All Posts Tagged ‘Wholeness

Post

Timelessness and Time

17 comments

We function in (and “as”) time. Time involves distinctive patterns in sequences. Thought/thinking is of time; thought/thinking is time. Distinctive, disparate patterns in (and “as”) time allows for conflict, friction, and discord to take place. Needless to say, a lot of friction and disharmony takes place in today’s world; just look at the newspapers to see plenty of that going on.

There is a nameless, sacred timelessness that exists at (or “as”) another dimension completely. It is not of conflictive patterns; it is not of sequences of discord; it is not of fragments involving disorder. It is coherent and is of a harmonious whole, beyond mere conflict and chaos.

Organized religions cannot take you there; organized religions are based on achievement, progress, and movement to goals (in time)… all involving calculated (man-made) patterns. That namelessness is beyond the cause-effect parameters of patterns; it is not some causally induced “effect achieved” or end result.

Thought/thinking, though oftentimes very necessary in functioning, cannot take you to that otherness. Thought can play all kinds of tricks but it cannot take you to where it cannot function… to where it has never functioned (and to where it never will function). (Thought/thinking can easily imagine that it is of wholeness and that it is in great silence and in the special quietness of “not being thought”… while — all the while — it is deceiving itself.) Thought/thinking is always conditioned, always in (or part of) a cause-effect sequence, always reactionary, always rather virtual, always fragmentary, and always rather secondhand. Well, that’s enough thinking for now.

Pale Green Assassin Bug, waiting with his different-colored bait … Photo by Thomas Peace c. 2020
Post

The Limited Consciousness

15 comments

Can consciousness actually be in contact with the infinite when such a consciousness always functions with (and “as”) the limited? It cannot. The mind can think or feel that it is in contact with the infinite, but that is mere reaction and not the actuality. It is immensely easy for the mind to delude itself and trick itself into believing and thinking all sorts of things. A consciousness of fragmentation, for example, can convince itself that it is of wholeness and freedom… while, in actuality, that is not the case whatsoever.

Unfortunately, most people are quite content to merely — in very limited ways — accept the traditions and beliefs that were handed down to them. (Curiously, this is even the case with many of those writing on meditation or mindfulness in books, blogs, and such, as if they have transcended something, when fundamentally they have not.) Most people in limitation — which is of confinement — feel “safe.” They do not truly reexamine all that they were taught. They do not fully question what was spoon-fed to them. (Many assume that they have broken from the standard, run-of-the-mill consciousness but, fundamentally, they have not.) They, among countless others, were taught to conform, obey, absorb, accept, and adhere to all of the traditional outlooks and images. Is a consciousness raised in such a way, and programmed in such a way, much more than a bundle of reactions?

One reaction after another, in life, is limitation, is fragmentation. Holistic contact is much more than mere reaction, but far too many people are merely reacting and are not involved with (or “as”) what is beyond. It is beyond what they spoon-fed into you. It is beyond beliefs, conditionings, and symbolic, sequential thoughts and ordinary feelings (which are all limited reactions). Though the physical organism is important to maintain in time, the old “you” cannot merely psychologically exist (for that immensity and nameless eternity to visit).

Among the Coneflowers … Photo by Thomas Peace c. 2020

Post

On Becoming Whole

24 comments

Recently, within the last week or two, one of the regular blogs that i visited, as part of a rather poetic posting that it had about things to accomplish, mentioned — among other things — “becoming whole.” Not wishing to criticize here, but that posting — like so many blogs that are similar to it by well-meaning others — has very good intentions but (one feels) misses the mark (so to speak). (Unfortunately — for others — people who write about wholeness and mindfulness, but who have never actually gone through deep and profound enlightenment — though their intentions are good — are like blind men writing about the beauty of good photography.)

To have the aspiration of “becoming whole” may seem well and good but it may actually have the unintentional backfiring effect of being quite misleading and misdirecting. For instance, do any of us deeply question “what” or “who” is going to be “becoming whole”? If what purports to become whole is some illusory “center” that one has accepted (via miseducation) as some kind of core controller in the middle of consciousness that is (supposedly) orchestrating things, then one may be wasting time with fictitious, barbaric paradigms. Frankly, as one has pointed out in numerous blogs (previously), there is no legitimate “center” that is in control. (And do not misconstrue this; this does not mean, because of a lack of a true center, that one should get all depressed about a lack of security and eternity in life; nothing could be further from the case. Security, order, and eternity are there in abundance with right understanding.)

If there is no legitimate center, and there isn’t, then what is it that is going to psychologically “become”? One may become a better cook, a better gardener, a better photographer (over time). These all have to do with physical improvements over (and in) time regarding fragmentary and sequential frameworks… and in such frameworks, they are quite valid. However, wholeness — real wholeness, not silly mental constructs and fabrications about what wholeness is — may be beyond the framework of time. Time, thought, and everything in time (including thought) is fragmentary and sequential. Real wholeness is a timelessness beyond all of this. And an illusory, petty little “center” — that one has blindly accepted from society (from your parents and educators) as being legitimate — purportedly thinks that it can progress (in sequential time) to what it says is whole. It cannot. An illusory fragmentation (as an accepted image of something “central”) cannot become what is pristine and what is beyond sequential, time-oriented paradigms.

It would be prudent, before proceeding on a quest for truth, to do so without carrying a heavy load of preconceptions/presumptions (i.e., a heavy load of baggage). And without the psychological baggage, it may be that there would not be a false, fragmentary network seeking what it could never be. And there is great beauty in that.

Not an Electrical Array … Photo by Thomas Peace c. 2020

Post

Why are so few of “wholeness”?

19 comments

Why do so few people perceive the whole? Have you ever asked yourself that question? Perhaps the question itself is a wrong (i.e., faulty) question. It may be that wholeness is simply “what is” beyond the dualistic, separative perception involving an “observer” and “that which is observed.”

Very few people are of wholeness, though (certainly) a good number think that they are. Most people are of fragmentation… perceiving from — and through — that fragmentation. We were taught, by elders, about how to perceive, how to react, and about what to believe in. We live in (and “as”) mental symbols; we accept those virtual-mental symbols as true realities. Most of us stay in the rut of that limitation, that conditioning, and remain that way until the day we die. Is that ever really living?

Throughout school, we were not encouraged to question things deeply; we were not encouraged to go beyond the accepted values and the accepted ways of perceiving things. Man, throughout the ages, evolved from animals; we (being so-called sophisticated animals) still harbor basic instincts for focusing on elemental parameters, (just like the animals do… only what we do is a bit more “sophisticated”). Few of us go beyond that. You could count those (living wholly) on one hand. What is the sound of one hand clapping?

Through eons of conditioning over generations, people are locked into reacting as they inevitably do. The following video, by Donald Hoffman, is worth a watch; it has its limitations, but it helps to illustrate some about what one has been saying for a long time. (With other of his video/audio sessions, one feels that he relies too much on old, fragmented, mathematical, and speculative approaches that can leave us merely analyzing ad infinitum.)
Is, by the way, the watcher separate from the watched?

This is not a toad… Photo by Thomas Peace c. 2020
Post

If one knows that one is meditating, meditation isn’t there.

4 comments

If one knows that one is meditating,
meditation isn’t there.
If one knows that one is whole,
wholeness isn’t there.
If one knows that one is humble,
humility isn’t there.
If one knows that one is quiet,
quietness isn’t there.
If one knows that one is spiritual,
spirituality isn’t there.
If one cultivates simplicity,
simpleness isn’t there.
If one cultivates perception,
insight isn’t there.

Who is pulling my leg from down there? Photo by Thomas Peace c. 2019

Post

This little world…

20 comments

 

This little world needs more jubilance and wholeness

         and intense insight and sound compassion

This little round place doesn’t need fossil fuels

         nor indifference that kisses the behind of out-dated political drivel                  

         and doesn’t need complacency when separation and

         fragmentation devour all inside and out

Frozen in Time (1) Photo by Thomas Peace c. 2017

Frozen in Time (1) Photo by Thomas Peace c. 2017

Frozen in Time (2) Photo by Thomas Peace c. 2017

Frozen in Time (2) Photo by Thomas Peace c. 2017

Post

Mindfulness… True Perception…

18 comments

 

True perception involves seeing the whole in a sensitive way without the contamination of isolated (taught, habitual) images.  Distortion occurs when the supposed (but false) whole is seen fragmentarily through a mental screen of conditioning.  For instance, it is in vogue to say that “I am one with the beauty of nature”… or to identify oneself in a special connection with magnificent, towering trees or a breathtaking mountain range.  One fragmentary image, however, identifying itself with other images… is what it is: a sequence of fractional image making.  (Few, by the way, identify themselves with people who are mentally or physically handicapped or with disappearing coral reefs; maybe if they observed them without a mere fractional center… more good things would get done).  Real wholeness exists beyond the boundaries of thought.  These boundaries include the fallacious center that feels in control of  what are considered “subservient thoughts.” Thought/thinking projects this center as being separate from other thoughts and as being separate from what is perceived (through the screen of thought); this center has (and is) an essence of separation.  Real wholeness does not put a separative, isolated image of a (fallacious) center on a psychological pedestal; real wholeness does not have a supposedly central image that merely identifies itself (at times) with other chosen, select images — like breathtaking mountains — while (at other times) it purports to be domineering over “other” images (whether they be internal or external) from a distance.

Most people don’t care deeply about true or deep perception; they have accepted crude, mundane ways, (and they continue to perceive through — and “as” — these mundane, superficial ways, without going deeply beyond them).  In these banal, mundane ways, most inevitably get bored and feel unfulfilled, which is (obviously) due to clinging to the old and stale.  They continue to cling to the old and stale ways, and they are afraid to let them go.  Untold many, over centuries, have each relied on and believed in a domineering and manipulative center that is (supposedly) in charge of the rest of thinking… and the world remains in crisis; deep harmony rarely emerges out of distortion.  The irony in this, unfortunately, is that most will not care to delve into this and transcend the fractional center; yet it is this very so-called center (because of its unnecessary friction and conflict) that keeps them in psychological isolation that is dull, lonely, distorted, second-hand, deceitful (and that is not dynamic while it creates a space of limitation that directly leads to boredom and inner sorrow).  The serious mind that sees the falsity of such a center is, on the other hand, joyous, harmonious, original, whole, and beyond deep deception.  Falsities are not just in some of the age-old, infantile beliefs of man; they go to the very essence of what consciousness entails.  Transcending them is true liberation and bliss… not all that phony stuff.

Sharing (1) Photo by Thomas Peace c. 2016

Sharing (1) Photo by Thomas Peace c. 2016

Sharing (2) Photo by Thomas Peace c. 2016

Sharing (2) Photo by Thomas Peace c. 2016