To exist as nothing, psychologically, is not an unfavorable, weak state. Going beyond everything that you have been and believe in — instantly, without motive — is one of the most positive things, for it is of innocence, wholeness (beyond fragmentary reactions), and freedom. In fact, always continuing as mere reaction (from the old memory bank of stale ideas and images) is the continuation of sorrow. Sorrow must inevitably occur when mental things are second-hand and are constituted of mere reactions. Of course, thought/thinking must frequently manifest for one to do certain necessary things proficiently, with care. However, remaining in (and “as”) thought/thinking habitually, when such thinking is unnecessary, is sorrow and over-reacting. (It’s like endlessly clinging to a stream of shadows when — with deeper awareness — such shadows can be seen to be superficial and often rather insignificant.)
We, unfortunately, were miseducated to associate internal emptiness with internal poverty. Pure, uncontaminated, psychological emptiness is the most positive action, for it is of a pristine, orderly wholeness; merely being the reaction of thinking, however, is essentially inaction… dullness. Unfabricated emptiness is of a wholeness that is beyond mere sequential reaction in (and “as”) time; in that is vast energy, real freedom.
I am not overly interested in the words that the Buddha allegedly said, since, over long stretches of time, words and translations get distorted. I am not overly interested in the words that Jesus allegedly said, since, over long stretches time, translations go askew, words get added and distorted. Even the early Coptic versions of the Gospel of Thomas (which many top scholars say preceded the other four gospels), and which the power-hungry Roman-appointed hierarchical bishops rejected, was not as pristine as the even earlier papyrus Greek fragments found of that cornerstone gospel. I am not overly interested in the words that Lao Tzu allegedly said, since, over long stretches of time, words and translations get distorted. (And each of the many translations of the Tao Te Ching is different.) I am interested in discovering spirituality on my own, and learning directly, without distortion, without merely depending on old words, organizations, translations, and ancient documents. They tried to get Walt Whitman to alter his poetry; he wouldn’t. They tried to get E.E.Cummings to alter his poetry; he wouldn’t. They tried to get me to alter my poetry; i wouldn’t. They like to stealthily insert their ideologies into the works of others, to suit their own ends, to suit their own self-serving needs. They often (over time) like to get their conniving, little hands into the works of others (and twist things around).
I’ve read statements by people, in blogs and elsewhere, where they say, for example, “I meditate for 20 minutes a day.”
Meditation cannot be practiced. It is a quietude of the mind that is not made by some projected image of a central controller. There is no central controller, or “I,” or “me” that can cause meditation. Meditation is not a mere sequential effect or event (in time) brought about by some predetermined cause (i.e., by some form of causality). True meditation is timeless and is not what can occur by any methodology in (and “as”) psychological time. If you think that you are causing so-called meditation to happen for a specified period of time (each day or whatever), it is — unfortunately — a form of glorified self-hypnosis.
Real meditation is not even what one can “know” is happening. It is beyond the field of the known. One can neither practice it nor know that it is happening… and that is its beauty. But most people are so addicted to their need to categorize and “know” things that they feel frightened or insecure with not existing (mentally) as the known. They perpetually cling to the apron-strings of the known. They have to know that they are meditating or know that they are practicing meditation… all of which are not real meditation whatsoever.
Or they say such things as, “Well I am working on perfecting my meditation,”… or “I am practicing my meditation more and more each day.” Who (or what) is this so-called “I” that is supposedly doing such things? Really, if we are at all honest, it is a protrusion of thought (i.e., an image created by thought) that takes credit for being a central controller or central (mental) orchestrator, of which it is (in actuality) neither. Most people — plain and simply — are afraid to transcend the false sense of security that the primitive notion of a central “I” projects as. However, a false (fabricated) central “I” that thinks it is meditating is neither meditating, nor an actuality, nor truly central. (Past blogs that one has written explain this more; read them if confusion exists at this point.)
Real meditation may occur when the mind, without effort, is aware beyond superficiality. That means that it is not merely attached to the field of the known. The known is always limited; it is grossly circumscribed. Wisdom is meditation, a non-concocted quietness, which may happen throughout the day without deliberate intent. Then, perhaps, what is eternal, sacred, unlimited, and beyond words may enter. But it does not enter if false notions, false practices, and false images are perpetually clung to.
Real meditation can be a blossoming of the mind. But if you (metaphorically) cling to fake, fabricated flowers all of your life, nothing profound will happen.
There is a vast, timeless sacredness that is beyond the illusory patterns of the world. It did not create this world and it rarely manifests itself to those in it. (The creation of the world or universe by a separate, calculating deity is a rather barbaric conceptualization inherited from our ancient forebearers.) This sacredness is ineffable; it is beyond words and the representation of words. (Most all words are symbols and are merely representations.) It is beyond the framework of time. All sequential patterns of words (and mental images) are time. What is merely caught in time cannot touch or approach the timeless. There is an innocence, a wholeness of mind, beyond thought/thinking, that can be open to a visitation of this timelessness, (and that can also involve insights that may be reflections from such timelessness). Theories and beliefs have nothing to do with it.
It can only visit you; you cannot visit (or approach it). The “you” (i.e., that learned image of a “central me”), anyway, cannot merely exist as the illusion that it is (for a likely communion with that timelessness to take place). Mankind, for the most part, being caught in rather vapid sequential symbols of thought/thinking, tends to go on suffering, go on in limitation and time.
We were miseducated to look with separation. For eons, we have looked from (and “as”) separation. For eons, we have looked from (and “as”) separative beliefs. Beyond empty, limited separation is wholeness, beauty, and full compassion. One of the attributes of limited, learned separation is indifference. Many people have (and “actually are”) cold indifference; many people’s minds are based upon the acceptance of separation; they look from (and “as”) separation. It’s easy for cold indifference to point a gun at what it considers to be “others who are separate from oneself.” It is easy for cold indifference to look the other way and not help. If the essence of your consciousness is based on separation — as most are, these violent days — then you will go on in the old ways, old habits, and old mundane routines.
There is a profound reality of wholeness with its natural integrity of real beauty. It cannot be touched by what is distorted and corrupt. Separative beliefs can never be one with it. Its beauty is beyond the learnable, beyond the merely absorbed. Profound goodness is not the mere opposite of the bad. There is a wholeness that is beyond the opposites and beyond measure.
Blossoming Beyond Separation … Photo by Thomas Peace c. 2019
In order to have psychological fear, psychological time is a fundamental necessity. (Thinking and psychological time are not two separate things.) Without some protrusion of thought about some distant event in the future, there would be no psychological fear. That distance (that the mind fabricates about the future) necessarily involves space (and sequential duration)… which are projected by (and “as”) the mind. “In the future, something terrible might happen.” “In the future, I might not have enough friends.” There may be innumerable fears, such as the two aforementioned ones, that can plague a human’s mind. Then one may say that one would like to get rid of the many fears that one has. Somewhat ironically, the very desire to get rid of these fears is (in a real way) an extension of fear; it (itself) is, in a big way, an extension of (or precursor to) more fear.
Who is dealing (internally) with the fears? If one is looking at the fears with a feeling of control or manipulation, then one is assuming that the fears exist at some distance (to somehow “manipulate”). However, (psychologically, whether we like it or not) the manipulator is not separate from the manipulated; the two are both part of the thought/thinking process… and (in a big way) are not two separate things. Trying to “get rid” of the fear causes the mind to fabricate the controller, the “I” or the “me” who is allegedly separate from the fear.
Many types of sequential thinking (i.e., many forms of sequential thinking) — in most people — trigger thoughts that project (often needless) fear about what may happen in the future (along with thoughts of an “I” or a “me” that will be dealing with things). (Sequential thinking that reflects order is very good; sequential thinking — especially the muddled, psychological kind learned from miseducation — that reflects disorder is bad.) A keen perception that observes this whole process (and that goes beyond fabricating a separate “me” apart from the fear) has gone beyond friction and then has tremendous energy, wholeness, and insight. Insight is timeless energy; most people, unfortunately, waste energy. Timeless energy is beyond the chaos that manifests as mere psychological time. (In true silence there is great energy/insight; however, there is no “I” or “me” who can take one to that silence through the process of sequential time.)
Frivolity, caught in the little details of the competitive games and traditions, never was the serious pondering about the whole. That’s why it remained as frivolity. Frivolity can wear awesome shoes. Frivolity can wear a first-rate hat. Frivolity can appear to be intelligent, in frivolous ways.