Ingrained humility
Insight is a question of perception: the willingness
to see.
Take, for example, the humble rice plant on which
over 50% of the world's population is dependant for
food.
The journal Nature has recently published the results
of a project, involving the cooperation of 10 countries,
called The Rice Genome Sequencing Project.
As amazingly complex as we believe the human body
to be, it may come as something of a surprise to
learn that the humble rice plant has 37,544 genes
positioned along 12 chromosomes.
Thats about 7,500 more genes than the human
genome!!
So, next time our ego is getting the better of
us and we lose track of our willingness to be
humble, may I respectfully suggest that we
think of the humble rice plant.
For even the smallest of us, like the rice plant,
have a uniqueness, a vital contribution to make
to this world of One-ness experiencing.
Thursday, August 11, 2005
Thursday, July 21, 2005
Don't blame 'God'
"Ateeque Sharifi had seen his fair share of
tragedy as a boy in Afghanistan. His
parents were killed by the Taliban before
he was 20 and he was the only
male in his family to escape death.
At 21, he fled Kabul to find refuge in Britain,
where he overcame his struggle to learn
English and became a model student. In
his spare time he worked in a pizza takeaway,
sending most of his wages to his younger
sister in Afghanistan.
But three years after fleeing the brutal
regime of the Taliban to rebuild his life in
his adoptive city, the young Muslim was to
die in a suicide bombing carried out in
the name of his faith".
(you can read the full story of this tragedy at:
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article300555.ece )
Despite all that had happened in his young life,
Ateeque Sharifi still attended devotions at
his mosque.
Whatever the creed, whatever the perverted
justification man's mind can create for such
abominations as the murder of this much
liked, loved and respected young man,
we can be very sure of one thing........
The One God of us all has never, never
needed to express His lovingness
through such mindless cruelty.
"Ateeque Sharifi had seen his fair share of
tragedy as a boy in Afghanistan. His
parents were killed by the Taliban before
he was 20 and he was the only
male in his family to escape death.
At 21, he fled Kabul to find refuge in Britain,
where he overcame his struggle to learn
English and became a model student. In
his spare time he worked in a pizza takeaway,
sending most of his wages to his younger
sister in Afghanistan.
But three years after fleeing the brutal
regime of the Taliban to rebuild his life in
his adoptive city, the young Muslim was to
die in a suicide bombing carried out in
the name of his faith".
(you can read the full story of this tragedy at:
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article300555.ece )
Despite all that had happened in his young life,
Ateeque Sharifi still attended devotions at
his mosque.
Whatever the creed, whatever the perverted
justification man's mind can create for such
abominations as the murder of this much
liked, loved and respected young man,
we can be very sure of one thing........
The One God of us all has never, never
needed to express His lovingness
through such mindless cruelty.
Saturday, July 09, 2005
Respect
Any 'religion' that has not learned..and does not
practice...the meaning of the word 'respect',neither
commands respect nor deserves it.
Respect for life, innocence, beauty, truth.
Where these are absent in the manifestations
of any political or religious creed,respect for that
creed from others is also absent.
In the absence of such respect, no such creed
can survive in the long term.
This is the lesson, the singular truth of human history.
Any 'religion' that has not learned..and does not
practice...the meaning of the word 'respect',neither
commands respect nor deserves it.
Respect for life, innocence, beauty, truth.
Where these are absent in the manifestations
of any political or religious creed,respect for that
creed from others is also absent.
In the absence of such respect, no such creed
can survive in the long term.
This is the lesson, the singular truth of human history.
The Koran at sura (chapter) 2.256: “Let
there be no compulsion in religion; truth
stands out clearly from error.”
Or heed the words of The Prophet
Muhammad: “The true Muslim is the
one who hurts no one by word or deed.”
There are a lot more beautiful, honorable,
sincere and respectful followers of Islam
outside of the Jihadist movement,
unaccepting of extremist 'fatwas', than
there are those who misguidedly corrupt
and manipulate the words of The Prophet
for their own purposes
The truth of unconditional love has stood
as the beacon of enlightenment and the
symbol of empowerment throughout
history.
there be no compulsion in religion; truth
stands out clearly from error.”
Or heed the words of The Prophet
Muhammad: “The true Muslim is the
one who hurts no one by word or deed.”
There are a lot more beautiful, honorable,
sincere and respectful followers of Islam
outside of the Jihadist movement,
unaccepting of extremist 'fatwas', than
there are those who misguidedly corrupt
and manipulate the words of The Prophet
for their own purposes
The truth of unconditional love has stood
as the beacon of enlightenment and the
symbol of empowerment throughout
history.
Saturday, July 02, 2005
Dysfunctional Disintegration
In the continuing attempts of the 'old religions' to
maintain power and control, something easy to do
in the days of illiteracy and ignorance, all sorts of
contradictions arise to demean and devalue the
original core principals of those religions. The
religious 'leaders' are more responsible for the demise
of respect for those core principals than could ever be
attributed to any other cause.
Take, for example, the Catholic Church Paedophile
scandal. Or the 'free Christian Church's' in America,of
the south, whose espousal of racist ideas and sentiments
could even support the Klu Klux Klan during the last
century. Or the 'church's ' support of Apartheid
Or, today, an amazing double standard howls out
absurdity from India:"She had a physical relationship with
her father-in-law.It does not matter if it was consensual or
forced" Mohammad Masood Madani,Muslim cleric from a
highly influential Islamic centre.
A young married woman was forcibly raped by her
father-in-law. The religious ruling issued by the 'clerics'
instructs that she must marry the father-in-law!??!?!. He
has been arrested and is now in jail.
The natural extension of this fatwa concept argues with
the principles of equality enshrined in the Koran and the
Islamic faith....and makes a nonsense of fatwas in other
Islamic countries.
It seems,according to this ruling, it does not matter if
your faith in Islam, and therefore God, is consensual or forced.
Except, that is, to you and to the God you acknowledge.
These 'old religions' continue to implode and self-destruct
in their insatiable desire for control.
Dominance,manipulation and lack of respect are NOT
attributes of unconditional love.
In the continuing attempts of the 'old religions' to
maintain power and control, something easy to do
in the days of illiteracy and ignorance, all sorts of
contradictions arise to demean and devalue the
original core principals of those religions. The
religious 'leaders' are more responsible for the demise
of respect for those core principals than could ever be
attributed to any other cause.
Take, for example, the Catholic Church Paedophile
scandal. Or the 'free Christian Church's' in America,of
the south, whose espousal of racist ideas and sentiments
could even support the Klu Klux Klan during the last
century. Or the 'church's ' support of Apartheid
Or, today, an amazing double standard howls out
absurdity from India:"She had a physical relationship with
her father-in-law.It does not matter if it was consensual or
forced" Mohammad Masood Madani,Muslim cleric from a
highly influential Islamic centre.
A young married woman was forcibly raped by her
father-in-law. The religious ruling issued by the 'clerics'
instructs that she must marry the father-in-law!??!?!. He
has been arrested and is now in jail.
The natural extension of this fatwa concept argues with
the principles of equality enshrined in the Koran and the
Islamic faith....and makes a nonsense of fatwas in other
Islamic countries.
It seems,according to this ruling, it does not matter if
your faith in Islam, and therefore God, is consensual or forced.
Except, that is, to you and to the God you acknowledge.
These 'old religions' continue to implode and self-destruct
in their insatiable desire for control.
Dominance,manipulation and lack of respect are NOT
attributes of unconditional love.
Sunday, June 26, 2005
togetherness
This exists just a few hundred metres from my home.
One-ness is a growing together,
yet still a seperate identity
The "SASF=O" Corollary.
"Human knowledge is doubling every 10 years. In the past
decade(1987-1997) more scientific knowledge has been
created than in all of human history"
(Dr. Michiu Kaku - 'Visions:How science will revolutionise the
21st century', New York,Anchor Books)
The International Geophysical Year (1958) saw the launch
of a satelliteas part of a cooperation between 67 nations in
a joint project concerning the earth. Such a project had never
happened before..and has not happened since...yet. The project
studied the earth and it's natural processes.
In our lifetime the genetic codes of human life itself have been,
to a large degree, unravelled and medical science stands on the
brink of a whole new age in terms of treatment and cures for illnesses
and diseases that have ravaged humanity for centuries.
In the space of just 2 decades, the computer has allowed us to
gather, store and have immediate access to unprecedented amounts
of knowledge on virtually every possible subject. Ask Google or Yahoo
or the other search engines about anything, and in seconds a mass of
information is available.
It is hardly suprising, therefore, that 'scientific analysis standards' are
being applied to spiritual matters. Hardly surprising that many young people
seek 'confirmed knowledge' data as opposed to philosophised or religious
theory.
Hardly surprising that so many people question the validity of their own
experiences unless and until a 'scientific proof model' is available to confirm
such validity.
Yet such a 'scientific proof model' is, at best, a 'general rule' concept.By nature
of it's 'catch all coverage' the intricacies of individualised experiencing dictate
exceptions to the rule. For example, Aspirin suits some people, but not all.
Some anti-biotics cure some illnesses, but not all. Some patients respond well
to the leading Aids treatment drugs,but not all. Some flowers grow in the shade,
but wither in the sunlight.
Your experiencing is unique to you. The interpretations of those experiences,
the understanding of them, is only for you to fully recognise. Only if you surrender
your responsibility to yourself can the 'scientific analysis norm standard'. or the
subjective experiences of another, be substituted for your self-awareness.
That's the SASF=O rule of existence.
Self Awareness + Self Fulfillment = One-ness.
(Corollary:a proposition that follows without need of seperate proof:Pocket Oxford
Dictionay)
Humankind is passing from the age of discovery of knowledge into the age of the
application of knowledge in it's fullest and most beneficial meaning. From the age
of observing, to the age of creating.
One thing seems clear from all of this: we are indivisibly linked. We are One. The
ancients intuitively knew this. We are slowly (though more speedily in these last 50
years), through science, coming to accept this.
Their is only one logical, intuitive, humane, scientific outcome to this process.
The experience of One-ness as an indisputable fact, rather than as a belief system.
Yet, the beauty of this One-ness is in the requirement for each individualised atom to
be it's fullest self. When one is less, the whole is less.
When we discount or doubt our own experience, we diminish the beauty of the
whole.
"Human knowledge is doubling every 10 years. In the past
decade(1987-1997) more scientific knowledge has been
created than in all of human history"
(Dr. Michiu Kaku - 'Visions:How science will revolutionise the
21st century', New York,Anchor Books)
The International Geophysical Year (1958) saw the launch
of a satelliteas part of a cooperation between 67 nations in
a joint project concerning the earth. Such a project had never
happened before..and has not happened since...yet. The project
studied the earth and it's natural processes.
In our lifetime the genetic codes of human life itself have been,
to a large degree, unravelled and medical science stands on the
brink of a whole new age in terms of treatment and cures for illnesses
and diseases that have ravaged humanity for centuries.
In the space of just 2 decades, the computer has allowed us to
gather, store and have immediate access to unprecedented amounts
of knowledge on virtually every possible subject. Ask Google or Yahoo
or the other search engines about anything, and in seconds a mass of
information is available.
It is hardly suprising, therefore, that 'scientific analysis standards' are
being applied to spiritual matters. Hardly surprising that many young people
seek 'confirmed knowledge' data as opposed to philosophised or religious
theory.
Hardly surprising that so many people question the validity of their own
experiences unless and until a 'scientific proof model' is available to confirm
such validity.
Yet such a 'scientific proof model' is, at best, a 'general rule' concept.By nature
of it's 'catch all coverage' the intricacies of individualised experiencing dictate
exceptions to the rule. For example, Aspirin suits some people, but not all.
Some anti-biotics cure some illnesses, but not all. Some patients respond well
to the leading Aids treatment drugs,but not all. Some flowers grow in the shade,
but wither in the sunlight.
Your experiencing is unique to you. The interpretations of those experiences,
the understanding of them, is only for you to fully recognise. Only if you surrender
your responsibility to yourself can the 'scientific analysis norm standard'. or the
subjective experiences of another, be substituted for your self-awareness.
That's the SASF=O rule of existence.
Self Awareness + Self Fulfillment = One-ness.
(Corollary:a proposition that follows without need of seperate proof:Pocket Oxford
Dictionay)
Humankind is passing from the age of discovery of knowledge into the age of the
application of knowledge in it's fullest and most beneficial meaning. From the age
of observing, to the age of creating.
One thing seems clear from all of this: we are indivisibly linked. We are One. The
ancients intuitively knew this. We are slowly (though more speedily in these last 50
years), through science, coming to accept this.
Their is only one logical, intuitive, humane, scientific outcome to this process.
The experience of One-ness as an indisputable fact, rather than as a belief system.
Yet, the beauty of this One-ness is in the requirement for each individualised atom to
be it's fullest self. When one is less, the whole is less.
When we discount or doubt our own experience, we diminish the beauty of the
whole.
Thursday, June 23, 2005
Creative imaginations
It is interesting to consider how often we experience something and
then proceed to doubt our own experience. We seek social approval,
third party confirmation of the experienced moment - and when none
is available questionthe validity of our own sensing.
How often, for example, we have experienced the 'spiritual presence'
of a long dead family member only to 'apparently find' that no other
experienced this and therefore we dismiss the experience as imaginings
or fantasy. Yet it seemed so real to us. How euphoric we are when
another confesses to the same, or similar,'sensing'.
Equally, how many times we have felt the presence of 'God', only to
rationalise that since no one else around us had that same experience in
the same way - or even similar - that we must have imagined it.
No matter how many times we are faced with the reality that we are so
uniquely individual, that our life's walk is so amazingly special, we seek to
confirm through others the validity of our own experiences and even conform
our experiences to acceptable social 'norms'.
So strange. So amazingly peculiar that we would trust, believe
in, give credence to, the expressed experience of another in
preference to our own. Yet we continually fill the 'workshop of
our experiencing' with the words and experiences of others as
though they are 'tools of comprehension', not
recognising that that was their unique experience.
At what point are we willing to accept that imagination,
even 'fantasy', are also valid tools of experiencing....for
at that moment we are experiencing that about which we
imagine or fantasise. We have created that very scenario
wthin our consciousness or have sensed that very
'creation' within our 'metaphor of relativity'.
It is no wonder that Christ said that when we think a thing
it as as though we have done it. For, most surely, in the
heart of our 'experiencing' the thinking of it is the doing of it.
In this sense the boundary between reality and imagining
becomes as small as an atom of air. Our relative, conditioned
perspective dictates whether the experience is classified as
real or fantasy by our logical cortexes. Our
conditioned-conscious-thought perspective can deafen us
to the voice of our own individualised spirit speaking to us.
In this sense our manifestations of lovingness cease to be
ours any more, they become the property of our conditioned
circumstance and manifest in conditioned expressions.
Only when we are willing to accept the full responsibility of
our own creating self are we fully empowered to emanate
unconditional love. In that event it matters little whether we
classify the experience of unconditional love as real or imagined.
It matters little because the energy we release in this
unconditional lovingness emanation creates a reality of it
around us.
When you consciously know - and accept this - you
understand the words 'all things are possible to them
that believe'.
It is interesting to consider how often we experience something and
then proceed to doubt our own experience. We seek social approval,
third party confirmation of the experienced moment - and when none
is available questionthe validity of our own sensing.
How often, for example, we have experienced the 'spiritual presence'
of a long dead family member only to 'apparently find' that no other
experienced this and therefore we dismiss the experience as imaginings
or fantasy. Yet it seemed so real to us. How euphoric we are when
another confesses to the same, or similar,'sensing'.
Equally, how many times we have felt the presence of 'God', only to
rationalise that since no one else around us had that same experience in
the same way - or even similar - that we must have imagined it.
No matter how many times we are faced with the reality that we are so
uniquely individual, that our life's walk is so amazingly special, we seek to
confirm through others the validity of our own experiences and even conform
our experiences to acceptable social 'norms'.
So strange. So amazingly peculiar that we would trust, believe
in, give credence to, the expressed experience of another in
preference to our own. Yet we continually fill the 'workshop of
our experiencing' with the words and experiences of others as
though they are 'tools of comprehension', not
recognising that that was their unique experience.
At what point are we willing to accept that imagination,
even 'fantasy', are also valid tools of experiencing....for
at that moment we are experiencing that about which we
imagine or fantasise. We have created that very scenario
wthin our consciousness or have sensed that very
'creation' within our 'metaphor of relativity'.
It is no wonder that Christ said that when we think a thing
it as as though we have done it. For, most surely, in the
heart of our 'experiencing' the thinking of it is the doing of it.
In this sense the boundary between reality and imagining
becomes as small as an atom of air. Our relative, conditioned
perspective dictates whether the experience is classified as
real or fantasy by our logical cortexes. Our
conditioned-conscious-thought perspective can deafen us
to the voice of our own individualised spirit speaking to us.
In this sense our manifestations of lovingness cease to be
ours any more, they become the property of our conditioned
circumstance and manifest in conditioned expressions.
Only when we are willing to accept the full responsibility of
our own creating self are we fully empowered to emanate
unconditional love. In that event it matters little whether we
classify the experience of unconditional love as real or imagined.
It matters little because the energy we release in this
unconditional lovingness emanation creates a reality of it
around us.
When you consciously know - and accept this - you
understand the words 'all things are possible to them
that believe'.
Monday, June 13, 2005
Revisited pathways
All is change in this life's walk, that is the nature of the
experience we call life. To resist change is to resist the
urge of life itself. To accept the challenge of change is
to continue the adventure of experiencing with all it's
potential for self-revelation, self-fulfillment.
When we do so, we should give all our heart to the
adventure and not seek to hide in the memories of the
pathway we have already walked.
GKR
All is change in this life's walk, that is the nature of the
experience we call life. To resist change is to resist the
urge of life itself. To accept the challenge of change is
to continue the adventure of experiencing with all it's
potential for self-revelation, self-fulfillment.
When we do so, we should give all our heart to the
adventure and not seek to hide in the memories of the
pathway we have already walked.
GKR
Everywhere we look, everywhere our senses
input the incredible wonder of this 'metaphor
of relativity' that we call the earth, the world,
Everywhere,
everywhere all the time,
there is such incredible diversity,
such unnutterable beauty,
such ecstacy of experiencing....
It's all there, all the time.
Always in a state of constant change
It's there if you wish to see it
will take the moments as precious gifts
jewels of beauty
with which to enrich your life experiencing
input the incredible wonder of this 'metaphor
of relativity' that we call the earth, the world,
Everywhere,
everywhere all the time,
there is such incredible diversity,
such unnutterable beauty,
such ecstacy of experiencing....
It's all there, all the time.
Always in a state of constant change
It's there if you wish to see it
will take the moments as precious gifts
jewels of beauty
with which to enrich your life experiencing
dicentra_small
see also the tapestry 'Dicentra'
at http://www.ragnhild-monsen.com/ragnhild_monsen-2003-03a_004.htm
Saturday, May 28, 2005
Thursday, May 12, 2005
Royal visits
I dreamt that one day
into the humble place I call my home
Came a royal family
whose graciousness and dignity shone
more brightly than the summer’s noonday sun
The brightness of their shining
was the humility of their ways;
The warmth of their beaming
was the lovingness of their days:
and we were blessed by their rays.
Yet, soon we came to see
our reflected higher self,
for in such spiritually royal company
we removed from mundanity’s shelf
the soul we hid for fear of ridicule.
Glad, therefore, with joy and truth
we see the self-governed soul
that rests within it’s centred self
loves all alike, the whole
that is the realm of Yukta.
The peaceful kingdom of Nirvana
One-ness is a dream of a reality.
I dreamt that one day
into the humble place I call my home
Came a royal family
whose graciousness and dignity shone
more brightly than the summer’s noonday sun
The brightness of their shining
was the humility of their ways;
The warmth of their beaming
was the lovingness of their days:
and we were blessed by their rays.
Yet, soon we came to see
our reflected higher self,
for in such spiritually royal company
we removed from mundanity’s shelf
the soul we hid for fear of ridicule.
Glad, therefore, with joy and truth
we see the self-governed soul
that rests within it’s centred self
loves all alike, the whole
that is the realm of Yukta.
The peaceful kingdom of Nirvana
One-ness is a dream of a reality.
Monday, May 02, 2005
Bad is Good
One of the most fascinating and mysterious facts of modern times is that IQ scores
have been steadily rising in developed nations for the past half_century. A political
scientist, James Flynn, noticed in the early 1980s that the "control" group of
teenagers who were regularly being tested to keep scores in line was improving all
the time.
"Every time kids took the new and the old tests, they did better on the old ones,"
Flynn found. "I thought: that’s weird."
For Johnson, the explanation may be staring us in the face. "Over the last 50 years
we’ve had to cope with an explosion of media, technologies and interfaces, from the
TV clicker to the worldwide web. And every new form of visual media — interactive
visual media in particular — poses an implicit challenge to our brains: we have to
work through the logic of the new interface, follow clues, sense relationships."
These, he points out, are the very skills measured in IQ tests. "You survey a field of
visual icons and look for unusual patterns."
Educationists agree. In Britain three years ago, researchers funded by the Department
for Education and Skills found that computer games improved problem-solving skills,
concentration, memorisation and collaboration in the 700 children they studied.
What they do is help players to think: "All the intellectual benefits of gaming derive
from this fundamental virtue, because learning how to think is ultimately about
learning to make the right decisions."
of learning how to think for one’s self, is a main factor in the decline of
outdated doctrine-based institutions?
One of the most fascinating and mysterious facts of modern times is that IQ scores
have been steadily rising in developed nations for the past half_century. A political
scientist, James Flynn, noticed in the early 1980s that the "control" group of
teenagers who were regularly being tested to keep scores in line was improving all
the time.
"Every time kids took the new and the old tests, they did better on the old ones,"
Flynn found. "I thought: that’s weird."
For Johnson, the explanation may be staring us in the face. "Over the last 50 years
we’ve had to cope with an explosion of media, technologies and interfaces, from the
TV clicker to the worldwide web. And every new form of visual media — interactive
visual media in particular — poses an implicit challenge to our brains: we have to
work through the logic of the new interface, follow clues, sense relationships."
These, he points out, are the very skills measured in IQ tests. "You survey a field of
visual icons and look for unusual patterns."
Educationists agree. In Britain three years ago, researchers funded by the Department
for Education and Skills found that computer games improved problem-solving skills,
concentration, memorisation and collaboration in the 700 children they studied.
What they do is help players to think: "All the intellectual benefits of gaming derive
from this fundamental virtue, because learning how to think is ultimately about
learning to make the right decisions."
(the above are extracts from a Sunday Times article: the full article can be viewed
here: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2092-1592248,00.html )
Is it possible that this increase in problem solving ability, this processof learning how to think for one’s self, is a main factor in the decline of
outdated doctrine-based institutions?
Saturday, April 23, 2005
Expectations of perfection begin with ourselves
So often we concern ourselves with moral or ethical judgements
relating to the behaviour of others. It is a regrettable feature of many
institutions and a clear motivator for the popularity of ‘soap and virtual reality tv’
programmes.
Well it has been said by many religious leaders, Jesus Christ, Gandhi, (amongst others)
that we should beware of such judgements. The case for ‘moral absolutism’ versus
‘moral relativism’,currently scheduled to be the ‘cause celebre’ in the new papal era,
is a case in point.
We have interesting contradictions, in this last week, even within the words of just one
powerful vatican representative: “The head of the Vatican's Pontifical Council on the
Family, Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, denounced the legislation as profoundly
iniquitous. Interviewed in the Italian newspaper, Corriere de la Serra, Cardinal Lopez
Trujillo said the Church was making an urgent call for freedom of conscience for Roman
Catholics and appealing to them to resist the law”. On the one hand was the defence of
moral absolutism in condemning the recent laws passed in Spain concerning the rights
of ‘sexual minorities’ yet, in the same breath, comes a plea for relativism in resisting
these laws (shown in bold type).
Clearly all arguments can be used to defend any scenario, huh?
This is also shown in the emerging information concerning Cardinal Ratzinger’s (now Pope
Benedict XVI) handling, as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,( the
Vatican body which has the power to investigate and excommunicate priests guilty of sexual
abuse) of the charges against Fr Marcial Maciel, the founder of the Legionaries of Christ and
a close friend to the last Pope.. His male accusers include three professors, a teacher, a
lawyer and an engineer (at least one ‘witness’, a priest, of this ‘abuse’ made a death bed
‘declaration’ denouncing Maciel). Another Priest, himself sexually abused by Maciel,
forwarded the list of charges to a New York Bishop who forwarded the data and evidence
to the the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 1997!
It would appear that freedom of conscience (moral relativism) rules in the Vatican. But is only
for those chosen to receive it, not for the rest of humanity.
It would also appear that secular society has more grasp of the caring aspects of this subject,
in terms of morality and ethics, than does an institution claiming greater historical authority in
this area.
When religion mixes with the ‘politics of expediency’, or the ‘politics of secular power’, we can
be relatively sure of the absolute corruption of both at the expense of moral standards,
human dignity and even life..
So often we concern ourselves with moral or ethical judgements
relating to the behaviour of others. It is a regrettable feature of many
institutions and a clear motivator for the popularity of ‘soap and virtual reality tv’
programmes.
Well it has been said by many religious leaders, Jesus Christ, Gandhi, (amongst others)
that we should beware of such judgements. The case for ‘moral absolutism’ versus
‘moral relativism’,currently scheduled to be the ‘cause celebre’ in the new papal era,
is a case in point.
We have interesting contradictions, in this last week, even within the words of just one
powerful vatican representative: “The head of the Vatican's Pontifical Council on the
Family, Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, denounced the legislation as profoundly
iniquitous. Interviewed in the Italian newspaper, Corriere de la Serra, Cardinal Lopez
Trujillo said the Church was making an urgent call for freedom of conscience for Roman
Catholics and appealing to them to resist the law”. On the one hand was the defence of
moral absolutism in condemning the recent laws passed in Spain concerning the rights
of ‘sexual minorities’ yet, in the same breath, comes a plea for relativism in resisting
these laws (shown in bold type).
Clearly all arguments can be used to defend any scenario, huh?
This is also shown in the emerging information concerning Cardinal Ratzinger’s (now Pope
Benedict XVI) handling, as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,( the
Vatican body which has the power to investigate and excommunicate priests guilty of sexual
abuse) of the charges against Fr Marcial Maciel, the founder of the Legionaries of Christ and
a close friend to the last Pope.. His male accusers include three professors, a teacher, a
lawyer and an engineer (at least one ‘witness’, a priest, of this ‘abuse’ made a death bed
‘declaration’ denouncing Maciel). Another Priest, himself sexually abused by Maciel,
forwarded the list of charges to a New York Bishop who forwarded the data and evidence
to the the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 1997!
It would appear that freedom of conscience (moral relativism) rules in the Vatican. But is only
for those chosen to receive it, not for the rest of humanity.
It would also appear that secular society has more grasp of the caring aspects of this subject,
in terms of morality and ethics, than does an institution claiming greater historical authority in
this area.
When religion mixes with the ‘politics of expediency’, or the ‘politics of secular power’, we can
be relatively sure of the absolute corruption of both at the expense of moral standards,
human dignity and even life..
Monday, April 18, 2005
A Record of Goodness
In the years before the war we used to go for an hour's walk
together every day of the week.
There was the evident simplicity of the man
There was the boyish good humour of the man
He was in all circumstances endlessly considerate for the
position and problems of others. And with all this it is still
difficult to say what made him so beloved, so simply accepted
on trust, by an endless number of people everywhere. One can
only say that it is itself a tribute to the decency of the mass of
the people everywhere who recognised and loved goodness
in a man above all other things.
Professor David Mitrany writing in The Guardian newspaper
(UK) on the occasion of the death 50 years ago today of
Albert Einstein
Einstein had said of Ghandhi's death that "generations to come
will scarce believe that one such as this, in the flesh, ever walked
upon this earth". Words that might have also been his own eulogy.
In the years before the war we used to go for an hour's walk
together every day of the week.
There was the evident simplicity of the man
There was the boyish good humour of the man
He was in all circumstances endlessly considerate for the
position and problems of others. And with all this it is still
difficult to say what made him so beloved, so simply accepted
on trust, by an endless number of people everywhere. One can
only say that it is itself a tribute to the decency of the mass of
the people everywhere who recognised and loved goodness
in a man above all other things.
Professor David Mitrany writing in The Guardian newspaper
(UK) on the occasion of the death 50 years ago today of
Albert Einstein
Einstein had said of Ghandhi's death that "generations to come
will scarce believe that one such as this, in the flesh, ever walked
upon this earth". Words that might have also been his own eulogy.
Sunday, April 17, 2005
Pop songs and melodies
Whilst recently doing some building work at my home I was exposed
to the latest offerings in popular music offered by some of the younger
co-workers. Happily,I got ‘hooked' on quite a few (inside me somewhere
there is still a youth, hehehe).
Two songs that had a large effect (amongst many) on me were
Eamon's "I don't want you back' and F.R.David's "Words".
Both speak of being in love and yet speak from the opposite polarities.
Interestingly enough, one is from the 1980's and the other from the
2000's and both are popular today. Both melodies and words speak of
the fascinating aspects of love as seen through the eyes of young men.
In Eamon's song we hear the pain of rejection and ‘betrayal. And the
associated anger reaction. In F.R.David's song - almost a hymn - we hear
of the difficulties of expressing what is in our hearts when we are in love.
One presents us with failed expectations, the other with gentle hopes of
acceptance.
Herein lies two of the main problems of modern relationships:
expectations and acceptance. Both these aspects go to the roots of our
definitions of love, for so often our definition is dependant upon
expectations as opposed to acceptance. We have been conditioned to
expect that love is conditional and have diffficulty, therefore, to accept
when we are challenged to be unconditional in our lovingness.
Yet, this very ‘conditionality' is a denial of who and what we are.
Love sets no borders.
Love has no demands.
Love seeks only the fulfilment of itself.
When we love shall we allow others, other circumstances, to deny us the
fullest expression of ourselves? I'm talking about Love here, not needs...
for they are very different.
If you love with expectations, beware of disappointment.
If you love with acceptance, beware of the pain that this unconditionality
will bring to your consciousness - yet - celebrate the wonder of your spirit
that you can love so much, so large, so ‘outside your own borders'.
Only when you are willing to love unconditionally will you be able to see
the true glory, wonder, magnificence of love...and of yourself.
The melody of love within our spirit is always ringing
tones of lovingness through our emotions and consciousness,
no matter what the life circumstance
(this blog dedicated to K & N... with humble gratitude for their sharing)
(Checkout what the Sugababes have to say in the blogs below)
Whilst recently doing some building work at my home I was exposed
to the latest offerings in popular music offered by some of the younger
co-workers. Happily,I got ‘hooked' on quite a few (inside me somewhere
there is still a youth, hehehe).
Two songs that had a large effect (amongst many) on me were
Eamon's "I don't want you back' and F.R.David's "Words".
Both speak of being in love and yet speak from the opposite polarities.
Interestingly enough, one is from the 1980's and the other from the
2000's and both are popular today. Both melodies and words speak of
the fascinating aspects of love as seen through the eyes of young men.
In Eamon's song we hear the pain of rejection and ‘betrayal. And the
associated anger reaction. In F.R.David's song - almost a hymn - we hear
of the difficulties of expressing what is in our hearts when we are in love.
One presents us with failed expectations, the other with gentle hopes of
acceptance.
Herein lies two of the main problems of modern relationships:
expectations and acceptance. Both these aspects go to the roots of our
definitions of love, for so often our definition is dependant upon
expectations as opposed to acceptance. We have been conditioned to
expect that love is conditional and have diffficulty, therefore, to accept
when we are challenged to be unconditional in our lovingness.
Yet, this very ‘conditionality' is a denial of who and what we are.
Love sets no borders.
Love has no demands.
Love seeks only the fulfilment of itself.
When we love shall we allow others, other circumstances, to deny us the
fullest expression of ourselves? I'm talking about Love here, not needs...
for they are very different.
If you love with expectations, beware of disappointment.
If you love with acceptance, beware of the pain that this unconditionality
will bring to your consciousness - yet - celebrate the wonder of your spirit
that you can love so much, so large, so ‘outside your own borders'.
Only when you are willing to love unconditionally will you be able to see
the true glory, wonder, magnificence of love...and of yourself.
The melody of love within our spirit is always ringing
tones of lovingness through our emotions and consciousness,
no matter what the life circumstance
(this blog dedicated to K & N... with humble gratitude for their sharing)
(Checkout what the Sugababes have to say in the blogs below)
"Pop Gurus" Sugababes.....Stronger
(Lyrics from www.poplyrics.net )
I'll make it through the rainy days
I'll be the one who stands here longer than the rest
When my landscape changes, re-arranges
I'll be stronger than I've ever been
No more stillness, more sunlight
Everything's gonna be all right
I know that there's gonna be a change
Better find your way out of your fear
If you wanna come with me
Then that's the way it's gotta be
I'm all alone
And finally
I'm getting stronger
You'll come to see
Just what I can be
I'm getting stronger
Sometimes I feel so down and out
Like emotion that's been captured in a maze
I had my ups and downs
Trials and tribulations
I overcome it day by day
Feeling good and almost powerful
A new me,
that's what I'm looking for
I know that there's gonna be a change
Better find your way out of your fear
If you wanna come with me
Then that's the way it's gotta be
I'm all alone
And finally
I'm getting stronger
You'll come to see
Just what I can be
I'm getting stronger
I didn't know what I had to do
I just knew I was alone
People around me but they didn't care
So I searched into my soulI
'm not the type of girl that will let them see her cry
It's not my style
I get by
See I'm gonna do this for me
I'm all alone And finally I'm getting stronger
You'll come to see Just what I can be I'm getting stronger
I'm all alone And finally I'm getting stronger
You'll come to see
Just what I can be
I'm getting stronger
(Lyrics from www.poplyrics.net )
I'll make it through the rainy days
I'll be the one who stands here longer than the rest
When my landscape changes, re-arranges
I'll be stronger than I've ever been
No more stillness, more sunlight
Everything's gonna be all right
I know that there's gonna be a change
Better find your way out of your fear
If you wanna come with me
Then that's the way it's gotta be
I'm all alone
And finally
I'm getting stronger
You'll come to see
Just what I can be
I'm getting stronger
Sometimes I feel so down and out
Like emotion that's been captured in a maze
I had my ups and downs
Trials and tribulations
I overcome it day by day
Feeling good and almost powerful
A new me,
that's what I'm looking for
I know that there's gonna be a change
Better find your way out of your fear
If you wanna come with me
Then that's the way it's gotta be
I'm all alone
And finally
I'm getting stronger
You'll come to see
Just what I can be
I'm getting stronger
I didn't know what I had to do
I just knew I was alone
People around me but they didn't care
So I searched into my soulI
'm not the type of girl that will let them see her cry
It's not my style
I get by
See I'm gonna do this for me
I'm all alone And finally I'm getting stronger
You'll come to see Just what I can be I'm getting stronger
I'm all alone And finally I'm getting stronger
You'll come to see
Just what I can be
I'm getting stronger
Saturday, April 09, 2005
Splinters and beams
About 3,800 years ago it was unhealthy to be the firstborn,well, if you lived in the Middle
East it was (check it out,ask Isaac).
About 2,000 years ago it was 'socially and religiously unnacceptable' to be sick. This was
"God's punishment'.The 'sins' that Jesus 'healed' should be understood in thiscontext.
This nonsense is still voluminously echoed in this modern age - compare the attitudes
towards Aids in the 'Bible belt of America' or the archaic views of some African states.
By the Middle Ages it was unhealthy to have 'deviant or heretical' beliefs. A syndrome
that still persists even today!
Then by the late 19th century, early 20th century, it became abnormal, appalling,
to have 'independant thoughts'. Thanks to Pavlov,Freud and a few others society was
influenced to believe that 'conditioning was the new god' ( a god profusely worshipped
in Communist ruled countries) Anyone outside of this category was
'idealogically/psychologically impaired' (?)
Then we moved into an arena where such old concepts of control ceased to function
adequately (did we?), so the new absurdity is that your ego is the major fault in you.
Of course, I write here from a Judao/Islamic/Christian viewpoint. Such ideas about
imperfections in mankind did not appear in other cultures!?! Huh? Nonsense.
These 'archetypes' of categorisation where just as equally expressed in differing
cultures in differing ways. Even today in India, 60 years after the death of the prophet
of non-violence,children are still beaten by parents, teachers, etc. (thus are taught
the supremacy of violence over other means of societal influence) and untouchability
is still practised within a less conspicuous form of the caste system. The revolt against
the institutionalised religious structures in the West has been hijacked by leaders,
gurus, from the East..where the ability to produce such 'gurus' seems to outstrip the
production of rice, yet another 'supply/demand' status.
The control-orientated structures of differing religions,philosophies, practices,
permeate the totality of cultures throughout the world. 'Having a mind, having an
ego' becomes the modern equivalent of being the firstborn, being sick, being heretical,
being 'psychologically deviant'.
It places you in a scenario where you cannot be controlled and therefore indoctrinated
into someone else's viewpoint.Inherent in this procedure is the need to do as described
in the previous blog - adapt and use the 'teachings' of others,modify where necessary,
invent if required (even when no evidence supports the invention) and generally tailor
your message to suit your audiences cultural and historical background, gently inserting
'cultural reference points'.
Equally inherent in this scenario is the need to find some basis of sugestion that will
cause you to reject any fundamental principle that you can be (and are) as equally
spiritually knowledgable as any Priest, Imman, Guru, etc.
First 'convict of imperfection'. Next, replace with auto-suggestion,finally complete the
indoctrination by removing the concept of self.
Daring to be an individual, to be the you you have chosen to be in this life's walk,
to be the manifestation of an aspect of free, unbounded unconditional love, is the
highest tantra,the highest calling, the highest 'You'.
It is written "through experience one transcends" (Osho). Is that your experience or
someone else's? Is that intramundane transcendance or supramundane transcendance?
Borrowing the experiences of another is not a revelation of yourself to yourself - however
wonderful and loving you may feel the other to be. Indeed, the fact that you feel them
to be so is a light upon your own 'knowledge', 'enlightened state'.
As I am very fond of saying, repeatedly, "Enlightened is what you are, experiencing
it is what you do". To which I can add, " manifesting it is your joy, your bliss,
your tantra"
You are exactly as you have chosen to be in this life's walk: chosen as an eternal spirit
that is an integral component of the 'One-ness'. Your individuality, your totality of being:
mind, body, emotions, ego, spirit, are essential aspects of 'The One-ness'. Choosing to
be you, in the fulness of who you really are, is honouring the purpose of your life's walk,
when you are the lovingness that you truly are
And I don't know anything you don't know in spiritual terms :):) I don't need to convince
you of something that you already know. You are a Master. You are a Guru. You need
no other...unless it's for entertainment! (there was much of that in religious traditions
before TV, PC and MP3 came along).
It snowed again the other night :):)
About 3,800 years ago it was unhealthy to be the firstborn,well, if you lived in the Middle
East it was (check it out,ask Isaac).
About 2,000 years ago it was 'socially and religiously unnacceptable' to be sick. This was
"God's punishment'.The 'sins' that Jesus 'healed' should be understood in thiscontext.
This nonsense is still voluminously echoed in this modern age - compare the attitudes
towards Aids in the 'Bible belt of America' or the archaic views of some African states.
By the Middle Ages it was unhealthy to have 'deviant or heretical' beliefs. A syndrome
that still persists even today!
Then by the late 19th century, early 20th century, it became abnormal, appalling,
to have 'independant thoughts'. Thanks to Pavlov,Freud and a few others society was
influenced to believe that 'conditioning was the new god' ( a god profusely worshipped
in Communist ruled countries) Anyone outside of this category was
'idealogically/psychologically impaired' (?)
Then we moved into an arena where such old concepts of control ceased to function
adequately (did we?), so the new absurdity is that your ego is the major fault in you.
Of course, I write here from a Judao/Islamic/Christian viewpoint. Such ideas about
imperfections in mankind did not appear in other cultures!?! Huh? Nonsense.
These 'archetypes' of categorisation where just as equally expressed in differing
cultures in differing ways. Even today in India, 60 years after the death of the prophet
of non-violence,children are still beaten by parents, teachers, etc. (thus are taught
the supremacy of violence over other means of societal influence) and untouchability
is still practised within a less conspicuous form of the caste system. The revolt against
the institutionalised religious structures in the West has been hijacked by leaders,
gurus, from the East..where the ability to produce such 'gurus' seems to outstrip the
production of rice, yet another 'supply/demand' status.
The control-orientated structures of differing religions,philosophies, practices,
permeate the totality of cultures throughout the world. 'Having a mind, having an
ego' becomes the modern equivalent of being the firstborn, being sick, being heretical,
being 'psychologically deviant'.
It places you in a scenario where you cannot be controlled and therefore indoctrinated
into someone else's viewpoint.Inherent in this procedure is the need to do as described
in the previous blog - adapt and use the 'teachings' of others,modify where necessary,
invent if required (even when no evidence supports the invention) and generally tailor
your message to suit your audiences cultural and historical background, gently inserting
'cultural reference points'.
Equally inherent in this scenario is the need to find some basis of sugestion that will
cause you to reject any fundamental principle that you can be (and are) as equally
spiritually knowledgable as any Priest, Imman, Guru, etc.
First 'convict of imperfection'. Next, replace with auto-suggestion,finally complete the
indoctrination by removing the concept of self.
Daring to be an individual, to be the you you have chosen to be in this life's walk,
to be the manifestation of an aspect of free, unbounded unconditional love, is the
highest tantra,the highest calling, the highest 'You'.
It is written "through experience one transcends" (Osho). Is that your experience or
someone else's? Is that intramundane transcendance or supramundane transcendance?
Borrowing the experiences of another is not a revelation of yourself to yourself - however
wonderful and loving you may feel the other to be. Indeed, the fact that you feel them
to be so is a light upon your own 'knowledge', 'enlightened state'.
As I am very fond of saying, repeatedly, "Enlightened is what you are, experiencing
it is what you do". To which I can add, " manifesting it is your joy, your bliss,
your tantra"
You are exactly as you have chosen to be in this life's walk: chosen as an eternal spirit
that is an integral component of the 'One-ness'. Your individuality, your totality of being:
mind, body, emotions, ego, spirit, are essential aspects of 'The One-ness'. Choosing to
be you, in the fulness of who you really are, is honouring the purpose of your life's walk,
when you are the lovingness that you truly are
And I don't know anything you don't know in spiritual terms :):) I don't need to convince
you of something that you already know. You are a Master. You are a Guru. You need
no other...unless it's for entertainment! (there was much of that in religious traditions
before TV, PC and MP3 came along).
It snowed again the other night :):)
Wednesday, April 06, 2005
Miror, mirror on the wall............
It is interesting how we are so conditioned to the 'teacher/pupil syndrome', huh?
Even people who do not tread the normal institutionalised pathway of religions,
(rich as they are with 'superior authoritarian metaphors for power over others')
people we could feel are 'new era - new age', still persist in manifestations of
conditioning by seeking guru's, enlightened ones, mahatmas'
So, I was recently occupied in a discussion, or rather i should say involved in
listening, concerning the superiority of one 'guru' over another. Amazing how,
through the ages, differing religious leaders fall prey to 'character/spiritual
assasination' by 'newer, modern gurus who need to theorise about the particular
or general motivations and/or characteristics of, for example, Christ.
Whilst accepting the general thrust of Christ's ministry, it seems so
essential to the modern 'guru' movement to on the one hand identify with
those characteristics by theorising that Christ visited this country or that
country, studied this or that 'religious tradition'. Then, on the other hand
to seperate the 'modern movement' from those aspects of Christ's ministry
which do not fit with the 'modern interpretation'.
When this contadiction is challenged one can hear comments like 'ah, but
xyz (their favourite guru) is an 'enlightened one' and knows about these things
(even when that so called knowledge is based upon uncorroborated fact or
theory) .
Then, of course, it's fair to ask the question," how do you know xyz is enlightened?"
Surely there is only one way to really know such a thing: that is if you yourself
are conversant with the codes and qualities of an 'enlightened being'. Surely
there is only one way that this could be so.... an issue of self experience
(for all else is simply hypothesis, huh?)
In order to recognise someone else as being 'enlightened', you must also
know what 'enlightenment is, be an enlightened One..ergo, all are 'enlightened
beings'.
If that is so, what is the need of this or that guru's experiencing as being
superior to one's own experiencing?
Ah, but then we are all conditioned to the 'teacher/pupil - master/disciple -
leader/follower- syndromes', huh?
It is interesting how we are so conditioned to the 'teacher/pupil syndrome', huh?
Even people who do not tread the normal institutionalised pathway of religions,
(rich as they are with 'superior authoritarian metaphors for power over others')
people we could feel are 'new era - new age', still persist in manifestations of
conditioning by seeking guru's, enlightened ones, mahatmas'
So, I was recently occupied in a discussion, or rather i should say involved in
listening, concerning the superiority of one 'guru' over another. Amazing how,
through the ages, differing religious leaders fall prey to 'character/spiritual
assasination' by 'newer, modern gurus who need to theorise about the particular
or general motivations and/or characteristics of, for example, Christ.
Whilst accepting the general thrust of Christ's ministry, it seems so
essential to the modern 'guru' movement to on the one hand identify with
those characteristics by theorising that Christ visited this country or that
country, studied this or that 'religious tradition'. Then, on the other hand
to seperate the 'modern movement' from those aspects of Christ's ministry
which do not fit with the 'modern interpretation'.
When this contadiction is challenged one can hear comments like 'ah, but
xyz (their favourite guru) is an 'enlightened one' and knows about these things
(even when that so called knowledge is based upon uncorroborated fact or
theory) .
Then, of course, it's fair to ask the question," how do you know xyz is enlightened?"
Surely there is only one way to really know such a thing: that is if you yourself
are conversant with the codes and qualities of an 'enlightened being'. Surely
there is only one way that this could be so.... an issue of self experience
(for all else is simply hypothesis, huh?)
In order to recognise someone else as being 'enlightened', you must also
know what 'enlightenment is, be an enlightened One..ergo, all are 'enlightened
beings'.
If that is so, what is the need of this or that guru's experiencing as being
superior to one's own experiencing?
Ah, but then we are all conditioned to the 'teacher/pupil - master/disciple -
leader/follower- syndromes', huh?
Sunday, April 03, 2005
ITO Aspects.... 3
I came to you
as your first breath
and you received me
I came to you
when first you walked
and together we travelled
I came to you
in your first romance
and together our spirit’s danced
I came to you
clothed in darkness
that you could shine in your lovingness
..............and when first you doubted
That you and I were One
I held you till your doubts were gone
And when first you struggled
Like an opening seed
I tended you till my hands did bleed
And then in beauty blossomed fair
The scent of your lovingness filled the air
I was there.
.... as I shall always be
Throughout eternity.
Geoffrey Groom April 2005
I came to you
as your first breath
and you received me
I came to you
when first you walked
and together we travelled
I came to you
in your first romance
and together our spirit’s danced
I came to you
clothed in darkness
that you could shine in your lovingness
..............and when first you doubted
That you and I were One
I held you till your doubts were gone
And when first you struggled
Like an opening seed
I tended you till my hands did bleed
And then in beauty blossomed fair
The scent of your lovingness filled the air
I was there.
.... as I shall always be
Throughout eternity.
Geoffrey Groom April 2005
Wednesday, March 30, 2005
Is, Is not
This is part of what I mean in my blog when I quote the song from Wet Wet Wet.'I
see it all around me, in everything'. Raindrops, clouds, leaves on trees,blades of
grass, snowflakes, people (especially children)..everything. The message is in
everything we behold. The uniqueness of it all. The individuality of it all. The
extreme magnificence of it all. It all speaks to me, all the time when I choose to
be consciously aware of it...it shouts to me of the limitlessness of Love.
Unconditional! Many 'religious' cultures have honoured this reality,especially
the N.American Indian cultures. All was/is a manifestation of Great Spirit (God).
Mankind's humanenting habit, one that is essentially born out of a desire to control
others and gain some 'illusory power' over them and thus be 'superior' to others,
gives birth to a belief (an abstract term) that Great Spirit can somehow lose in a
battle for the hearts of mankind. Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!
That there is somehow some great battle involving humankind between devlish
forces and God's forces..and that God might lose. ha Ha Ha HaHa Ha Ha.
Great Spirit is mankind!
Great Spirit is the limitless expressioning and experiencing of unconditional love,
in and through every (every, the so called negative as well as positive polarities)
aspect of existence/creation.
Doctrinalists cannot have it both ways:
God is either all powerful,or is not.
God is either all present, or is not.
God is either all-loving, or is not.
If God is, then God is everything!
If God is everything then we, each one, are a part of God.
What a silliness to think that Great Spirit fights against himself/herself/itself....and
can lose the battle. Ha Ha Ha Ha HaHa Ha ....of all the most absurd notions invented
in the mind/intellect of humanity, this has got to be the most schizophrenic and
absurd in this day and age.
Maybe in previous ages such 'conception cartoons' served a purpose of 'education',
or were a vehicle of moral precepts, but in this age such concepts simply become
prisons of conformity ruled by jailers whose programme is more that of punishment
than one of love.
Great Spirit knows the outcome of all the 'metaphors of relativity'. Great Spirit
desires to experience the wholeness and does so, amongst other ways,through the
'process of the pathway' of each individualised part ofhimself/herself/itself - in full
knowledge and awareness of the destination of the pathway.
No matter how many detours, all spiritual pathways,all spirit energy pathways, lead
back to their source.
This is part of what I mean in my blog when I quote the song from Wet Wet Wet.'I
see it all around me, in everything'. Raindrops, clouds, leaves on trees,blades of
grass, snowflakes, people (especially children)..everything. The message is in
everything we behold. The uniqueness of it all. The individuality of it all. The
extreme magnificence of it all. It all speaks to me, all the time when I choose to
be consciously aware of it...it shouts to me of the limitlessness of Love.
Unconditional! Many 'religious' cultures have honoured this reality,especially
the N.American Indian cultures. All was/is a manifestation of Great Spirit (God).
Mankind's humanenting habit, one that is essentially born out of a desire to control
others and gain some 'illusory power' over them and thus be 'superior' to others,
gives birth to a belief (an abstract term) that Great Spirit can somehow lose in a
battle for the hearts of mankind. Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!
That there is somehow some great battle involving humankind between devlish
forces and God's forces..and that God might lose. ha Ha Ha HaHa Ha Ha.
Great Spirit is mankind!
Great Spirit is the limitless expressioning and experiencing of unconditional love,
in and through every (every, the so called negative as well as positive polarities)
aspect of existence/creation.
Doctrinalists cannot have it both ways:
God is either all powerful,or is not.
God is either all present, or is not.
God is either all-loving, or is not.
If God is, then God is everything!
If God is everything then we, each one, are a part of God.
What a silliness to think that Great Spirit fights against himself/herself/itself....and
can lose the battle. Ha Ha Ha Ha HaHa Ha ....of all the most absurd notions invented
in the mind/intellect of humanity, this has got to be the most schizophrenic and
absurd in this day and age.
Maybe in previous ages such 'conception cartoons' served a purpose of 'education',
or were a vehicle of moral precepts, but in this age such concepts simply become
prisons of conformity ruled by jailers whose programme is more that of punishment
than one of love.
Great Spirit knows the outcome of all the 'metaphors of relativity'. Great Spirit
desires to experience the wholeness and does so, amongst other ways,through the
'process of the pathway' of each individualised part ofhimself/herself/itself - in full
knowledge and awareness of the destination of the pathway.
No matter how many detours, all spiritual pathways,all spirit energy pathways, lead
back to their source.
KVG_001-mote
Sculptur "Mote" (meeting) by Kjersti Vexelsen Goksoyr.
kjersti-vexelsen-goksoyr.no
Photo: Kim Muller
Saturday, March 26, 2005
"Greater love..."
It's Eastertime. Holiday weekend in the West, fervent and dedicated worship
in Africa, the Phillipines and a few other places where hardship and real need
is still the 'daily bread'
Existing in our 'benign indulgence'condition here in the West it is rarely
afforded to us to face the trauma of daily survival- and the consequent 'belief
system need' that offers some hope for better days -that is the daily eucharist
of so many in this world.
Just occasionally we get glimpses,revert to 'faith orientated hopes',and usually
in the face of great calamity. Some of these calamities the polarities of nature,
some the indifference or negative metaphors of other human beings.
In so many of these circumstances we witness the fulfillment of the words
"Greater love hath no man than that he lay down his life for his friends."
If you think this is an especially 'christian concept', think again!
In so many cultures in history there have been so many individuals
who have manifested this truth of' unconditional, unlimited lovingness'.
It often happens quietly and without great acclaim. But it happens all the
time. The symbolism of Easter, the ultimate sacrifice of the self for others,
is a constant theme throughout humanity.
In all areas this can be found.
So, this 'christian' Easter I remember Islam - an adolescent youth,a muslim
with the name Islam.
"According to the eyewitnesses, after the first explosion the boy rushed to
a call of an injured girl. "Help!" she moaned desperately. Islam only had time
to approach to her, when they shot him in the back. Maybe that was the same
terrorist who promised the boy to kill him: In the overfilled hall people were
forced to sit for hours in a closed proximity. When Islam Khadikov rose in
order to relax numb muscles, a nearby terrorist ordered him to sit down under
the death threat. "You will not kill me,I am a Muslim", answered Islam. "I will
kill you personally", maliciously replied the terrorist." (quoted from the Beslan
website:http://Beslan.ru )
Despite having been harshly warned by the terrorist, Islam Khadikov still went
to the assistance of that young girl in that school gymnasium at Beslan.
Islam's story is one of many, many that occurred during the horrors of those
days in Beslan. Stories of amazing courage and almost unbelievable lovingness.
It would be unbelievable if it had not actually happened.
Easter is not history. Easter, it's full symbolic meaning, echoes throughout
history and it matters not which religious 'label' we wear.
Islam Khadikov was killed by members of his own religion. Islam Khadikov
died in the act of trying to save another. Islam Khadikov was 14 years old.
Unconditional love.
It's Eastertime. Holiday weekend in the West, fervent and dedicated worship
in Africa, the Phillipines and a few other places where hardship and real need
is still the 'daily bread'
Existing in our 'benign indulgence'condition here in the West it is rarely
afforded to us to face the trauma of daily survival- and the consequent 'belief
system need' that offers some hope for better days -that is the daily eucharist
of so many in this world.
Just occasionally we get glimpses,revert to 'faith orientated hopes',and usually
in the face of great calamity. Some of these calamities the polarities of nature,
some the indifference or negative metaphors of other human beings.
In so many of these circumstances we witness the fulfillment of the words
"Greater love hath no man than that he lay down his life for his friends."
If you think this is an especially 'christian concept', think again!
In so many cultures in history there have been so many individuals
who have manifested this truth of' unconditional, unlimited lovingness'.
It often happens quietly and without great acclaim. But it happens all the
time. The symbolism of Easter, the ultimate sacrifice of the self for others,
is a constant theme throughout humanity.
In all areas this can be found.
So, this 'christian' Easter I remember Islam - an adolescent youth,a muslim
with the name Islam.
"According to the eyewitnesses, after the first explosion the boy rushed to
a call of an injured girl. "Help!" she moaned desperately. Islam only had time
to approach to her, when they shot him in the back. Maybe that was the same
terrorist who promised the boy to kill him: In the overfilled hall people were
forced to sit for hours in a closed proximity. When Islam Khadikov rose in
order to relax numb muscles, a nearby terrorist ordered him to sit down under
the death threat. "You will not kill me,I am a Muslim", answered Islam. "I will
kill you personally", maliciously replied the terrorist." (quoted from the Beslan
website:http://Beslan.ru )
Despite having been harshly warned by the terrorist, Islam Khadikov still went
to the assistance of that young girl in that school gymnasium at Beslan.
Islam's story is one of many, many that occurred during the horrors of those
days in Beslan. Stories of amazing courage and almost unbelievable lovingness.
It would be unbelievable if it had not actually happened.
Easter is not history. Easter, it's full symbolic meaning, echoes throughout
history and it matters not which religious 'label' we wear.
Islam Khadikov was killed by members of his own religion. Islam Khadikov
died in the act of trying to save another. Islam Khadikov was 14 years old.
Unconditional love.
Thursday, March 24, 2005
Wet Wet Wet, opening words to
'Love is all around'
"I feel it in my fingers
I feel it in my toes
Love is all around me
And so the feeling grows
It’s written on the wind
It’s everywhere I go, oh yes it is
So if you really love me
Come on and let it show "
How much do we need to see before we accept
the real 'me' ?!?
'Love is all around'
"I feel it in my fingers
I feel it in my toes
Love is all around me
And so the feeling grows
It’s written on the wind
It’s everywhere I go, oh yes it is
So if you really love me
Come on and let it show "
How much do we need to see before we accept
the real 'me' ?!?
Word Power II
James Campbell was once talking with a Priest and was asked
'Mr. Campbell, do you believe in a personal God?' To which he
replied he did not. Then the priest observed,'I suppose there
is no way I can prove the existence of a personal God to you?'
To which James Campbell replied,'if you could, then what would be
the value of faith?'
The Pocket Oxford Dictionary (1925 edition) defines faith as:
'belief in divine truth without proof'. Now both James Campbell
and the priest obviously held this definition of the word 'faith'.
Of course, faith in it's modern useage has come to mean something
a little different, or has it?
And what of the other key word in this scenario? Belief, as defined
by POD (above) means: 'Trust, confidence, acceptance of a thing as
true'.
So, both the term faith and the term belief are, in actuality, abstract
terminologies. They are words which construct a scenario that
occupies the energies of the logical cortexes of the brain. Except
that belief also contains a kinetic energy concerning an issue of
acceptance.
Now, the simple question I wish to pose is this: why would you need to
have a belief in something that you already know? Paraphrased: why
would you need to have faith in something that has already been proven?
With or without the 'God gene VMAT2' it seems clear to me that if we
dispense with humanented (humanenting: attributing human
characteristics to the character of a Supreme Being/Great Spirit/God)
God definitions and simply allow the supreme definition of 'God' as being
Unconditional Love, then the proof of this lovingness not only surrounds
and infuses our every 'metaphor of relativity' but does in fact lie within
our 'spiritual DNA coding'.
Since we know all the spiritual truths _ and may choose to manifest
them in consciousness or choose not to manifest them _ what is there
to have 'faith' in? What is there to believe?
Do we seek to 'prove' our very existence in this so_called reality of life?
Is it required that we have 'faith' that we actually read these words and
therefore are? It was once written 'I think therefore I am', maybe it is
better written 'I fee therefore I am'. WYSIWYG - what you sense is what
you get,hehehehe
Interesting how we will rather play intellectual ping_pong with concepts,
imbibe the 'authority of someone else's experiences', debate with our
word-games the validity of this or that theory......rather than accept our
own inner feelings about an issue of spiritual truth.
You know what I know, spiritually speaking. We all have equality of
knowledge in this area. It is neither a question of faith nor a question
of belief...it is an issue of acceptance of our own inner voice when it
speaks to us of manifesting, or beholding the manifestations of, spiritual
truths.
If there is a 'God' and the definition of 'God' is unconditional love
(and anything less than that is a much lesser humanented 'God') why
do we consider it so strange _ we snowflakes of sensing _ that we are
a part of God and therefore are living proof, in this life's walk, of a truth?
Acceptance of who you truly are is neither a question of belief nor a
question of faith..it is simply the application of 'in-sight'. Looking within.
Have a listen to Wet Wet Wet singing ‘Love is all around’.....it’ll
give you a clue :)
James Campbell was once talking with a Priest and was asked
'Mr. Campbell, do you believe in a personal God?' To which he
replied he did not. Then the priest observed,'I suppose there
is no way I can prove the existence of a personal God to you?'
To which James Campbell replied,'if you could, then what would be
the value of faith?'
The Pocket Oxford Dictionary (1925 edition) defines faith as:
'belief in divine truth without proof'. Now both James Campbell
and the priest obviously held this definition of the word 'faith'.
Of course, faith in it's modern useage has come to mean something
a little different, or has it?
And what of the other key word in this scenario? Belief, as defined
by POD (above) means: 'Trust, confidence, acceptance of a thing as
true'.
So, both the term faith and the term belief are, in actuality, abstract
terminologies. They are words which construct a scenario that
occupies the energies of the logical cortexes of the brain. Except
that belief also contains a kinetic energy concerning an issue of
acceptance.
Now, the simple question I wish to pose is this: why would you need to
have a belief in something that you already know? Paraphrased: why
would you need to have faith in something that has already been proven?
With or without the 'God gene VMAT2' it seems clear to me that if we
dispense with humanented (humanenting: attributing human
characteristics to the character of a Supreme Being/Great Spirit/God)
God definitions and simply allow the supreme definition of 'God' as being
Unconditional Love, then the proof of this lovingness not only surrounds
and infuses our every 'metaphor of relativity' but does in fact lie within
our 'spiritual DNA coding'.
Since we know all the spiritual truths _ and may choose to manifest
them in consciousness or choose not to manifest them _ what is there
to have 'faith' in? What is there to believe?
Do we seek to 'prove' our very existence in this so_called reality of life?
Is it required that we have 'faith' that we actually read these words and
therefore are? It was once written 'I think therefore I am', maybe it is
better written 'I fee therefore I am'. WYSIWYG - what you sense is what
you get,hehehehe
Interesting how we will rather play intellectual ping_pong with concepts,
imbibe the 'authority of someone else's experiences', debate with our
word-games the validity of this or that theory......rather than accept our
own inner feelings about an issue of spiritual truth.
You know what I know, spiritually speaking. We all have equality of
knowledge in this area. It is neither a question of faith nor a question
of belief...it is an issue of acceptance of our own inner voice when it
speaks to us of manifesting, or beholding the manifestations of, spiritual
truths.
If there is a 'God' and the definition of 'God' is unconditional love
(and anything less than that is a much lesser humanented 'God') why
do we consider it so strange _ we snowflakes of sensing _ that we are
a part of God and therefore are living proof, in this life's walk, of a truth?
Acceptance of who you truly are is neither a question of belief nor a
question of faith..it is simply the application of 'in-sight'. Looking within.
Have a listen to Wet Wet Wet singing ‘Love is all around’.....it’ll
give you a clue :)
Tuesday, March 22, 2005
crow
Crow, the keeper of sacred law in the N.American Indian traditions,
sees that the physical and spiritual worlds are an illusion at least as most of mankind interprets them. Crow is an omen of change
The reflected crow.
As a matter of habit it seems that most of us tend to regard a problem as a
challenge,something to be overcome, resolved,explained.This aproach
has been a great spur to the progress of humanity - well at least the
inquisitiveness of scientists in their desire to comprehend has been
a boon to the improvement of the human condition.
When it comes to spiritual issues,however, it seems clear that the use
of formulae and theoretical objectivity are not as successful in resolving
the issues.Possibly this is the result of the inability to actually be objective,
huh? For, as has been adequately demonstrated by modern neuro-science,
our 'logical cortexes' only start to work after - note after - the amygdala
'intuitive reaction' centre of our brain has already effected action.
In other words, we seem to act/react first and then seek explanations of
our behaviour through the proceses of the logical cortexes of the brain.
Hmmmm....this would seem to suggest,then,that our ability to even
comprehend the existence of a 'problem' (spiritually speaking) is a logical
cortex function. We have already intuitively reacted to, or formed opinions
about,or acted upon,any and every circumstance with which we meet before
we have proffered a 'logical acceptance stance'.
In terms of spirituality, therefore, it would seem that it is the function of our
'thinking brain' to isolate a situation as being problematic - even though we
have already experienced the situation and reacted to it.. Now there's a bold
assertion, huh?
But, think about it. How can we perceive there is a problem at all, if something
inside us is not aware of an experiential comprehension?
It is my assertion, my belief, my feeling that spiritual 'problems' are no more
and no less than our logical cortexes attempting to provide our conscious mind
with an acceptable explanation to something we know has occurred but which
we have difficulty in framing within a 'conditioned reflex' parameter.
In other words, in relation to spiritual matters,we already know the answer.
We must do in order to perceive there is a problem.
The problem is that of accepting, logically,emotionally, the answer that we
already know.In this sense we can deduce that in order to pose the problem
we are aware of the variables and in posing the problem seek a resolution
of those variables.
In other words, a problem is a solution awaiting it's time of birth in our
consciousness. We simply require to cloth it in an acceptable and
recognisable form.That is the problem our cortexes struggle with.....finding
a way to accept what we already know.
But then, you already knew this, didn't you,hehehehehe.
Becoming your future self is not a problem of a problem...but an issue
of acceptance of who you really are and choose to be.
As a matter of habit it seems that most of us tend to regard a problem as a
challenge,something to be overcome, resolved,explained.This aproach
has been a great spur to the progress of humanity - well at least the
inquisitiveness of scientists in their desire to comprehend has been
a boon to the improvement of the human condition.
When it comes to spiritual issues,however, it seems clear that the use
of formulae and theoretical objectivity are not as successful in resolving
the issues.Possibly this is the result of the inability to actually be objective,
huh? For, as has been adequately demonstrated by modern neuro-science,
our 'logical cortexes' only start to work after - note after - the amygdala
'intuitive reaction' centre of our brain has already effected action.
In other words, we seem to act/react first and then seek explanations of
our behaviour through the proceses of the logical cortexes of the brain.
Hmmmm....this would seem to suggest,then,that our ability to even
comprehend the existence of a 'problem' (spiritually speaking) is a logical
cortex function. We have already intuitively reacted to, or formed opinions
about,or acted upon,any and every circumstance with which we meet before
we have proffered a 'logical acceptance stance'.
In terms of spirituality, therefore, it would seem that it is the function of our
'thinking brain' to isolate a situation as being problematic - even though we
have already experienced the situation and reacted to it.. Now there's a bold
assertion, huh?
But, think about it. How can we perceive there is a problem at all, if something
inside us is not aware of an experiential comprehension?
It is my assertion, my belief, my feeling that spiritual 'problems' are no more
and no less than our logical cortexes attempting to provide our conscious mind
with an acceptable explanation to something we know has occurred but which
we have difficulty in framing within a 'conditioned reflex' parameter.
In other words, in relation to spiritual matters,we already know the answer.
We must do in order to perceive there is a problem.
The problem is that of accepting, logically,emotionally, the answer that we
already know.In this sense we can deduce that in order to pose the problem
we are aware of the variables and in posing the problem seek a resolution
of those variables.
In other words, a problem is a solution awaiting it's time of birth in our
consciousness. We simply require to cloth it in an acceptable and
recognisable form.That is the problem our cortexes struggle with.....finding
a way to accept what we already know.
But then, you already knew this, didn't you,hehehehehe.
Becoming your future self is not a problem of a problem...but an issue
of acceptance of who you really are and choose to be.
Sunday, March 20, 2005
Friday, March 18, 2005
Coded keys.
Some people seem to get a little confused when I talk about us 'knowing all there
is to know'. So I clearly have to differentiate between the spiritual and the 'temporal'.
When we, eternal spirits, enter into the 'metaphors of relativity' that we call life on
earth there are some 'mechanics' we need to understand before we can effectively
exist on earth.Does a spirit energy need to breath? Yet, here on earth our autonomic
neuron-empowered reflexes within the cellular structure we call our 'body' do just that.
We don't have to 'think' about it.The same with every vital organ in our body. The
mechanics of existing in a human body, for the most part, occur fairly automatically.
We need to provide the cellular fuels (food and liquid) to maintain the system or
degenerate the system (Edgar Cayce said 'we are what we eat') and, of course, there
are many stimuli we can involve ourselves with that express - and permit us to celebrate
-the magnificence of the structure we call our body. Not a lot to learn here except,
perhaps, to listen to what our cells tell us is acceptable treatment for this wonderful
mechanism. I don't need to know all about a car in order to enjoy a journey, huh?
Intellectually there is much for us to learn, much knowledge of a fascinating nature,
that speaks to us about the utter splendour of these 'metaphors of experiencing' that
are the polarities of human existence. Included in this category are all the millenia of
experiential conclusions which have been reached by 'thoughtful souls' about the
meanings of existence, who I am,what am I doing here, is there a God, do I have a
relationship with a Supreme Being, who created all this, etc.etc.etc. Let us remember,
however, when assimilating that knowledge that their experience, as is ours, was unique.
Experiencing, like the weather,is a condition of constant movement and change.
Now we return to the WYSIWYG -or what I call the 'what you sense is what you get'
formula, for the comprehensions that result in the 'answers' to the profound questions of
religion/eschatology depends upon what you wish to see or experience.
Since you know all the spiritual 'answers' how can you choose to experience them,
feel them, touch them - unless through that mechanism that I refer to as 'the process
of the pathway'. The metaphors of relativity allow us to experience every aspect of
unconditional love. This includes the opposites of unconditional love, or the 'perceived
absence' of unconditional love. It is not simply in the 'positive charged' energies of
relativity that we may experience a thing. This is the metaphorical symbolism of the
Adam and Eve story - a thing is either this or that or between this and that. Relativity
was Adam and Eve's 'gift to world'.Before this there had only been the realm of absolutes.
The 'forbidden fruit' could not have been forbidden in the realm of absolute unconditional
love. It is a metaphor for relativity without which we could not feel/experience that which
we know.
The key to awareness, enlightenment, is surely to accept -in your deepest sensing -
that in every single life experience is encoded a blessing of inner-awareness. If you
choose to see through,into, the metaphors of relativity you will always hear your 'inner
voice' telling you of the blessing. You hold your own key to this door.It's a unique key,
no-one else has a key the same. Your mind, your emotions, are a repository of other
people's keys.You've been collecting them all your life because your were told,influenced,
indoctrinated, to believe that those keys unlocked the secret vaults of enlightenment and
happiness and that this you had to learn to exist within this life. Funny how you keep
discovering that someone else's key does not unlock the inner you, huh?
Maybe we do need to consciously see the blessings within the'process of the pathway',
but we do not have to learn how to see.Spiritually we all have 'in-sight'. Just turn your
own key and release the real you. You know what's in there,but you also understand
your desire to experience what you know, huh? That is precisely what you are doing
at this very moment.
Some people seem to get a little confused when I talk about us 'knowing all there
is to know'. So I clearly have to differentiate between the spiritual and the 'temporal'.
When we, eternal spirits, enter into the 'metaphors of relativity' that we call life on
earth there are some 'mechanics' we need to understand before we can effectively
exist on earth.Does a spirit energy need to breath? Yet, here on earth our autonomic
neuron-empowered reflexes within the cellular structure we call our 'body' do just that.
We don't have to 'think' about it.The same with every vital organ in our body. The
mechanics of existing in a human body, for the most part, occur fairly automatically.
We need to provide the cellular fuels (food and liquid) to maintain the system or
degenerate the system (Edgar Cayce said 'we are what we eat') and, of course, there
are many stimuli we can involve ourselves with that express - and permit us to celebrate
-the magnificence of the structure we call our body. Not a lot to learn here except,
perhaps, to listen to what our cells tell us is acceptable treatment for this wonderful
mechanism. I don't need to know all about a car in order to enjoy a journey, huh?
Intellectually there is much for us to learn, much knowledge of a fascinating nature,
that speaks to us about the utter splendour of these 'metaphors of experiencing' that
are the polarities of human existence. Included in this category are all the millenia of
experiential conclusions which have been reached by 'thoughtful souls' about the
meanings of existence, who I am,what am I doing here, is there a God, do I have a
relationship with a Supreme Being, who created all this, etc.etc.etc. Let us remember,
however, when assimilating that knowledge that their experience, as is ours, was unique.
Experiencing, like the weather,is a condition of constant movement and change.
Now we return to the WYSIWYG -or what I call the 'what you sense is what you get'
formula, for the comprehensions that result in the 'answers' to the profound questions of
religion/eschatology depends upon what you wish to see or experience.
Since you know all the spiritual 'answers' how can you choose to experience them,
feel them, touch them - unless through that mechanism that I refer to as 'the process
of the pathway'. The metaphors of relativity allow us to experience every aspect of
unconditional love. This includes the opposites of unconditional love, or the 'perceived
absence' of unconditional love. It is not simply in the 'positive charged' energies of
relativity that we may experience a thing. This is the metaphorical symbolism of the
Adam and Eve story - a thing is either this or that or between this and that. Relativity
was Adam and Eve's 'gift to world'.Before this there had only been the realm of absolutes.
The 'forbidden fruit' could not have been forbidden in the realm of absolute unconditional
love. It is a metaphor for relativity without which we could not feel/experience that which
we know.
The key to awareness, enlightenment, is surely to accept -in your deepest sensing -
that in every single life experience is encoded a blessing of inner-awareness. If you
choose to see through,into, the metaphors of relativity you will always hear your 'inner
voice' telling you of the blessing. You hold your own key to this door.It's a unique key,
no-one else has a key the same. Your mind, your emotions, are a repository of other
people's keys.You've been collecting them all your life because your were told,influenced,
indoctrinated, to believe that those keys unlocked the secret vaults of enlightenment and
happiness and that this you had to learn to exist within this life. Funny how you keep
discovering that someone else's key does not unlock the inner you, huh?
Maybe we do need to consciously see the blessings within the'process of the pathway',
but we do not have to learn how to see.Spiritually we all have 'in-sight'. Just turn your
own key and release the real you. You know what's in there,but you also understand
your desire to experience what you know, huh? That is precisely what you are doing
at this very moment.
my_key
For 22 years and 11 months I have worn this key around my neck to remind me that I hold the key to myself
Wednesday, March 16, 2005
kinetic energy
Energy does not disappear - it transforms, transmutes,or is absorbed into a greater energy
Word-power
It was something Goerbels understood, and many 'politicians' since him.
It's something many 'religious leaders' understand.
It's something that, thanks to BLOGS which are revolutionising communication
for everyone can be a 'broadcaster' to a mass audience now, everyone of us can
sense.
The power of words to affect our lives, our judgements, our perceptions is
immense and yet, when it involves some of our deepest feelings and hopes
we become 'lost for words', hehehe.
The spoken word is one of the easiest forms of kinetic energy for us to
see/hear/sense. Say something bad about someone and see how quickly there
is energised a reaction within the group of listeners - or from the person themselves
to whom your words referred. See how the 'electricity of that energy' bounces
around your or their neurons like a pinball machine.
When translating St. John's gospel from the Greek (von Soden's text), James
Moffatt could find no effective word in the english language that had precisely the
same meaning and conveyed exactly the correct perception as the Greek word
'Logos' Logos means 'word',but it's meaning has the 'added value' of being an 'active
force'(kinetic energy) as opposed to a passive force (potential energy).
This, for any Christians,Jews or even Muslims reading this blog, is the meaning of
the 'creative word metaphor' that is used in the Book of Genesis, at the very beginning.
In order for us to fully understand what was written then we must also consider the
'energy' that impacted upon the society that read/heard it. Form Criticism and Higher
Criticism methodologies of interpretation must be applied for an adequate
understanding of meanings because words change in their energy potential and
effect throughout the ages. Indeed a similar 'creation story' can be found in many
different cultures around the globe. Spam, for me, was a kind of tinned luncheon meat,
hehehehe, now it devours my webmail and does so with considerable energy!?!
"It's only words', sang the Bee Gees and our pop music channels are filled with
them. To the credit of modern youth many of these 'song poems' are exceedingly
spiritual and express many of our innermost perceptions. Limp Biscuit have a ballad
'Behind Blue Eyes' that I especially like which speaks of 'my dreams are as empty as
my conscience seems to be". Anyone who has gone through a deep crisis can relate
to these words.An amazingly perceptive comment in this haunting song of dejection.
The ability of words to impact upon and influence a society is enormous.What we
say/write has an energy that goes out from us and can influence perceptions, if only
the perceptions of others about the speaker/writer.
When what we say has an energy source of love, we create - literally create
in the releasing of that energy - a loving effect.
The Dalai Lama understands this. Gandhi understood this. Mandella understands this.
In a world of words, over 5 million of them in the english language I understand, it's easy
for them to become devalued, or for them to be taken for granted. But even then,
occasionally, something someone says or writes 'energises our awareness'.
A butterfly of truth flaps it's wings and creates a storm of awareness, huh?
One of my favourites is the Chinese word for 'crisis', which according to JFK was
comprised of two symbols: the one symbol means danger and the other means
opportunity.Thus when we come into a 'crisis scenario' in life we can see precisely
what I meant when I talked about 'metaphors of experiencing'. There is the potential
for duality of energy in every word we speak and everything we experience - for
sometimes the 'metaphor of opposites' reveals something inside us.
The great souls (the mahatmas) know this and speak with the energy of love. For that is
a true reflection of their inner self, of the self they wish to manifest within this 'reality'
But then, love is only a word.........or is it?
It was something Goerbels understood, and many 'politicians' since him.
It's something many 'religious leaders' understand.
It's something that, thanks to BLOGS which are revolutionising communication
for everyone can be a 'broadcaster' to a mass audience now, everyone of us can
sense.
The power of words to affect our lives, our judgements, our perceptions is
immense and yet, when it involves some of our deepest feelings and hopes
we become 'lost for words', hehehe.
The spoken word is one of the easiest forms of kinetic energy for us to
see/hear/sense. Say something bad about someone and see how quickly there
is energised a reaction within the group of listeners - or from the person themselves
to whom your words referred. See how the 'electricity of that energy' bounces
around your or their neurons like a pinball machine.
When translating St. John's gospel from the Greek (von Soden's text), James
Moffatt could find no effective word in the english language that had precisely the
same meaning and conveyed exactly the correct perception as the Greek word
'Logos' Logos means 'word',but it's meaning has the 'added value' of being an 'active
force'(kinetic energy) as opposed to a passive force (potential energy).
This, for any Christians,Jews or even Muslims reading this blog, is the meaning of
the 'creative word metaphor' that is used in the Book of Genesis, at the very beginning.
In order for us to fully understand what was written then we must also consider the
'energy' that impacted upon the society that read/heard it. Form Criticism and Higher
Criticism methodologies of interpretation must be applied for an adequate
understanding of meanings because words change in their energy potential and
effect throughout the ages. Indeed a similar 'creation story' can be found in many
different cultures around the globe. Spam, for me, was a kind of tinned luncheon meat,
hehehehe, now it devours my webmail and does so with considerable energy!?!
"It's only words', sang the Bee Gees and our pop music channels are filled with
them. To the credit of modern youth many of these 'song poems' are exceedingly
spiritual and express many of our innermost perceptions. Limp Biscuit have a ballad
'Behind Blue Eyes' that I especially like which speaks of 'my dreams are as empty as
my conscience seems to be". Anyone who has gone through a deep crisis can relate
to these words.An amazingly perceptive comment in this haunting song of dejection.
The ability of words to impact upon and influence a society is enormous.What we
say/write has an energy that goes out from us and can influence perceptions, if only
the perceptions of others about the speaker/writer.
When what we say has an energy source of love, we create - literally create
in the releasing of that energy - a loving effect.
The Dalai Lama understands this. Gandhi understood this. Mandella understands this.
In a world of words, over 5 million of them in the english language I understand, it's easy
for them to become devalued, or for them to be taken for granted. But even then,
occasionally, something someone says or writes 'energises our awareness'.
A butterfly of truth flaps it's wings and creates a storm of awareness, huh?
One of my favourites is the Chinese word for 'crisis', which according to JFK was
comprised of two symbols: the one symbol means danger and the other means
opportunity.Thus when we come into a 'crisis scenario' in life we can see precisely
what I meant when I talked about 'metaphors of experiencing'. There is the potential
for duality of energy in every word we speak and everything we experience - for
sometimes the 'metaphor of opposites' reveals something inside us.
The great souls (the mahatmas) know this and speak with the energy of love. For that is
a true reflection of their inner self, of the self they wish to manifest within this 'reality'
But then, love is only a word.........or is it?
Tuesday, March 15, 2005
knowingness
Seekers on the spiritual path are curious to know about Enlightenment. What is Enlightenment?
I say, "Enlightenment is like a joke!" It is like a fish in the ocean searching for the ocean. Once upon a time, there was a congregation of fish, who got together to discuss who among them had seen the ocean. None of them could say they had actually seen the ocean. Then one fish said, "I think my great grandfather had seen the ocean!" A second fish said, "Yes, yes, I have heard about this." A third fish said, "Yes, certainly, his great grandfather has seen the ocean."So they built a huge temple and made a statue of the great grandfather of that particular fish! They said, "He had seen the ocean. He had been connected with the ocean."
Enlightenment is the very core of our being; going to the core of our self and living there. ~ Sri Sri Ravi Shankar
Monday, March 14, 2005
Snowing again :)
Yeah, it's snowing again here in the middle of the forests by the lake.
It always, always astounds me when it snow, the thought that scientists say each snowflake is unique. But then, how about a human brain?
The brain is a collection of about 10 billion interconnected neurons (and you thought mobile phone technology or PC's were amazing). Each neuron is a cell that uses biochemical reactions to receive, process and transmit information.A neuron's dendritic tree is connected to a thousand neighbouring neurons. When one of those neurons fire, a positive or negative charge is received by one of the dendrites. The strengths of all the received charges are added together through the processes of spatial and temporal summation. Spatial summation occurs when several weak signals are converted into a single large one, while temporal summation converts a rapid series of weak pulses from one source into one large signal.
The uniformity of function of the system is critical in an analogue device such as a brain where small errors can snowball, and where error correction is more difficult than in a digital system.
There are three classes of neurons:
Sensory neurons carry information from the sense organs (such as the eyes and ears) to the brain. Motor neurons have long axons and carry information from the central nervous system to the muscles and glands of the body. Interneurons have short axons and communicate only within their immediate region.
Scientists think that neurons are the most diverse kind of cell in the body. Within these three classes of neurons are hundreds of different types, each with specific message-carrying abilities.
How these neurons communicate with each other by making connections is what makes each of us unique in how we think, and feel, and act.
And that's just the brain. When it comes to the cells of the body, it's even more staggering: estimates vary betwen 10 trillion and 100 trillion cells in a human body. All of those genetically encoded by combinations of 1,000's of genes.
So how, when we are so individual and unique, do people assume to try and 'conform us' to someone else's ideas of ..well..whatever.
Ah, the wonderful intricacies of snowflakes, hehehehe
Yeah, it's snowing again here in the middle of the forests by the lake.
It always, always astounds me when it snow, the thought that scientists say each snowflake is unique. But then, how about a human brain?
The brain is a collection of about 10 billion interconnected neurons (and you thought mobile phone technology or PC's were amazing). Each neuron is a cell that uses biochemical reactions to receive, process and transmit information.A neuron's dendritic tree is connected to a thousand neighbouring neurons. When one of those neurons fire, a positive or negative charge is received by one of the dendrites. The strengths of all the received charges are added together through the processes of spatial and temporal summation. Spatial summation occurs when several weak signals are converted into a single large one, while temporal summation converts a rapid series of weak pulses from one source into one large signal.
The uniformity of function of the system is critical in an analogue device such as a brain where small errors can snowball, and where error correction is more difficult than in a digital system.
There are three classes of neurons:
Sensory neurons carry information from the sense organs (such as the eyes and ears) to the brain. Motor neurons have long axons and carry information from the central nervous system to the muscles and glands of the body. Interneurons have short axons and communicate only within their immediate region.
Scientists think that neurons are the most diverse kind of cell in the body. Within these three classes of neurons are hundreds of different types, each with specific message-carrying abilities.
How these neurons communicate with each other by making connections is what makes each of us unique in how we think, and feel, and act.
And that's just the brain. When it comes to the cells of the body, it's even more staggering: estimates vary betwen 10 trillion and 100 trillion cells in a human body. All of those genetically encoded by combinations of 1,000's of genes.
So how, when we are so individual and unique, do people assume to try and 'conform us' to someone else's ideas of ..well..whatever.
Ah, the wonderful intricacies of snowflakes, hehehehe
Saturday, March 12, 2005
Messengers
Sometimes it's a real struggle to try to manifest 'unconditional love'. Some life circumstances with which we are presented, and to which we feel a challenge to respond, just deeply offend any reasonable definitions of acceptable human behaviour.
That Gandhi could manage to respond to such challenges, or Nelson Mandela, or the wife of the missionary (and his two young sons) deliberately burnt to death in their car in Orissa State in India, or the young Asian girl who watched her family burnt alive by religious fanatics, - that they could respond to such challenges with concepts of forgiveness or a desire to inject love as opposed to hate into life scenarios, are modern, current examples that there is a deeply embedded aspect of lovingness within the 'human potential' that transcends mere 'existence in this life'.
In recent years atrocities on a scale that create horror and repulsion in the hearts of all reasonable people, have been answered with outpourings of love and charitable actions from around the globe. Never in the history of humanity has such rapid communication permitted us to respond so quickly to our innermost feelings and desires to help. 'Natural calamities' have been met with an outpouring of the force of human lovingness that transcends the 'natural force' which was the initiator of the catastrophe.
A whole new reality of humanity has passed it's birth, grown through it's infancy and is now in it's adolescence. It's in that stage of existing where dramatic mood swings occur and role modelling experimentations and expressions are overwhelming the habitual traditions of institutions. It is seen everywhere, sometimes in actions of desperation and rejection (as disillusioned young people prefer death to life, some of them even calling it marytyrdom), other times in manifestations of love,kindness and compassion that clearly show how far humanity has come from some of the negatively interpreted 'religion enshrined concepts' of a 1000 years ago or more.
As the economic indicators in western societies clearly show, the provision of most basic needs (food, housing, education, health welfare), has reached such a standard that populations have been freed from the 'survival mode' and have entered into a state of benign indulgence. But everywhere can be seen in these societies the re-emergence of a core concept of compassion and interdependence that demonstrates that the only growth 'industry' left for the 21st century is that of taking care of each other. Sharing our good fortune and management with our brethren throughout the world.
It is challenging, therefore, to read statements like this:
"We don't get involved in police affairs but we do feel that all "?!¤#¤!?" are obliged to ... keep anyone from doing unjustified damage to other people."
issued by an institution respresenting 70% of the followers of a religion in a modern western country. Granted the statement was contained within a condemnation,finally, of a modern terrorist icon whose activities and comments have almost hijacked a whole religion. At last, a world-wide massively membershipped religious institution has condemned as against it's teachings and the laws of God, such immoral, unethical and anti-humane atrocities by one of it's 'members'. Well, at least a small part of that world-wide institution has done so: in Spain, supported by 3 other countries.
The 'old attitudes and precepts' still infuse the thinking of such institutions, however.
In issuing a fatwa (an Islamic edict) against Osama Bin Laden the Muslim clerics representing 70% of their faith in Spain went on to say:
"Inasmuch as Osama bin Laden and his organization defend terrorism as legal and try to base it on the Quran ... they are committing the crime of 'istihlal' and thus become apostates that should not be considered Muslims or treated as such."
The Arabic term "istihlal" refers to the act of making up one's own laws.
At last the Islamic world is starting to re-assert it's core Koranic values. But the core of the problem of istihlal lies in
a concept that God solves problems the way that mankind solves them and therefore there can be justification for 'damaging' another human being. In the unfortunate words 'unjustified damage to other people' hides a concept that requires an answer: who decides what is justified? The world has seen enough of religio-politico 'justifications' that teach only pain and suffering. Hasn't Osama Bin Laden been using them? Weren't they used in Ireland, in the religious persecutions in England? By the Catholic church in South America? Christians versus Jews, Jews versus Canaanites, Christians versus Muslims, Muslims versus Hindus....and on, and on, and on! History is littered with the skeletons of concepts of 'justification'.
Humanity is beginning to find a better methodology that is free from the barbarity of the 'purely animal reflexes'. Many societies have transcended the 'eye for an eye' justification.
In doing damage to another person we damage the reality of 'The One-ness', we damage an important part of ourselves. Is that not the core 'original' message of all the major religions?
Whatever may be the powers and justifications of religious institutions, or even humanistic institutions, it is not even a faint shadow of the power of Love of that young Asian girl, or of those self-sacrificing Beslan teenagers who rescued others at the cost of their own lives. Amongst us are messengers who surrender all that is precious to them in this life to convey the message. You don't have to look back into history to find such messengers, we are surrounded by them now.
The 'old world' is being shown some insights as to how 'Paradise' really is, huh? Even from the mouths (and actions) of children. Adolescent behaviour often contains the uncompromised expression of ideals that are fundamental human archetypes, thus it is that spiritually mankind is starting to express the highest spiritual archetypal behaviour. Without conditions.
The LAW of unconditional LOVE transcends all other laws. There is no higher expression of 'The One-ness'. The reality of lovingness is the reality of the presence of 'The One-ness'. The upsurge in expressions of lovingness around the world is an indicator of humanity's 'growth into One-ness'.
In every 'metaphor of experience' can be found the 'process of the pathway' if we are willing to look. It's always been there, but now we are passing the merely 'survival mode' of existing and rapid uncensored communication allows us the possibility to see more clearly... if we are willing to look.
Sometimes it's a real struggle to try to manifest 'unconditional love'. Some life circumstances with which we are presented, and to which we feel a challenge to respond, just deeply offend any reasonable definitions of acceptable human behaviour.
That Gandhi could manage to respond to such challenges, or Nelson Mandela, or the wife of the missionary (and his two young sons) deliberately burnt to death in their car in Orissa State in India, or the young Asian girl who watched her family burnt alive by religious fanatics, - that they could respond to such challenges with concepts of forgiveness or a desire to inject love as opposed to hate into life scenarios, are modern, current examples that there is a deeply embedded aspect of lovingness within the 'human potential' that transcends mere 'existence in this life'.
In recent years atrocities on a scale that create horror and repulsion in the hearts of all reasonable people, have been answered with outpourings of love and charitable actions from around the globe. Never in the history of humanity has such rapid communication permitted us to respond so quickly to our innermost feelings and desires to help. 'Natural calamities' have been met with an outpouring of the force of human lovingness that transcends the 'natural force' which was the initiator of the catastrophe.
A whole new reality of humanity has passed it's birth, grown through it's infancy and is now in it's adolescence. It's in that stage of existing where dramatic mood swings occur and role modelling experimentations and expressions are overwhelming the habitual traditions of institutions. It is seen everywhere, sometimes in actions of desperation and rejection (as disillusioned young people prefer death to life, some of them even calling it marytyrdom), other times in manifestations of love,kindness and compassion that clearly show how far humanity has come from some of the negatively interpreted 'religion enshrined concepts' of a 1000 years ago or more.
As the economic indicators in western societies clearly show, the provision of most basic needs (food, housing, education, health welfare), has reached such a standard that populations have been freed from the 'survival mode' and have entered into a state of benign indulgence. But everywhere can be seen in these societies the re-emergence of a core concept of compassion and interdependence that demonstrates that the only growth 'industry' left for the 21st century is that of taking care of each other. Sharing our good fortune and management with our brethren throughout the world.
It is challenging, therefore, to read statements like this:
"We don't get involved in police affairs but we do feel that all "?!¤#¤!?" are obliged to ... keep anyone from doing unjustified damage to other people."
issued by an institution respresenting 70% of the followers of a religion in a modern western country. Granted the statement was contained within a condemnation,finally, of a modern terrorist icon whose activities and comments have almost hijacked a whole religion. At last, a world-wide massively membershipped religious institution has condemned as against it's teachings and the laws of God, such immoral, unethical and anti-humane atrocities by one of it's 'members'. Well, at least a small part of that world-wide institution has done so: in Spain, supported by 3 other countries.
The 'old attitudes and precepts' still infuse the thinking of such institutions, however.
In issuing a fatwa (an Islamic edict) against Osama Bin Laden the Muslim clerics representing 70% of their faith in Spain went on to say:
"Inasmuch as Osama bin Laden and his organization defend terrorism as legal and try to base it on the Quran ... they are committing the crime of 'istihlal' and thus become apostates that should not be considered Muslims or treated as such."
The Arabic term "istihlal" refers to the act of making up one's own laws.
At last the Islamic world is starting to re-assert it's core Koranic values. But the core of the problem of istihlal lies in
a concept that God solves problems the way that mankind solves them and therefore there can be justification for 'damaging' another human being. In the unfortunate words 'unjustified damage to other people' hides a concept that requires an answer: who decides what is justified? The world has seen enough of religio-politico 'justifications' that teach only pain and suffering. Hasn't Osama Bin Laden been using them? Weren't they used in Ireland, in the religious persecutions in England? By the Catholic church in South America? Christians versus Jews, Jews versus Canaanites, Christians versus Muslims, Muslims versus Hindus....and on, and on, and on! History is littered with the skeletons of concepts of 'justification'.
Humanity is beginning to find a better methodology that is free from the barbarity of the 'purely animal reflexes'. Many societies have transcended the 'eye for an eye' justification.
In doing damage to another person we damage the reality of 'The One-ness', we damage an important part of ourselves. Is that not the core 'original' message of all the major religions?
Whatever may be the powers and justifications of religious institutions, or even humanistic institutions, it is not even a faint shadow of the power of Love of that young Asian girl, or of those self-sacrificing Beslan teenagers who rescued others at the cost of their own lives. Amongst us are messengers who surrender all that is precious to them in this life to convey the message. You don't have to look back into history to find such messengers, we are surrounded by them now.
The 'old world' is being shown some insights as to how 'Paradise' really is, huh? Even from the mouths (and actions) of children. Adolescent behaviour often contains the uncompromised expression of ideals that are fundamental human archetypes, thus it is that spiritually mankind is starting to express the highest spiritual archetypal behaviour. Without conditions.
The LAW of unconditional LOVE transcends all other laws. There is no higher expression of 'The One-ness'. The reality of lovingness is the reality of the presence of 'The One-ness'. The upsurge in expressions of lovingness around the world is an indicator of humanity's 'growth into One-ness'.
In every 'metaphor of experience' can be found the 'process of the pathway' if we are willing to look. It's always been there, but now we are passing the merely 'survival mode' of existing and rapid uncensored communication allows us the possibility to see more clearly... if we are willing to look.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)