled Tears are joy Hate is mindless Poem is reading Awake not dreaming See not knowing Pour was spill Clean was dirty Little is big Born was dead Left to right Wings are resting Desert was thirsty Jungle was noise War is sorrow Flowers are calling She is he Silence is golden Once is always Time is ticking
The thinking process is largely based on (and dependent upon) measurement. Without measuring, consciously or unconsciously, thinking (for the most part) would not exist. We have concepts about time — like the past, present, and future — and these aspects of thinking are learned measurements, (and may not necessarily reflect true reality). We have mental labels for certain animals and plants, and these mental labels are largely based on measurements and measure-oriented attributes about the animals and plants. Sometimes measurement is necessary but all too often we engage in it in excess (which results in comparison, greed, jealousy, conflict, frustration, judgment, and discrimination).
Real bliss in life, however, occurs beyond mere measuring and labeling. Measuring and labeling are always partial, limited, and fragmented. A brain that mostly just measures and labels is likely a rather robotic brain that is not of a blissful whole.
The following is one of the many koan-like sayings that occur within the Gospel of Thomas. Some top biblical scholars say that this gospel — which was banned by the so-called high priests who were controlled by the Roman Empire — was closer to the historical Christ and is more pristine than the other politically endorsed gospels. One is not necessarily positing that the following saying means anything specific, but it does pertain to going beyond measurement. (Assessing weight is measurement.)
Jesus said, “The father’s kingdom is like a woman who was carrying a jar full of meal. While she was walking along a distant road, the handle of the jar broke and the meal spilled behind her along the road. She did not know it. She noticed no problem. When she reached her house she put the jar down and found it empty.”
The dictionary describes sorrow as ‘the mental suffering caused by loss, disappointment, etc.; sadness, grief, or regret.’ Sorrow is a common phenomenon for human beings and some other animals as well. We suffer mentally, even when some of us are not directly aware of that suffering. A mind of fragmentary mechanical reactions, separation, and secondary symbolic thinking is often what sorrow is. The thinking process itself, though sometimes very necessary, is — whether we admit it or not — a vast (though limited) field of sorrow because it is what is symbolic, fragmentary, and residual (i.e., resulting from something that was previously present). Thinking (per se), being residually shadowlike, is not true bliss.
We often try to avoid sorrow by engaging in escapes… such as entertainment, traveling, reading, engaging in activities, and all kinds of things. But the psychological suffering is usually always there, waiting, confronting again and again around the corner. Escapes are essentially temporary. A very prudent action, in regard to this, is not what just involves another reaction, is not what involves just another standard escape. Reaction is mechanical (bound by thought/thinking) and may be part of the problem. Real action — that is not just another reaction — is holistic and direct. Perceiving suffering directly and holistically may entail seeing it beyond fragmentary, separative distance. Then the psychological suffering isn’t “there” at a distance for you to contend with… rather, you are that suffering; consciousness is not then separate from what suffering is. You used to do things about it to escape from it or evade it. But now — if wisdom is there — intelligence may see that one is what it is (not that it is separate from what one is); when one fully perceives that one is it, reacting to it does not manifest as it did before in the standard old ways. Wisdom is the flame that dissipates suffering and disorder. No separate reaction on your part is necessary. (Such wisdom will naturally help so-called others.)
The dictionary defines “Sensibility” as ‘the capacity to feel.’ We can — if we are aware — observe that our society is largely bereft of “feeling,” these days. More and more people are concerned about money and power… not about others, not about curtailing suffering. Of course, there are some people who care, but society (as a whole) is generally headed in a disorderly direction. In regular public schools, they mostly focus on teaching you the 3 Rs. They do not, unfortunately, encourage students to probe deeply into such things as awareness, compassion, deep perception, self-understanding, mindfulness, wholeness, and transcending limitation. Public schools generally do not want students who would question society’s superficial values and norms. Public schools are generally designed to crank out followers and “robotic sameness.” This is why i’ve consistently donated to decent alternative schools such as the Brockwood Park School.
If you are (or were) educated in a run-of-the-mill public school, you will have to re-educate yourself. You will have to step out of the box. But you can’t easily step out of the box if your conditioning and brain are the box. Profound compassion requires going beyond superficial mental distance and numbing perceived space. Profound compassion is a real art (in a world full of sameness and secondhand imitation).
The space between the perceiver and that which is perceived… what is it? Have you ever wondered about that fundamental question?
That intervening space, that interstice, may primarily result from thought/thinking. Thought/thinking formulates an image (or an assembly of images) about a central observer (i.e., what thought thinks the “self” is). (This has been going on for eons, over the centuries.) Then thought/thinking assembles images or labels concerning what is perceived at a distance. This may seem silly — though it is essentially true — but what occurs is that one set of images or mental patterns about an observer sees what is considered “itself” looking at something (that apparently exists externally) as the observed (that usually manifests mentally via labels and categorizations of thought). So these two sets of constructs, made up of thought/thinking, are what takes place. So, unfortunately, the relationship is primarily between two sets of images (that thought developed)… which is no real relationship at all.
Real relationship goes beyond this habitual mental orchestration (constituted of mere reactions). Then separation and secondhand labeling come to an end. Then the perceiver and that which is perceived are not parts of some fabricated duality. Deep compassion occurs when the perceiver and the perceived are one (beyond the distortion of thought/thinking). Then mentally fabricated space and separation end.
“The true value of a human being is determined primarily by the measure and the sense in which he has attained liberation from the self”. — Albert Einstein
We human beings — most of us anyway — tend to habitually look at everything through mental screens of conditioning that involve boundaries and borders. Most of us habitually delimit what is observed into fragments and snippets involving identification and learned recognition via what was absorbed in the past. Then we often further delineate things via words and labels. Words are symbolic and secondhand; they — for the most part — are not the actuality of what is observed. The word dog isn’t the dog. Words for many people are often seen as realities and although being primarily symbolic, they are not seen as representations but, rather, as what can take the place of reality just fine. Many people get lost in a world of symbolism, often letting the symbols seem to be realities.
It is good to use symbols when needed but it is also good (and very prudent) to go beyond them (and see their limitation). Then, if one is lucky, the whole is there (without the superficial symbolism). And a lot of people will think that they see the whole (although they do not). Self-deception is very easy, especially when that self is, itself, something that seems to recognize a wholeness from a distance. Chicanery is easy when the perceiver and the perceived appear to be separate and when recognition seems to occur from an internal center. Thought/thinking fabricates the internal center and such a supposed center is then given credit for having great perception, or it is praised for being right, or it is given blame for making mistakes, or it is lauded for exercising freedom of choice.
Most minds resist investigating this kind of thing; most minds are heavily conditioned to support the illusion at any cost. And it’s a tragedy really, because the real magic and the profound beauty only occur if one has the passion and the guts to fully delve into it.
I write to encourage others to go beyond conditioning, blind acceptances, and stagnation. Most of us were deeply conditioned in early childhood — and beyond — to absorb and follow what elders spoon-fed to us; they (i.e., the elders), without question, were deeply conditioned themselves throughout their early (and later) lives. We accept so many myriads of things and most of us blindly adhere to these things without question. Most of us are unaware of the extreme degree of our conditioning.
Conditioning is largely illusory in its essence; a conditioned mind is often a rather disorderly mind (though, to itself, it appears to be very orderly and “normal”). A conditioned mind primarily goes on in the same, old patterns while not questioning their value, essence, or impact. Society is a reflection of this conditioning and society is full of illusion, disorder, conflict, separation, friction, and turmoil. Many of us try to escape from such situations via entertainment, amusements, sports, incessant music, vacations, dreams, and various activities. However, the problem is not solved until we question intelligently and understand our own minds deeply. But going beyond being secondhand is very uncomfortable to a lot of people and so fundamental change does not take place.
The dictionary defines time as: ‘The measured or measurable period during which an action, process, or condition exists or continues.’
Since Einstein, many scientists have been referring to “spacetime,” wherein space and time are united and not separate.
When we look at time or spacetime in the ordinary way, we — as we were taught — look via the known… via limited measurement and inherited pattern-making. Such time (or spacetime) is circumscribed and very limited. We look via the known and usually see things in a circumscribed, bounded, finite, fixed, and confined way. Such looking is fragmentary, partial, and quite constrained. Very few of us look beyond the known, beyond the second-hand, beyond the restricted templates and limited symbolic arrangements. A beautiful psychological transformation or metamorphosis can enable us to exist beyond such bounded, limited perspectives. However, time is not a factor in getting there; that would be absurd. There is no path to the pathless.
We are predisposed to incessantly label and categorize everything. This was hammered into us at school and most of us have largely become products of that miseducation (or very limited education). We habitually look through a screen of patterns and labels that was handed down to us (by our primitive society). We see what we were taught to see. We usually recognize merely according to what we were programmed to recognize. What we see is usually very limited, second-hand, fragmentary, and banal. Then many of us end up depressed, ordinary, and — to a large extent — mediocre.
Please question what you were taught and (often) go beyond it. Please look without all of the crap that was spoon-fed to you. Please often look at things holistically, without all of the divisions, distinctions, separations, run-of-the-mill labels, and distance. Question what was poured into you. Go out, appreciate what you see, and breathe and live as if for the first time.
There is the silence of a still evening as the sun is setting when none of the beautiful trees have leaves moving or fluttering about. There is the limited silence between notes being played by a wonderful musical instrument. There is the echoless silence in a large theater when no one is there. There is the murmurless silence of a dragonfly peacefully resting.
Silence of the mind can be a most beautiful, spiritual, divine, and wise thing. True spiritual silence is not an act of will. Will is a projection of desire and will is never truly free, though many of us insist that it is. True spiritual silence that comes about naturally, spontaneously, without any cognitive/mental effort, can be a miraculous thing. It occurs when the mind is aware but is not merely accumulating or striving. Control has nothing to do with it, for control is in the pattern of the opposites and is manipulation toward an end; it is merely part of the cause/effect continuum. True spiritual silence is beyond ends to attain; it is beyond cause and effect patterns and sequences. Such silence is an explosion beyond the known… beyond the cunning and ludicrous patterns of man.
Creation seems to be a concept that our primitive, sequential, time-oriented brains lock onto. The universe can have its own intrinsic, organic intelligence (which may reflect — but not be created by — a higher order to some extent). However, that higher order exists beyond conflict and separation. Love is beyond conflict and separation; it is a wholeness.
Regarding those who are pompously dogmatic, who pontificate, telling you exactly what to do according to rigid creeds or beliefs that they expect you to adhere to… may i suggest running away from them (and wisely discovering and examining things for yourself beyond set patterns). And many say they’ve “gone beyond society’s crude patterns” while, all the while, they continue to carry them around mentally (tricking themselves that they’ve gone beyond). It’s so easy to deceive oneself and to wallow in (and “as”) that deception; it’s so easy to live a mechanical, robotic-automaton life, falling into programmed, spoon-fed habits and perspectives sadly beyond the natural, holistic, unfettered (living) beauty.
A few students walked past the elderly Lo Zu as he was sitting quietly in nature. As they were passing, they briefly paused near the wise and highly respected Lo Zu and he briefly stated this: “Beyond all of the so-called religious mumbo-jumbo, just sit still and perish to what you’ve been told. Do not try to ‘make’ the mind silent; just be passionate about the intrinsic beauty of true silence and then perhaps true silence will naturally manifest. You cannot make the un-makable.”
Four young people saw the elderly, willowy Lo Zu walking (as he often did with his trusty meandering cane). They asked him where he was going. Lo Zu replied, “I am going nowhere and I am coming from nowhere. A truly silent mind is of no place, so it is nowhere; being of nowhere it may, thus, be everywhere.” The sagacious Lo Zu — who had immense compassion for all living things — kept on walking, leaving the young students pondering. And though he left them, he was always with them.
We — most of us — live in (and “as”) the linear past, moving into what we think is the future. However, this future is, for the most part, a projection or fabrication from the past, and when unusual things later pop up we arrange them to fit into our storage of narrow past recognitions. (These recognitions constitute what we “are.”) We can fool ourselves into thinking that we often live in the present — in some kind of here and now — but usually it is the clockwork past deluding itself. Self-understanding and critical self-awareness may go beyond the limitations of all this. Such understanding and awareness are not merely the result of some learned processes or taught techniques.
When one was in grade school at, of course, a very young age, one was in one’s upstairs bedroom. Suddenly, one was in an extremely perceptive state in which thought/thinking was not in occurrence. One realized, without internal words or symbols, that it was a very “special” mental state (much different from regular, mundane consciousness involving thought/thinking). Somehow it was instantaneous in nature, not involving time and the sequence that words and time are involved in. From then on, one would occasionally go into that dimension (or “special” mode).
Back then, one did not label it as anything. “Meditation” was not a word that i was familiar with; “meditation” was not discussed or mentioned in my culture or educational background at the time (way back then). Only later, in one’s college days, did i discover more about the term “meditation.” Interestingly, one found that a lot of what some gurus from the East were presenting as “meditation” was really a form of self-hypnosis (involving mere concentration, effort, resistance, and time). Thought/thinking, being a sequential mental process, involves (and actually is) time. Profound perception is beyond time; it is a beautiful timelessness that thought cannot “make happen.”
Here is an excerpt from Leaves of Grass by Walt Whitman…
How beautiful and perfect are the animals!
How perfect the earth, and the minutest thing upon it!
What is called good is perfect, and what is called bad is just
The vegetables and minerals are all perfect, and the imponderable
fluids are perfect;
Slowly and surely they have pass'd on to this, and slowly and surely
they yet pass on.
I swear I think now that everything without exception has an
The trees have, rooted in the ground! the weeds of the sea have!
I swear I think there is nothing but immortality!
That the exquisite scheme is for it, and the nebulous float is
for it, and the cohering is for it;
And all preparation is for it! and identity is for it! and life
and materials are altogether for it!
The dictionary defines Nirvana as: ‘(in Buddhism) perfect bliss attained by the extinction of individuality.’
And the following — which may reflect the above definition — may be one pristine part of the bible that managed to get through without being adulterated much over time by those with mythological propensities:
35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ 37 Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? 38 And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? 39 And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ 40 And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers,[a] you did it to me.’
Lo Zu was sitting peacefully, adjacent to a beautiful, small creek with splendid, lush vegetation growing all around it. A towering, majestic mountain stood in the distance. Four inquisitive, very young students came by, and one of them said to Lo Zu, “Tell us something of wisdom; please tell us something that will amaze us.”
Lo Zu turned to them, smiling, and said, “Well, my friends, that’s a very tall order!” The youths all affectionately smiled at the aged Lo Zu and agreed. Lo Zu gazed at them and said (half to himself), “Let’s see… what can one say (or do) that would sufficiently satisfy such a tall order?” Then Lo Zu said, “How about if i get that mountain to move? Would that be sufficient?” “Oh, yes it would, indeed,” said one of the young students, “but it can’t be done.”
“Maybe you shouldn’t be so sure,” Lo Zu stated, grinning. Lo Zu continued on, “You see, in the mind, psychologically, it is such that the perceiver is (in a big way) the perceived. If the mind feels anger, it is the anger; if the mind feels joy, it is the joy; if the mind sees a tree (the patterns and the colors of that tree become what the mind is); if the moon is perceived, it’s image becomes what the mind is (psychologically). So the perceiver is (psychologically) the perceived. The two are as one.
“Yes,” the students said. Lo Zu went on, “So if one of you students looks at the mountain, and i move you… then in a big way, the mountain will move.” “Very interesting,” the students proclaimed.
Then Lo Zu said, “”There is a great book, stemming from a great and very wise man, that was written in a foreign land a short while back. It was a cornerstone book that was rejected by the authoritarian (so-called spiritual) bureaucrats in that land (who wanted to manipulate people and did not want them to be independent); they arranged for all of those who cherished that book to be executed. The book was called ‘The Gospel of Thomas.’ Here is one of the sayings from within that book: “When you make the two into one, you will become children of humanity, and when you say, ‘Mountain, move from here,’ it will move.””
Integrity is very significant in life. A mind that is merely a sponge, just robotically spewing out what it absorbed, is likely not of integrity. A mind without integrity and order is limited and fragmentary. Integrity means wholeness, soundness. Integrity is of an unadulterated innocence. A mind full of limitations is of conflict and is bound to do divisive and chaotic things. Wholeness exists beyond the limitations. Many of us, when we were younger, accepted behavioral patterns — which society spoon-fed to us — based on competition and conflict. Most of us have accepted such behavioral patterns — largely based on fragmentation and conflict — and have gone on in existence, adhering to these patterns of limitation and conflict. True bliss, however, is not of limitation and fragmentation; true bliss exists with (and “as”) wholeness, integrity. But so many of us have merely accepted what was poured into us when we were young… and we have gone on in the old ways; we have gone on in the antiquated traditions.
Limitation, being based on conflict and tending to produce conflict, inevitably contributes to the divisive and chaotic attributes of society. Limitations — based on conflict — are restrictions, and they snag the mind and keep the mind within (and “as”) constrained and blocked realms. Blocked mental realms often manifest as disorder and conflict. Disorder and conflict do not generally reflect wholeness and integrity.
Interestingly, our very concepts of time are based on fragmentations and limitations. We accepted these time-oriented fragmentations and limitations from society; we fully accepted them as being totally legitimate. However, it may be that we have largely accepted what is fundamentally erroneous and distorted. Our limited conceptualizations of spacetime may be largely fragmentary and perverted; we see what we were programmed to see. Our time conceptualizations may be somewhat relevant physically — in getting actual physical things done — but in the psychological realm, they may be rather absurd, limited, and illusory. One says, “I will try to be less envious of others tomorrow,” but then (at that moment) one creates a space between what one considers to be “oneself” and “others”; one additionally fabricates a “tomorrow” that is separated from “now” by psychological time (which also is of a concocted space). This concocted space is of conflict, which was a distorting factor (initially) in the situation. To live in limitation, conflict, and distortion may not be order, may not be bliss. Deep joy and order may come when distortion ends, when limitation is not just overwhelming.
his looking, day after day year after year,
Was through the mental screens and motifs that They provided
Hence, it wasn’t his “looking” whatsoever; it was Their “looking”
And it wasn’t “seeing” whatsoever; it was the death-like absence of really seeing
Awareness, in terms of mindfulness and meditation, is not a calculated escape into some kind of fabricated domain beyond what is all around you. The world is largely a big mess right now, chiefly because of man and the disorder that man propagates. The world of nature basically has a beautiful intrinsic order. Awareness perceives this order and also perceives the disorder (primarily involving man). Again, awareness is not some kind of escape into some kind of domain (fabricated by the mind to, supposedly, exist in a utopian, blissful state). Awareness is not sitting with one’s legs in a lotus position, thinking that one is achieving something extraordinary. That is usually a form of self-hypnosis, and there is nothing extraordinary about that.
Deep awareness remains with (and “as”) what is, but that “what is” is not merely the result of what one was molded and trained to see. Merely looking at things through a mental screen of words (which are mere symbols) and isolated images — in a separative, pigeonholing, divisive kind of way — is just a continuation of mindless, limited conditioning and, therefore, is not deep awareness. Deep awareness shatters through stale acceptances, worn-out systems of looking at things, dead traditions, and preconceived iron-clad concepts, and bursts beyond these mere reactions. Deep awareness is not mere reaction, it is action. Deep awareness acts and ends disorder. Again, deep awareness is action, not mere reaction. Deep awareness exists beyond effort; effort is always for a limited goal — in time — and is of reaction. Reaction is mechanical, robotic, rather dead, unalive, ordinary, and it comfortably fits into the current rotten society just fine.
Leafhoppers are not often seen because they are savvy enough to perceive a person approaching them and they subsequently quickly move to a portion of the plant, that they are upon, that is not visible to the oncoming individual. They are very visually and vibrationally perceptive, which is a limited type of awareness.
And while he observed the diminutive insect gazing out from the base of the leaf, there was no immediate labeling, there was no separation between the leaf and his consciousness, there was no separation between the insect and what he was. (They taught him that he was separate, but he didn’t listen.)
The dictionary describes “oblivious” as ‘not aware or concerned about what is happening.’ Many are neither concerned about the environment, about stopping the current virus from spreading, nor about curtailing the injustice and discrimination going on in the world. Looking with the mechanistic brainwashing that was likely poured into you in your youth, is not awareness. True awareness transcends the mediocre, conditioned, superficial platform that society tends to educate its children with. Words are symbolic patterns, virtual reactions, and to merely look at the world through (and “as”) symbolic patterns and conditioned reactions is not real looking and is not real awareness.
The dictionary describes “narrow-minded” as ‘rigid or restricted in one’s views; intolerant.’ Many humans have rigidly clung to the restricted and limited educational patterns that were poured into them. They go through life, looking at things in pre-molded, pre-planned ways — set up by organized bureaucracy — which isn’t really “looking” at all. No wonder then, that there is much indifference and callousness taking place in (and “as”) their minds. Of course, there are a good number of people out there that have noble arrangements or professions that really help people (and animals) but the world needs far more of such people. Indifference, rigidness, and unconcern are far too rampant.
There is no rule or method to follow that enables one to truly go beyond mental superficiality and rigid methodologies. One must do it with the heart in a way that goes beyond the mere symbolic patterns of words, learned patterns of separation, and self-concepts. The true living heart has no boundaries and does not cling to man-made limitations.
If you happen to have a physical handicap, ailment, or disorder, one does not think that it would be prudent to take it out on, or blame, some “higher power.” There is a sacredness that exists, but one does not feel that it interferes much with the natural, organic occurrence of things. If it did, there would be no end to the multitude of illnesses and physical problems that needed fixing and if it fixed everything, for example, we would be living in a cartoon-like, plastic-plant-like world where things were disgustingly artificial.
My wonderful wife, before she passed, had all kinds of physical problems (and handicaps). I, more than once, advised her not to take it out on that higher order and vast intelligence. By the way, things happened in the past, such as adult neighbors getting in front of my wife with their car as she was walking down our rural road for exercise, and laughingly mocking the way she walked, stopping their car in front of her to block her walking. This kind of thing is unbelievable, especially from adults. (By the way — and this is not mere politics — i was not at all appreciative of the way Trump, in the past, openly mocked and disparagingly imitated that poor man who was handicapped.) There are some people out there with no hearts. It is very sad.
I was a teacher for students with multiple handicaps, and i occasionally would talk to them about their situation. Some were as intelligent as you or i but, for example, were quadreplegic, not being able to move their arms or legs with coordination and not being able to feed themselves. Yet we got them to laugh often and feel good about themselves. Let me tell you, when anyone of us humans (including animals) suffers… the whole world suffers in a way and (in a way) shares in that suffering. We can help each other and all do better; all of us are like the fingers of one hand, and although the fingers seem separate, in reality they are not separate.
If you happen to have handicaps, keep your head held high; do not feel inferior; please do not blame that sacredness. Let’s face it, in a big way all of us humans have some kind of handicap(s). (Many of my students, while being severely handicapped, smiled more often and were kinder and far more caring than a lot of the ordinary, so-called normal businessmen that i met in the outside world.)
If you don’t understand what living is, deeply and passionately, then you will not understand about physical death. A man (or woman) who often is psychologically dying to the dead past, to corrupt (limited) conditioning, to illusory limititations, and to robotic traditions and habits… is someone who is deeply living.
By the way, regarding physical death, it’s not what you have been told. It’s not any of the crap that people have dished out to you. It’s not that your special human soul floats away to a bliss with an anthropomorphic god or gods. It is not that when you are dead, you are dead (and that that’s it); it is not that you are reincarnated to some kind of better life; it is not that you go to some kind of heaven or hell; it is not that you float around like a ghost or specter, looking down upon everyone else. It is not what you have been told (by others). So what happens? One must find out. Intelligence must find out. I certainly am not going to tell you. It’s for deep perception to find out (and discover); it’s not for being told (for people to merely robotically believe or not believe). Again… it’s not for being told.
Attachment is very prevalent in most peoples’ lives. Most people are heavily attached, psychologically, to a large number of things. Attachment can give one a sense of security, safety, stability, and self-identification. People are, for example, attached to their religion, their country, their political propensities, their spouse, their house, property, and possessions. People are attached to their beliefs, their traditions, their opinions, and their prejudices. People can be attached to practicing some robotic, absurd method of meditation or mindfulness that they engage in often and that they think is just phenomenal. People are often attached to their conceptions of others and of certain groups; many are attached to the habit of endlessly pursuing pleasure; many are attached to seeing everything with (and “as”) preconceived labels and words. People, over the ages, have been attached to their anthropomorphic mental obtrusions of God and of divine beings. Many people are attached to existing in (and “as”) a competitive way of life, competing against others habitually (without question). Many are attached to football games and other sporting events (that glorify competition and survival of the fittest). Most people are heavily attached to their own images of self, that self (having a name) and being of a supposed real center.
This is all well and good… but, really, it may not be so very well and good. True freedom and profound wisdom exist beyond myriads of accepted attachments (however safe they may erroneously make one feel). Being bound by attachments causes the mind to be bound within limitations. A limited brain is not, under any circumstance, likely to be visited by the unlimited. (You can’t put the ocean in a goldfish bowl.) Little wonder, then, why so few people are ever visited by that sacrosanct eternity. Beliefs, that so very many people are deeply attached to, tend to divide the world causing much friction, fragmentation, turmoil, and even wars (which people die in, with all of the concomitant suffering). Most of us ardently cling to our attachments, because without them we are essentially nothing psychologically (and we are so very afraid of being nothing).
Innumerable many of us, without question, accept our limitations, accept our attachments, and accept our fragmentary lifestyle (which isn’t really living whatsoever). Improper education in the past, really, had a lot to do with it. We were taught to accept words (as symbols) as basically equivalent to the real thing; we exist as words and we worship these words. The world’s climate is changing rapidly like wildfire (due to human negligence and indifference). Most of us (because of habits and attachments) continue to live in (and “as”) the same patterns that have caused the problems in the first place. We must wake up and fundamentally change.
Listening is very important in life. How you listen matters tremendously. Most people listen with — and through — the background of their conditioning (that stems from past accumulation). With that accumulation, they listen… which really isn’t listening at all. They then walk around mistakingly thinking that they are “free” and “open.”
True wisdom may be beyond the mere accumulation of patterns (from the past). It may involve deep insight beyond what you merely have been told and accumulated. Insight is timeless; what is timeless is not of mere piecemeal accumulation (which is in time). Piecemeal accumulation is time.
A group of students came walking by and they observed the aged Lo Zu to be peering deep into a large, flourishing bush. The students remarked to themselves that Lo Zu would often be seen closely examining things of nature… nature’s treasures. “What are you observing,” the students fondly asked of Lo Zu. “Life on its journey,” replied Lo Zu. One of the students remarked, “Well, I’ve heard that one before from you. Do you mean deep within that bush is life on its journey?” Lo Zu responded, “I am observing you traveling students; it is yourselves who are life on its journey. And since one is not truly mentally separate from what one observes, this old entity, too, in seeing you, is life on its journey.”
“Interesting remarks,” the students replied. Lo Zu invited, “Take a look at the little eggs within the nest deep inside of that bush. Tell me if you see an egg that looks apart from the rest. Please tell me what you see.” The students eagerly peered into the bush. They excitedly exclaimed, “Yes, Lo Zu, one of the eggs seems to be apart from the rest. It seems different and separate from all of the others.”
Lo Zu replied, “The one is different, but is it really separate?” One of the students answered, “Well, it is different, but it is not really separate from the others; it fits in and is together with them.” “Exactly,” said Lo Zu, “It is different, such that you can distinguish it from the rest, yet it is together with the others, contacting them, and is not separate from them. When you look at things, they seem to be different from what you are — and they are different — yet what you look at, (in other words) what you observe, constitutes part of your consciousness and, therefore, is not really separate from what you are.”
“Profound observation,” the students remarked. Lo Zu then interjected, “Listen to this carefully. Whoever thinks that he (or she) is separate from what he (or she) is, inevitably falls into a lot of needless conflict and friction. Such people go through life fragmented, mentally crippled, and broken up into needless pieces. Beware of accepting separation as the norm (such as is what is taught and endorsed by all of the fighting and competing others). Please look deeper and see without all of the separation. There is great beauty and joy in that.”
The students thanked Lo Zu and went on their way. But only one had really listened passionately.
Each wish came upon an intangible dream. All dreams are intangible, being the virtual aspirations or speculations that they are. In a world past dreamers, he or she who sees things as they are (beyond distortion), ironically, does not merely see things… because things are of thought’s plurality that is largely illusory and superficial (though important to respond to accordingly at times).
Life, despite what most people think, isn’t a series of things. Life is beyond the plurality of appearances that are tricks upon the mind. Life is not wholeness either, for such wholeness, for most, is just another thing, just another abstraction to dream about.
While in the garden, the handsome blue Hostas and the attractive, purple Columbine flowers were not separate from the mind; then they were beyond mere labeling and definition; spontaneously, they transformed into what cannot be described or dreamed about. Then beauty was the “observing” and was beyond mere “observing.”
In that garden, there was careful “observing” and there was “beyond observing.” The two danced in harmony beyond fabricated plurality and wholeness. Curious, the ants, as to what moved past them in a vastness.
A couple of young men were walking near to where the aged Lo Zu was resting. He was sitting on an inclined large log with his meandering cane resting along his side. Then they observed Lo Zu walking — with his curved, wooden cane — to a nearby evergreen tree, where he presently stopped and began stooping next to the tree, looking at something down low toward the ground; he had a big smile upon his bearded face as he looked at something upon a blade of green.
The young men asked Lo Zu what he was gazing at. “Life on its journey,” reported Lo Zu.
Just then, a group of monks came walking by, all with shaved heads that were bowed down, with eyes only staring at the empty path that they were treading upon, while their “leader” marched ahead, “leading them.” The two youth said to Lo Zu, “Many say that you are the wisest man in all of the lands, yet we see that you do not march with the others and go to the temples.”
Lo Zu replied, “They march with their heads held down — not looking around whatsoever — and follow a path which they’ve been walking upon for centuries, and that path, honestly, is empty and dead. Life is not flowering in such a path. They do not look around to freely and joyfully perceive the beauty of the skies and the miracles of nature; they follow a leader who may be as blinded as they are. They spend time in the temple. It is full of man-made statues. They revere these lifeless statues, all of which were made by thought. They revere a dead product of their own creation. I, however, do not enter the temples. I remain away from the cold, lifeless buildings and spend time with nature, with creation… life. I am neither fascinated by dead, empty paths, man-made fabrications, nor with leaders who lead others to closing their lives away from life and the beauty of existence. Their fancy garbs and decorative buildings do not make them truly religious. Being religious is a living thing. If you are going to worship something, worship that poor, elderly woman toiling in the fields. Help her to carry her heavy load to her home (without asking anything in return).”
The elderly Lo Zu walked through a long, beautiful meadow and came near to the local village. He saw a group of youth sitting near a fenced garden and ambled near to them while holding on to his sinuous, meandering cane. As he walked, he smiled at the majestic, wonderous blue sky and at the beautiful trees dancing in the light breeze that he was not (in any way) apart from. Many of the young people looked rather bored, and excitement and wonderment were missing from their eyes. Lo Zu said to them, “When i was your age, i too sometimes would get bored; I too found myself lacking in exciting things to do. Now, in my elderly age, there is no boredom; there is only harmony and bliss.”
“What is your secret?, one of the youth asked.
Lo Zu then said, “One went beyond what all of the others said about life, self, and consciousness. The root of suffering was discovered and perceived.”
Some of the youth inquired, “What is the root of suffering?”
Lo Zu replied, “The ‘I,’ the ‘me,’ with all of its pretense and chicanery. The ‘I’ or the ‘me’ helps create a space between what is considered a “center” and the rest of the world (even including between a thought of a supposed center-controller and thinking). However, for example, thoughts and thinking are what consciousness is (as they occur), including the concept of ‘I’ or ‘myself.’ There is, though, a beautiful intelligence beyond and much greater than mere thoughts and thinking. Such intelligence is of a wholeness and transcends the petty concepts of ‘I’ and ‘me.’ Such intelligence transcends psychological suffering/boredom, mere words as labels, and gross limitation; what is whole and immense is not dominated by what is false and limited. Mental suffering is false and limited. Only when one clings to the limited is the intelligence of the whole not apparent. Look at everything beyond fragments, symbols, and images… and perhaps that intelligence will manifest. Clinging to what the ordinary, every-day people tell you… may be like clinging to garbage. Even clinging to ‘collected experiences’ (robotically) is childish and unnecessary. Cling in that way if you wish, but as for this elderly being, there is too much bliss here to crave what is fundamentally of the dead past. See the living beauty of life and nature in each instant (without merely always labeling and remembering). Question things, be appreciative of life, perceive with wholeness, and go beyond the ordinary. “
The group of youth thanked Lo Zu and asked him to stop by to visit them again.
As he walked away, he heard one of them say, “He is not like the other elders; he is different; he seems magical. When he looks at you, it is as if he can see right into you.”
Human beings have dealt with loneliness for generation after generation. Most of us run away from it. We run away from it in many ways. We run away from it through various forms of entertainment. We run away from it by incessantly watching entertaining sports, by going to entertaining religious services, by endlessly socializing, texting, talking on the phone, reading, endlessly watching television, endlessly listening to the radio, and by innumerable other ways. However, it is always there, waiting around the corner. It is there waiting and once again manifesting. Mankind has been avoiding it for eons. It can even manifest in a person who is among a large group of people. Many, as a means to coping with it, even engage in alcohol and drugs.
Few of us are really involved with loneliness beyond mere conflict. Instead of merely being in conflict with loneliness, by constantly running away from it (as most incessantly do), can one realize that one actually is what it is, without merely thinking that it is what one “has” (as some loneliness)? If we often merely try all of the innumerable escapes from loneliness, it will always be there waiting and popping up again and again. Obviously, it is great to socialize and such. But to merely constantly run away from loneliness may merely feed its flames.
Aloneness is far different than loneliness. The root meaning of alone is ‘all one.’ (How can the mind be ‘all one,’ or whole, if it is primarily composed of fragmented thoughts and if it is constantly escaping from — and in conflict with — the loneliness that it is?) With aloneness, there is contentment/joy/deep perception without needing outside influences. It may occur to one who is a light to himself (or herself). Bliss without endless motives may be indicative of the intelligence of aloneness. It is not a selfish intelligence. It is an intelligence that involves compassion and care for all. True aloneness is beyond propaganda. True aloneness does not blindly jump on the bandwagon just to fit in. True aloneness perceives beyond the inner and outer separation that so many others have accepted from so-called leaders and superiors.
Clarity in terms of the mind. What does it mean? Have you ever pondered over it or considered it deeply and seriously? Most people have not pondered over it. The dictionary defines clarity as: ‘The quality of being coherent;’ it also defines it as: ‘The quality of purity.’ Coherency in minds, in the manner we are writing about, means order. If the mind has significant fears, prejudices, beliefs (which tend to separate and divide people), and is tied down to dead (though fully accepted) second-hand traditions, is that order? If one is at all honest… a mind harboring many of such things — as what it actually “is” — probably is not of order.
Purity (in terms of mental clarity) likely means that the mind is not heavily conditioned, that the mind has not been deeply molded and contaminated by others. It means that the mind can look in a pristine way, beyond what was spoon-fed into it. Pretty much all of us were spoon-fed (mentally) from the day we were born. And most of us fully accept what was poured into us, because it is so very easy to do so. Most like the easy way, the run-of-the-mill way. It is so easy to fit in and to do as everyone else does and to think as everyone else does. It is so very comfortable. We love to imitate; “everyone else is doing it; it must (therefore) be safe and right.” But is it?
Here it is being suggested that a lot of what they pumped into us may be very fundamentally wrong and highly erroneous. Even the very fundamental nature of time that they gave us may be very wrong and largely fallacious. The very nature of our relationship — that they spoon-fed into us — involving thoughts and involving each other… may be very fallacious and not of real and true order. So what is one to do? A disorderly mind, seeking order, will usually find (and discover) according to that disorder. Non-clarity (i.e., non-coherency) cannot easily perceive clarity and order. (Innumerable minds of disorder often cling to primitive, fragmentary traditions of disorder, ardently claiming they are of order; then the endless wars and conflicts between groups of opposing people — with their separate ideologies — continue and go on and on.)
Real clarity may mean standing alone beyond all of the contamination. It may mean that one — without depending upon others — has to work diligently to see (for oneself) what is actually taking place. It likely involves seeing beyond what was poured into you; it likely involves asking the right questions (that are serious and of great meaning to life, wholeness, and dignity). It likely involves seeing beyond all of the second-hand patterns and endless words, labels, and feelings of individual separation (from others). It likely does not involve mere blind conformity, unquestioning acceptance, allegiance, or being mesmerized by authorities (by groups) and their ideas. There are even classes on mindfulness or on meditation that (through various systems and methods) purportedly get you to be mindful or get you to meditate. However, methods and systems just make the mind more imitative, more robotic, more second-hand, and more residual.
Clarity is purity, (plain and simple). It is not about being adulterated by the ordinary and the run-of-the-mill. In clarity is great beauty, love, and eternity. But don’t take my word for it. Find out. To find out there has to be great order of the mind, but not order according to what authorities say, not order according to some second-hand, man-made structures. (Or perhaps you just want to go on blindly accepting, adhering, and repeating the same old things.) It is so very easy to repeat and to fit in. It is altogether a different story when it comes to real purity, deep awareness, and profound coherence.
To truly be alive is a real art. It involves a lot of depth, understanding, and compassion. (By the way, psychological depth, great understanding, and compassion are not three separate things; they are all one.) Most of us have been indoctrinated with superficial second-hand patterns, thoughts, and traditions. Most of us live in (and “as”) an endlessly repetitious series or sequence of thoughts. That is what we call “living.” However, that may not be “living” whatsoever. Most people say that they are doing fine and are OK, but, in reality, they are not. They are full of fears, uncertainty, depression, dull mundaneness, and one series of stale thoughts after another.
Thoughts are stale. All thoughts stem from the past and are protrusions (i.e., projections) from (and of) that past. Patterns from the past can be rearranged to seem rather new but, fundamentally, they consist of the stale past. From that past, we look. Most people look through — and from — images of the past that they hold (and are). They recognize, they re-cognize things… such that they perceive according to the symbols and patterns of thoughts that they have absorbed and have clung to in (and “as”) the past. Thoughts are merely symbols and, therefore, are very limited and circumscribed. Symbols, being representations, are always residual, limited, and rather stale. However, most of us were indoctrinated to live in (and “as”) thoughts. Little wonder why so many say that they are enjoying life when, really, they are not. It’s like hugging or clinging to a Stop Sign and saying that the sign fills you with joy. You might fool some people, but you can’t fool me. That Stop Sign, like a thought, is a symbol, and a symbol is always of the past, limited, fragmentary, and nothing to get in rhapsody about. Most of us are of a consciousness that goes from one series of thoughts to another, never looking or perceiving wholly beyond thought/thinking. We go from one sequence of symbolic images to another. Even when we are out in nature, we perceive things through (and with) the screen of thought/thinking; we see things according to mere pre-learned patterns and labels; this may not truly be “seeing” at all. And yet we think that we are doing fine.
Remaining as stale, mundane, second-hand thoughts and patterns is never fine. It is the road to mediocrity, dejection, and robotic-repetition. One has to have the moxie, the fortitude, the guts, and the integrity to go beyond the indoctrination that was implanted in (and “as”) one. But most people are unwilling to do that. They are caught and find it easy to remain rather dead in the net or web of second-hand circumstance. Intelligently going beyond mere thought/thinking is frightening to them, because thought thinking is what they are; it is what they have accepted and is what they cling to.
Thinking in an orderly fashion is very useful at times. However, it is prudent to often go beyond thought/thinking. To merely remain in (and “as”) thought/thinking is sorrow. Period.
Boundless, in the dictionary, means ‘beyond limits’ or ‘having no boundaries.’ That sacred energy, that eternal flame beyond man-made descriptions, may indeed be of a boundlessness beyond the limited, and, hence, beyond the bounded conceptions and images of mankind. People tend to pretty much exclusively perceive and think about things in terms of limited labels, circumscribed patterns, fragmentary constructs, and sequential images and descriptions. All of these are, by their intrinsic nature, fragmentary, isolating, and limited. Thought/thinking is of this limitation. It has not changed in us, fundamentally, for millions of years. Four million years ago, we perceived via limitation and conflict. And four million years later; we are still perceiving basically via limitation and conflict. We still primarily mostly look with separation at all things; one still continuously perceives oneself as being a separate, independent individual.
Even most of the scientists are caught in this fragmentary, circumscribed, piecemeal way of looking at things. Even though they have some interesting theories and discoveries, they still are perplexed about the nature of things. They have their conflicting theories and divisions of thinking about things. The various so-called religions, too, have their divisions and conflicting theories and stories. Concerning them, people still make and construct stone images to impress others by, just as what was done many millennia ago. Though we’ve changed tremendously technologically, we’ve — most of us anyway — stayed fundamentally the same inwardly (i.e., psychologically) for eons. We still look at things via separation, limitation, circumscribed labels, and conflict. Most of us have a lot of deep-seated fears and psychological problems. Yet we think that we are highly evolved.
Most of us were enthusiastically programmed to react, perceive, and continue to function just like everyone else, both outwardly and inwardly. Heaven forbid if you began to look at things in a whole, new way. But a whole, new way was how Einstein came up with some of his brilliant works; and, believe me, he understood far more than what he revealed in his published and popular works.
The question is: Can one perceive — in a fundamentally different way — without exclusively depending upon mere (limited) patterns (that you were molded to contain)? To answer that question truly and deeply, consciousness needs to go through a radical change. All of the stuff that was hammered into you, throughout your past, has to be put aside or (rather) psychologically died to. When one truly transcends all of the illusory separations, limitations, fragmentation, and division, then real intelligence and compassion emerge. But it isn’t compassion that “you” “have”; it is compassion; it is of the whole, not of a separate “you.”
This Allosaurus Dinosaur Leg-bone was sliced and polished, revealing the now crystallized canals (ducts or channels) that used to transport air (and some blood) through the system; they stored oxygen within their bones, which was a very advanced system (superior to what mammals currently have).
There is chronological time — time by the watch — such as when you have to be at the doctor’s office at a certain designated time, or the fact that you have to be at work at a certain time. However, there is also psychological time, such as when the brain imagines (to itself) that it will be less fearful in the future. Psychological time often departs from real, substantive frameworks and oftentimes flows into the fictitious, the imaginary, and the illusory.
Take the psychological time-based situation of a typical person imagining that he or she will be less greedy in the future, for example. The person imagines the greed (that he or she is now) as being separate from what he or she actually is. It is something that can be controlled from a distance, to his or her typical perspective anyway. Then, a separate “I” (that is projected to be separate from the greed) is formulated to go beyond the greed, controlling it, over time. (The imagined separation from the greed is, itself, a form of greed.) That person does not fully perceive that he or she is not separate from what the greed actually is. So the typical brain separates itself from greed (during the very distorted perception of greed) and then imagines or projects a state of being beyond it, or of controlling it. The typical brain sees greed as what it has, or as what it can control, rather than as what it actually is. It additionally projects a “should be” (i.e., an imagined state beyond greed) and strives to get to that imagined point over time.
A mind of deep, holistic intelligence deals with this differently. With such a mind, psychological time is not so much a factor. It instantly sees (without the movement of time being a factor) the greed as being what it is… not as being what it “has” (or what it is contending with or controlling). Here, the perceiver is “that which is perceived”; the controller is not separate from the controlled; really, there is no controller in this situation (and, really, there never truly was, in all actuality). The greed, by the way, likely dissipates without effort due to holistic intelligence (which has its own energy and profound order); or it never occurs much in the first place. (The word “has” in the previous sentence does not mean or imply ownership from a distance. By the way, ownership from a distance implies greed, doesn’t it?)
Here is another extremely interesting time-oriented point. Many top scientists — Einstein among them, who formulated the philosophy of spacetime, with space and time being one thing — are now supportive of the Block Universe perspective. It is also referred to as Eternalism. It, in one fell swoop (and whether you like it or not), nullifies the notion of free-will; however, it does not nullify the responsibility that each one of us has for the whole, for all others, and for the entire environment. Watch the following short video if you are not familiar with it. (You can watch it for a time.)
Motivation is oftentimes a very good thing. Your teachers wanted you to have plenty of it when you were a youth in elementary school. Most people look at a man or woman who has very little gumption as being rather mediocre and unproductive. Motivation helps one to accomplish things; oftentimes these things are necessary for good health, community prosperity, and the planet’s wellbeing.
It is prudent to have motivation for one’s so-called self and immediate family. It would be even more prudent to engage in motivation that helps the environment and the planet as a whole. Too many people were educated and conditioned to have motivation for the “self” while, all along, not seeing this self as including and being other life forms and the planet as a whole. Most of us were educated and conditioned to strive for a small, fragmentary self that is (for the most part) considered to be something apart from the whole. Most of us graduate from school, being so very proud of our graduation, and then go out (conditioned and programmed to have motivation for fragmentary concepts of rather separate selves and separate groups); then we ruthlessly compete, struggle, disagree over our separative images and beliefs… and continue to cling to motivational patterns that are isolating, divisive, and devoid of real, holistic compassion.
Although motivation has its place, it is wise to go beyond motivation at times. Thought/thinking is always tied to motivation. Thinking occurs for a reason (usually a very conditioned reason); thinking always involves moving in some direction, acquiring, avoiding, or getting… (all involving motivation). However, a very intelligent mind can see the limitation and the fragmentary nature of motivation; then, if it is lucky, it can sometimes be where motivation is not necessary, where motivation is no longer needed. This motivationless state is where thinking is transcended (without effort) and put aside (for the time being); it is of a causeless bliss and joy.
Can one, out of psychological strife and motivational effort, bring such a state into being? Of course not. The psychological ending of conditioning does not merely depend upon motivational patterns. Thinking (as internal, psychological motivation) has its place, but wisdom goes beyond what is of no use in terms of wholeness and profound awareness. One of intelligence does not set aside a special time to “go beyond motivational thinking” or to “indulge in meditation.” It is not what one can arrange to happen via set motivational undertakings. It happens naturally, spontaneously, without pre-programmed calculation… or it does not happen at all.
Pearling is what occurs in aquarium plants that — when in enough light — emit bubbles of oxygen into the water (that naturally stream upward during photosynthesis). The photo is of some of my Corkscrew Vals pearling. All plants, terrestrial plants included, emit oxygen into the atmosphere during photosynthesis — thank goodness for us — as a natural by-product.
We have space psychologically and, for most of us, it is very limited. Everyone seems to have a space between the so-called central “I” (or “me”) and the “other” thoughts that this “I” is purportedly thinking. People do not realize that this “I” (or “me”) is neither central nor truly “in control” of the so-called “other” thoughts. The image of a center is just a projection of the psychological process and (as such) it is not truly manipulating anything. However, unfortunately, minds conditioned and taught to perceive through this illusory mode of operation tend to be very uncomfortable about going beyond it. The “I” was not designed for one to have insight and holistic perception; the “I” formed as an extension for self-preservation. Preservation and care for the body are crucial and very necessary. “Thinking” was to tool to help in regard to that. But then thought began to make itself out to be the essence of the organism. Then it began projecting the “I,” the “me,” imagining the “I” or the “me” to be a central regulatory entity that dominates or produces the so-called subservient thoughts.
People have, psychologically, created a space between the “I” and other thoughts, (thoughts that the “I” allegedly manipulates). They have space between the perceiver and “that which is perceived.” Such (limited) space is often internal (i.e., between the “me” and the other thoughts). It also, all too often, deals with the external… “me” separate from the animal that is hunted by me.
Going beyond the “I” due to keen insight is what negates these false constructs within the mind. Going beyond the “I,” the “so-called center,” the “me,” is not dangerous. On the contrary, it is only a very intelligent, aware mind that does so. And in so doing, it transcends friction, separation, conflict, illusory fabrications, and internal falsities. Then the body and the mind are in perfect harmony beyond the need to control. This lack of control is not chaos; on the contrary, it is an orderly movement involving insight from a profound whole.
When most people observe, they are observing fragmentarily, with — and from — learned separation. They are observing through a conditioned screen of thought/thinking (involving labels, categorization, and separative distance). This separative structure is of a very crude nature and it is very limited. Such limitation allows very little room for true joy and insight.
Deep compassion occurs when the mind transcends the illusoriness of the supposedly separate “central I.” When other life forms are not merely seen from a separative distance, then a real (much more profound) kind of intelligence manifests; it may involve a space that is not limited. This manifestation is of order and right action. Such right action is not merely a series of dull, learned routines reoccurring as mundane, dead-from-the-heart-up reactions.
The following is not meant to offend those who pray. If you are into “praying,” please read this as objectively as possible.
Praying is still what a lot of people do. Why do people pray and what does praying involve? We must be careful not to overly or subjectively analyze it, since (psychologically) the analyzer is not something truly separate from the analyzed.
People who pray will tell you that they are praying to God, to what they consider or think/feel God to be. Fundamentally, in all actuality, they are praying to an image (of what their thoughts consider God to be). This image is a protrusion of their thinking process. It is a product and fabrication of thought/thinking. One of the associative feelings or suppositions regarding this projected image, regarding what “God” is considered to be, involves attributes of power, dominance, (and all of this with a heavily anthropomorphic bent). In other words, this image of God — within people, constituting part of their minds — consists of human (often fatherly) attributes; these images, for instance, tend to be formulated of human attributes involving such things as great strength, power, endurance, fortitude, fairness, awareness, and keen judgment. (Most people do not harbor internal images of a lazy, indifferent, weak God. Most brains do not harbor associative constructs tying images of God to inefficiency, indolence, and to a complete lack of awareness.)
Many ardently cling to this image involving domination and power — whom they call “God” — and will insist that it is more than a self-projected image that they carry. Curiously, if one examines honestly, there is another image that they carry that (coincidentally) also involves great domination and power. Do you realize what it is? It is the image of the self. It is the image of the “I” and/or the “me.” However, most of us do not see it for what it is (i.e., a projected, concocted image); most of us see it (or feel it) to be the permanent, separate, central orchestrator and core regulator of all of the other thoughts. Most of us see it as what has true domination and power; it (to us) is what is having domination and power over the “other” thoughts (and is separate from them). (So there exists domination and power regarding “God” and domination and power involving the “I” or the “me.”) We don’t see the “I” for what it really is… another protrusion of thought/thinking that (in reality) is neither powerful, dominant, nor truly central. However, most all of us cling to this psychological structure because it fits in well with what everyone else has absorbed and accepted as legitimate. We evolved from primitive hominids in an environment where domination and power were critical and extremely important. Following leaders of power — or forces of power — was critical and necessary way back then, wasn’t it? We haven’t dropped those old-fashioned ways.
A few additional points: So when people pray to God concerning things that need to be done for others, for instance, are they pointing out things that this God may be negligent about understanding or that this God is not quite fully adequate at being aware of? If mentally handicapped people and animals are not gifted enough to pray to what may involve dominance and power, does this mean that they are largely plum out of luck? When a person prays, may it be that that person feels that he or she is involved in a direct pipeline to something considered powerful and dominating (i.e., which — let’s face it — is that person’s image of God) with, all the while, this pipeline being something considered special? And could it be that the previous question implies that psychologically imagining that one has such a pipeline, in oneself, nourishes a form of self-aggrandizement, blowing up the ego of the one so imagining?
Personally, one does not pray in the traditional sense. One rolls up one’s sleeves. My prayer — if it is any form of prayer at all (which it really isn’t) — is the “doing.” I worked throughout life with the handicapped, with the mentally disadvantaged, and with those in real need. If we perceive with real intelligence and understanding, then compassion is there, the sacred is there. But it is not of dominance and power, and all of that traditional, projected, nonsensical crap.
When one was very young, one loved nature a lot. Nearing 70 years of age, one still loves nature a lot.
Starting at the 5th Grade level, they put me in parochial school; we had to attend mass every morning. As a child, one thought, “They don’t have God locked up in a golden box on the alter; God (i.e., what is sacred) is outdoors in nature, with life… with all of the trees and creatures.” One still feels the same way.
In the playground, as a kid, they had us pledging allegiance to a flag. As a child, way back then, one saw it as a rag on a stick; one saw how so-called separate countries were in battle with each other (each with their own so-called “special flag”). As a kid, the whole thing seemed so mindless and totally absurd. One kept silent as the other kids endlessly repeated the pledge. At around 70, one still feels the same way.
As a child, one was the only kid in our grade school class who would help a fellow student (in class) who happened to be mentally retarded. At the end of the grade school years, his mother saw me in a department store and passionately thanked me. I also helped foreign students who were struggling to learn English. Much later on in life, my adult profession was being a teacher for the multiply handicapped.
While in grade school years, while one was sitting in one’s room alone, one suddenly went beyond the thought/thinking process; one realized how “special,” “magical,” “intelligent,” and “whole” it was. It was instantaneous (i.e., timeless) whereas thinking was a process that took time. One continued to engage with (or “as”) whatever it was; one continues to be appreciative of it to this day. One can call it “meditation,” but what it involves transcends all words and labels.
One was always amazed at how cruel and indifferent other fellow grade-school students could be. For instance, they would often tease and mock the boy who happened to be mentally retarded. Now, at around 70, one is amazed at how cruel and indifferent adults can be. For instance, former President Trump openly mocking a handicapped man (and mindless masses still voting for him — even with all of his cruelty and racism — and ardently supporting him).
When one was young, one didn’t just regurgitate what was poured into one; one questioned things and pondered things for oneself. After all of these years, one still (thank goodness) questions things and ponders beyond the stagnant, normative traditions.
Does my blogging help much if that person hasn’t previously already figured a lot of it out as a kid? One wonders, one really wonders…
Most of us equate nothingness with worthlessness, with triviality, with insignificance. We are terrified of psychological nothingness, and when nothingness occurs, psychologically, we hurriedly run away from it with chattering thoughts, beliefs (that are extensions of thought/thinking), suppositions, and all kinds of entertainments, including television shows (with their sports and movies), radio shows, and internet correspondences. We were all taught to be something, to constantly pursue things with motives to achieve more and more (and still more). Most of us are internally prejudiced against psychological nothingness; it tends to frighten us and we automatically run away from it.
We were taught (directly or indirectly) that the “I,” the psychological center, the ego, the inner “controller” is very substantial. To most of us — let’s face it — it is the most substantial thing of all. Everything revolves around the “I” and the “me”; to suggest that the “I,” the “me,” is very insubstantial and false would be considered blasphemy by most people. (Such talk goes against their core values, their core essence.) Has your mind ever significantly pondered about what the “I,” the “me,” actually is? Most people don’t bother to ponder about it but they merrily go on referring to the “I” and the “me” and habitually function with such manifestations (that they didn’t bother to deeply ponder about).
Without thought/thinking, there can be no internal “I” or “me.” The “I” and the “me” are dependent upon thought/thinking. Without “thinking,” there is no “I” or “me.” The “I” and the “me” are protrusions of thought/thinking and are (in fact) fabrications (i.e., extensions) of the thinking process. The mind can perfectly function just fine without the inner notion of “I” or “me,” and can often do so with compassion, holistic awareness, empathy, and intelligence. In fact, a brain that exclusively functions with or from an “I” or “me” is a brain of separation, isolation, limitation, and division. A brain of separation, isolation, limitation, division, and imitation, may be considered to be intelligent by many people, but it may not be very intelligent. The “me” is considered separate from other thoughts, people, and organisms. It functions from (and “as”) a limited, separative, isolating space that thought/thinking has concocted. It may be that this concocted limited, isolating space is what is truly illusory and (hence) essentially (in a very limited way) nothing. And it may be that a rather egoless mind — without often depending on projections of “I” and/or “me” — can function as (or “with”) a vast, boundless emptiness. Such a vast emptiness (i.e., vast nothingness) is beyond motive and may be sacred, timeless, inclusive, immeasurable, highly sensitive and intelligent, and of a bliss far from what petty minds can fabricate. A brain consisting of a limited, little ego made up of a learned and fabricated “I” tends to be rather superficial and illusory; a mind of a truly holistic, vast, dynamic, immeasurable nothingness tends to be of true intelligence, understanding, compassion, and deep perception.
One would like to reiterate that language oftentimes plays a tremendous role in regard to how we view the world. Language, whether we care to admit it or not, predisposes us to see the world… usually in rather primitive, erroneous, crass ways. After all, language evolved millennia ago (in its basic forms) and we, for the most part, continue on with — and accepting — the same crude, old thing. Our conditioning goes much further in its entrapment by language, further and much deeper than we realize.
As i’ve mentioned before, Professor David Bohm, Einstein’s protege, whom one has talked to a lot many years ago, developed new ideas for a more evolved style of language (via the Rheomode) wherein verbs play a much more predominant role, rather than nouns (as the rather isolated, static objects that nouns generally are). These days, we continue to use language rather primitively and wrongly. The extent of this goes far deeper than many of us suppose. Language loads us with presuppositions and inaccuracies that have trickled down from the primitive past.
When someone says, for example, “I had an insight,” it presupposes that the observer is separate from the observed; it presupposes that some supposed “static” center was at some psychological distance from what the process of insight was and “had it”. In reality, deep insight exists as a movement that no central, isolated “I” actually “has” or can legitimately take credit for. A supposed central agency (that is not really central whatsoever), being static, conceptual, essentially virtual, and essentially fragmentary, cannot justifiably take credit for having what is a movement of substantiality, a holistic movement. An empty sealed jar cannot hold the wind.
When we look, we see — via language, as we were taught — a world of separate things. We see fragmentarily, in a (set, prearranged) sequence developed by language. “This” as separate from “that,” “this” following “that.” Language consists of sequence and fragmentary movements through (and “as”) time.
Do not be a slave to language. This movement asks you to please look deeply beyond it.