Ok, so where was I again... my previous blog was about conflicting choices. I mean, come on, who seriously wants a knife on the throat and an ominous voice interrogating you about your deeper desires: "Do you wish to live in a modern apartment in a downtown area or in a big manor house in the countryside?!" Eeeek! Heck do I know! I want both... and besides, it all depends, you know... like contemporary modern in a brand new house, modern minimalist, modern taken from "Living Etc" design magazine, or just an old apartment but nicely updated with smart solutions and sleek furbishing? And is the manor house perfectly renovated or falling apart... does it have grounds to go with it... is it in Lapland or in Sussex... Anyway, I don't want to answer that kind of question!
People seriously believe that you have to choose between two things. Otherwise they wouldn't create tests like that that accompany such big, money making sites. And life certainly does often present us with difficult choices. Should I leave him or should I stay? Should I write my book or should I avoid it for yet another day? Should I brush my cat and make him hate me or should I just leave him as he is and have all his love for me instead? And so on... you know how it is. Decisions... hard to think at times. Especially when you haven't slept well and you have no one to ask for help.
Yes, we do live in a dualist world. There are extremes and we tend to move back and forth like pendulums. Sometimes we stick to an extreme for ages. But just like the yin/yang symbol, the extreme will eventually change shape. No one knows when or where. But it will happen. Because this, as far as I understand it, is the basic nature of change. And without change there is no evolution. When thesis meets anti-thesis, we get synthesis. Check out the philospher Hegel for more in-depth views on this concept.
I just did another test online. This one was about how to train yourself to see auras. The idea of the most important exercise was to have two figures become one. To me, this actually exemplifies an attitude to life that can be developed and mastered. How can we start to understand reality as being One? In some way, it seems as tricky and incomprehensible as seeing auras if you don't have a natural knack for it. There are excellent books to study, for instance those that promote integral philosphy. In the hope of highlighting this topic a little I will quote some of my own musings. For more, see my early blogs. When I have time, I will also look for other material that I haven't posted yet.
***
"If you don't understand the idea of paradoxes as the basic nature of reality, then you don't know the abc of life. Any talk of oneness is useless if this is the case. Try and think in terms of "both-and" rather than "either-or", and see what happens!"
***
"The point about the paradox as a rule of thumb in one's life: moderation is simply the way in which we can gain the balance between extreme ways and attitudes. When you're able to see the truth of two opposites and inhabit the space between them, you are getting somewhere! Compare this with the Hegelian idea of thesis contra anti-thesis and the birth of the third conjoint force, the antithesis. This would be applicable to any level of life."
***"If you don't understand the idea of paradoxes as the basic nature of reality, then you don't know the abc of life. Any talk of oneness is useless if this is the case. Try and think in terms of "both-and" rather than "either-or", and see what happens!"
***
"The point about the paradox as a rule of thumb in one's life: moderation is simply the way in which we can gain the balance between extreme ways and attitudes. When you're able to see the truth of two opposites and inhabit the space between them, you are getting somewhere! Compare this with the Hegelian idea of thesis contra anti-thesis and the birth of the third conjoint force, the antithesis. This would be applicable to any level of life."
"The Taoists spoke of that which you cannot name, for as soon as you do, you are no longer speaking of 'it'. Ah, I love their sense of paradoxes! That to me is where we get closer to the real essence of 'this thing called God' (said with a smile). To me, talk about God promptly sucks me right into the issue of dualism, where opposites reign. Ok, so we live in a dualist world where contrasts provide experience (it's hard to appreciate good if you do not know of evil etc.). To me the Almighty is "above" these constellations. Note, however, that even the word "above" creates a dualist constellation but what can you do?! Language is this way! In fact I'd rather refer to "it" as 'Spirit', 'the Source' or 'the One'. 'The Universe' is okay too in some instances when you want to stress the interaction between the parts of the space we inhabit and bring God into it all. I guess humans need to talk in terms of God being this or that but my hunch is, we're all a bit off course because we're using words invented by humans. All in all I think that the word God carries too many heavy connotations no matter what the intention behind using it is."
***
"People who live with a fundamentally dualistic worldview simply cannot concieve of a world where paradoxes are closer to the truth than an either-or constellation. It's terrible how facts can be twisted so easily, well; that's why religion is such a terribly controversial subject of course. That makes me more pessimistic than the idea of Lucifer and his gang... If only people could see that everything we do and project and attract stems from our own minds, but how do you teach people like this that sort of thing? Not that there's a lack of information, only a lack of willingness to broaden the perspective and get out of the box of conventions."
"People who live with a fundamentally dualistic worldview simply cannot concieve of a world where paradoxes are closer to the truth than an either-or constellation. It's terrible how facts can be twisted so easily, well; that's why religion is such a terribly controversial subject of course. That makes me more pessimistic than the idea of Lucifer and his gang... If only people could see that everything we do and project and attract stems from our own minds, but how do you teach people like this that sort of thing? Not that there's a lack of information, only a lack of willingness to broaden the perspective and get out of the box of conventions."
***
"I know this sounds confusing but I'll give it a shot: The whole concept of saving or rescuing others or the world implies dualist thinking and especially a case of hierarchy. Somebody or something has to be higher on a ladder of sorts in order to "save" someone or something. Contrary to many, I don't think it's up to us to save anything at all since that would give us a lot of power within the framework of dualism. I think our small selves are less in charge of anything than we think. I think that only that which is in touch with Oneness can "save" anything, though it wouldn't really be 'saving' at all. It would just BECOME. I think that when we're in touch with Oneness our small selves are no longer ruling. We can then speak of our 'higher selves' being in charge. This is why it's tricky when people talk of being guided to say things to others. There is no way of being really sure that the source of information truly is from a higher aspect of ourselves or from somewhere else. Making assumptions about others is simply not respectful, and it can never be spiritual to want to make yourself appear higher on a ladder than someone else. It seems to me that only very few beings are enlightened enough to see the totality of what a person is all about."
Artwork: "The Veil", digital photograph by author, all rights reserved 2008
No comments:
Post a Comment