The nature of it ALL (well half of it anyways.)

[Guest guest]

Someone wrote to me:

> ... and wondering why, when we all come from

> pure love, acceptance, and light (that encompasses

> all, and there being no polarity or duality) that why

> (other than conditioning) do people embrace the

> dark side of their nature?

 

Reality, truth, love, energy all have to do with physicality.

 

Physicality is 'form & void'.

 

(Huh?)

 

A bowl is a bowl for its playfulness around the potential of being empty or

full or anything in between.

 

Imagine the first cupped hand

to bring water to the mouth

 

Imagine the first human

 

Imagine the first bowl

 

Imagine the first human love

 

the one who holds

the one who is beholden

the one who holds

the one who beholds the beholden

 

A dynamic and energetic, mutual and reciprocal interaction between lover and

beloved through sense and sensuality and also... surprise... measure, weight

and aspects in time.

That is the interplay of real stuff...

By the way, a grain of sand has sense(s) as well, so does a falling autumn

leaf. I have been so graced with having been allowed to experience and

remember that.

 

The dynamics involved in those interactions between 'stuff's are through

mutual causes and effects, reciprocal action and (positive) reaction - ergo

'interference' (as in 'interference patterns').

 

The meaning of these words (action / reaction, etc.) do not include meanings

like resistance, obstructive interference or counteractive reaction, the way

we humans have so erroneously learned to understand those words. In nature

there are no 'stopping actions' or 'counteractive manoeuvres'.

Really not...

 

Imagine billiard balls being played on a pool table.

A ball will not hit back when it is touched, it will roll on.

A ball will not 'on its own' decide to stop the ball that hit it, only a

very good billiard player who understands the laws of cause and *effect*,

action / reaction and plays them to their fullest extent can make such a

thing happen.

 

There is no retribution in nature. Words in physics like 'resistance' or

'interference' really have to do with 'friction' which is actually a

positive interaction between various states of matter: solid, liquid,

gaseous, plasmic, 'etheric'.

 

Let's not limit the scope of nature.

In nature there is the greatest depth and the widest expanse, the greatest

density and the greatest subtlety, it's all there, IT'S ALL THIS IS.

>From the moment we are born, we are confronted 'head on' or 'feet first',

with a new format of the physics of nature and we have to acquaint ourselves

with it from scratch. This 'confrontation' (the positive meaning), this

'facing' is helped by and facilitated though the faculties of our senses.

 

We perceive existence through our senses and... there is nothing wrong with

that... in fact... it is miraculous... we perceive ALL THIS HERE NOW, this

MIRACLE through our senses.

 

So, this is about perception of nature, all there is.

The way Jesus, the Buddha and the like, perceived it

when they, just like us, came into this world,

and they, just like us were confronted with... oops... suffering,

and they, just like us asked the same question that you stated above,

and they just like us wished to alleviate it, as you state so well below.

 

Again, this is about full perception of nature... 'all there is to it'.

 

The word 'perception' could be translated as "holding something and sensing

the energy of wonder and mutual admiration."

 

That is what we hope and expect to experience from birth and onwards, and

all of us will.. even if for some of us only for an instant... and for many

of us rather belatedly.

 

We are stuff and that is good... and everything that follows from that

naturally, is good.

When it was all conceived creatively, perceiving it all in wonder and mutual

admiration, God saw that it was all good and even said so

 

(Still measured as that pretty cool cosmic background radiation as 'heard'

up by Penzias and Wilson ?;-)

 

(I don't want to take the creation story literally, however what is

important to know is that the people who contributed to that account

originally knew that creation was good and divine per sé.)

 

In nature the laws of nature work, how is that in 'human nature' ???

Later!

 

In nature the laws of nature work as they are supposed to.

Well that is the nature of things, they have no choice do they?

Huh?....

 

Come to think of it, actually, I should say, naturally things choose freely

to deal with 'laws' of nature and as they do that they 'debunk' and reinvent

them, 'destroy' and recreate them, forget their roles and re-enact them.

(There is modern science behind this.)

That is the fun of the divine play of nature.

Also, just have a look and see how 'unadulterated' children play.

 

Action and reaction can only work smoothly and unencumbered when there is

that freedom and playfulness.

You would not think so, would you? Well that is the problem with thinking.

 

Now, we as humans, very early on in our development, discovered that we can

conceive of certain dynamics in nature..., mostly the cruder aspects.

Not enough, sadly enough, the more playful and subtler aspects of those

dynmics, having a problem with too much time on our hands and sleeping

through it all and sometimes no time at all from fear of being eaten up.

(A left over from the pre-human 'hunter and hunted' era).

 

We base our conceptions on the plentiful serious perceptions, rather than on

the meager playful ones. Ah data input.

(Did we learn to laugh last in our human development?)

 

Data input, hmmm..., not digitally as 0s and 1s, (that would have been good)

but as analogue representations, as reproduced constructs (as we will see a

little later) for the mind's eye... an analogue of the real eye.

At least we developed an ability to analyse data input, integrate data

input, compare and correlate data input. And we invented and devised a

special faculty to do that: a *mind*, but a mind being more a conceptual

invention than a physical 'contraption' like the eye or the ear or the nose

or the tongue or our tactile organs.

Some Buddhists (one of them, my great friend Avalokiteshvara) added that

mentalizing faculty to the 5 senses. I usually argue that, but I'll leave

that for now.

 

OK then, just like the senses, the mind is a medium, a tool. A tool to

analyse and integrate, a tool to correlate and corroborate, a tool to

interpret information gleaned from the senses. A tool also to help store and

retrieve sensed data representations in and from their classes and

categories, distinctions invented by the mind based on its analytical,

correlating and integrating prowess. The mind, a virtual master of a virtual

layering of virtual networks encapsulating our brain's mass. The mind was

supposed to have its repository (to repose, to rest itself and let its

illuminations come to rest) directly in the physical brain, a conglomerate

of very special cells... cells consisting of fatty acids mostly,

cholesterol... luckily the good kind.

 

But something went 'haywire'

 

The mind is a wonderful data base manager, cybernator (governor), steersman,

helmsman, traffic controller, supervisor maybe, but not more than that. The

mind is not a boss..., just like our eye is not a boss, or our nose isn't

or... our 'bossy' tongue is not.... definitely not :-)

 

However the mind picked up some allure...

 

The mind is supposed to be a tool to help see clarity in a potential

mishmash of complexity, to help shedding light, to aid in the

re-illumination and redistribution of response data with nervous energy

based on the mind's analytical and integrating functionality, to help

feeding data back to our sense organs for reappraisal, accompanied with

appropriate response stimuli and impulses. The mind is supposed to assure

freedom and fresh surprising creativity, something beyond automatic and

almost prescribed responses. The mind is supposed to be a biofeedback and

re-appraisal tool, a tool that guarantees benefial reciprocicity when asked

from and responded to. The mind as a virtual medium is not the message not

even the messenger, the mind is only supposed to facilitate storage and free

retrieval, distribution and coordination, create co-respondencies not

control them or prevent them.

 

So what happened?

 

The mind deals with abstracts, it only plays with recordings of sensed

stuff, not even imprints. Data are not the stuff they represent, data are

only representations, allusions at best, illusions at worst. The mind does

not know that... the mind does not know anything beyond its collected data,

for the mind the data are real, but WE are supposed to know that those data

are only virtually real, our awareness tells us that... but we have been

'led' to believe our mind more than ourselves. How did that happen? The mind

now keeps us away from experiencing reality more directly, the medium became

the impediment.

The mind is now happy enough to regurgitate its own data and does not desire

new anymore... the vicious circle is a closed circle, a closed mind

 

The medium will shoot any new message and the messenger gets floored..

 

So what happened... and why... and how can we put the mind back in its

place, revive the messenger and receive clear messages again so we can

believe our senses and be ourselves again...

 

Someone wrote to me:

> And coming here for a purpose...I am thinking that as beings

> that are pure love, etc etc etc...... do we come here just for

> the mere reason of experiencing?

> Perhaps that was the goal of some, and yes, we are here to

> experience, experiment, and many other things...

> But I also feel that out of compassion we come here in hopes

> of repairing some damage, or in aiding, or healing, or merely

> as being the vessel that helps someone else's life goal....

> It may be a human desire to have a goal in our meaningless

> lives, but I know of how we love humanity, and how we wish to

> preserve humanity and mother earth..

> This is not the goal of someone who seeks control,

> this is not the goal of someone who harms others thru

> manipulation and outright harm....

 

Although they may cloak their intentions with the very same words, but that

comes next.

 

Love, Wim

(more to follow)