Thursday, 22 August 2013

Grow a culture?

Perhaps our 'leaders' are really but slaves to the thinking of the world?

They cannot take us where we are unwilling to go and if we are forced against our willingness there is always backlash along the line.

To grow a culture of valuing sharing and sharing what I truly value starts with me  (for me) - and I have the benefit of that as a context of my life because I live it. It could take off - because isolated thinking is not an answer and something has to break siege to live forth in a demonstration that makes no claims for itself but shares a sense of worth with others. Is this not often a matter of simply pausing from reaction and listening in willingness and trust of a better way? It works! - But is hard because we often have to move through humiliation or powerlessness and the temptation to cover that in self-righteous anger.

That is the essence of the practice of 'spirituality' or love rather than dressing up in sets of beliefs and identifications. 'By our fruits are we known'. Not targets and check boxes but a living discernment of health and joy and integrity!

Feeling for what we hold in common rather than using everything to differentiate.

 If we think we have nothing in common with the 'stupid or hateful other' - perhaps we are too quick to judge or deny something in others that is unhealed in our own mind.

Perhaps we don't WANT healing! - but to be able to indulge a self righteousness.
Perhaps we have not suffered enough...

a narrow, rigid mind?


I read a comment that said:
Religious belief implies a narrow, rigid mind.


To a narrow rigid sense... of what religious belief is presumed to be, this must seem irrefutable, self evident and hardly worth saying.

But an open fluid mind can take any thought, perception and experience and use it to open a deeper or more inclusively related perspective or meaning.
This could be called meditation as it is a process in observation and discernment in which presumptions or beliefs about whatever it seems to be are challenged, released and expanded in freshly observed insight and perspective.

Of course the capacity of mind to narrow itself in rigid self-defining ways can be seen in relation to anything where an assertive and coercive identification is running as a presumption of knowing.

Though science does not presume to truly KNOW what anything really IS, its models and working hypothesis are adopted by a mentality that presumes it does!

The extent of manipulative interference of the scientific mind far exceeds anything that religious manipulation could have dreamed of. This may be an indicator of why the control mentality jumped ship to adopt a scientific mask in which to 'sell' and idea of rationality and free thinking as a deeper manipulative intent.

It is not difficult to see what one judges against - in one's own mind. One can also choose to see what we hold in common and share that instead. But a rigid narrow tyranny seeks to prevent these simplicities from being obvious to us all. Such is the nature of a mentality of judgement. It is always against - as if for. And operates the dictum. 'divide and rule'.

Religion might call this 'devil' or 'ego' and science might search out a virus that undermines the integrity of structural functionality and communication. It rests on the belief in a narrow rigid mind.

What truly is the nature of mind? It has NO materiality in itself whatsoever. No dimension and no limitation. All sense of limiting is the action of thoughts in mind being taken as if they were mind itself.

Sunday, 18 August 2013

Invalidating a greater perspective


"Is a viewpoint valid, if someone believes in an adult version of Father Christmas?"

I met this comment as a gesture of refusal to even begin to consider anything apparently religious to have any viewpoint to consider or learn from - apart from reinforcing a self-righteousness of superiority in one's own terms.

- - -

Your viewpoint has a validity in that you are no more or less valid than any other human being. That doesn't mean your viewpoint is true, but it means that you are not invalidated by that you are using something and making it true for you at some level.

If you felt the symbol of giving is useful to its reality, you might not need the symbol to do more than work as a focus for intention attention.

If you were to be open to that quality of existence that is a presence and a gift, it may dawn on you in all sorts of ways as a result.

What life is, is something that comes through us and shares itself to then reflects to us.

The symbol of getting is one that takes forms of meaning out of context and redefines to a self-defined context so as to replace art of living with artifice.

So if I said that I still believed in Santa, the fact that I believed it is valid, but not the belief.
 
The validity of a belief is a matter a the context of its service to the one who uses it. The criteria YOU set forth reflect you own beliefs and goals. If what serves another does not serve you, it does not mean you have invalidated it in your brother, or that your brother is invalidated by his choosing it.

If you would have freedom to uncover the truth of your living and being, then by allowing others to find theirs will you advance more surely.

If you want to define and determine reality so as to be valid at the cost of another's invalidity, you will only seed conflict and define yourself valid in opposition.

You have a sense that beliefs can be stepping stones and give off a sense that you are beyond all childish need for belief in external forms of support for the sense of identity currently active within your life.

It is not that you are invalidated by seeking to be right over and against another's wrong - but that this psychological defence is part of a hidden 'belief' in magic.

The disregard of the mind by scientific orthodoxy is a self-inflicted blindness. Opening a greater perspective is generally a result of 'loving thine enemy' in some sense of a shift of insight to that one is encountering one's own unconscious reflections and projections - but in terms designed to remain 'hidden' unrecognised and justly hated.

Truth is already. In seeking to create definitions - as if its 'discovery' in definition is testament to self - and validation of self, we persist an invalidity of identification. And such a sense of self-defensiveness will interpret all things in a manner that inhibits a unified perspective.