Monday, 22 April 2013

War on Consciousness?

I am one whose life has been an exploration of Consciousness – although I feel that its nature is not an exploration of a human intellect or personality – but a willingness to be guided through my own mind by honest observations amidst a perspective that is from outside the mappings and control mentality (these tend to be one and the same thing).
I feel that a scepticism of one’s own thinking is healthy – but a scepticism of Life itself is an absolute block to knowing anything real.
The extension of trust is not gullibility, but a willingness and capacity to put aside our own thinking and actually pay attention.
From such an act, an intelligence is accessed that communicates something of the nature of reality – not as a definition or analysis – but as and expression of integrity, helpfulness, or wholeness. Not because there is a communication from a God to a personal mind in fragmentation and dissociation from its Mind or true inherence in reality, but because an undefended appreciation of reality releases some of the distorting bias or filters that could be called a ‘war on Consciousness’ – excepting there is no battle but a mind at war with itself in identification with image and symbol and concept of reality or self.
The assertion and experience of the material basis for existence is a defence mechanism that is needed until there is a willingness to release it – whether its disintegration occurs via drugs or via a series of honest observations that are NOT censored but allowed to be held open despite the sense of threat to one’s established identification.
One could see the limitations as a womb or egg to be grown out from – or indeed as a straightjacket that cannot be undone until there is a fundamental trust restored.
Idea are the stuff of all else. Every culture is an exploration and embodiment of ideas, ad the world is an exploration of many and conflicting ideas – yet the term world there was used for an experience and not for the Actuality that is both beyond definition – and therefore cannot be experienced as any kind of object – and yet is the ONLY THING going on – right where ideas of self, of time and space and non-self, arise and form experience.
The human mind has defaulted to look ‘outside’ because its identity as an independent explorer of an unknown reality serves as a mask against the revealing of its foundationlessness as a power or entity in its own right. This it equates with death and its first drive is to prevail against the very Life that is its source of its sense of existence: survival of self within definition. Yet the laws of the nature of Mind cannot altogether be lost but are applied to that which self conficts and yet self protects both. This is a sort of riddle for trying to maintain incongruent and untenable conditions requires maximal ingenuity to keep inherent futility from awareness, as well as to create substitutions for a sense of Meaning of relation, connection and identity such as to keep a promise of fulfilment amidst what can never actually fulfil.
The Universe that our minds can understand – in the scientific sense, will be revealed to be our minds themselves – in ways that we don’t expect, because the mind works to deny and project out from itself that which it seeks to disown in order to prevail or survive (in its own terms) and yet all that is denied has become the matrix of its own experience… unrecognized, and remapped or redefined in terms of the drive to exploit it. All things and relationships are thus reduced to a means of validating a sense of self-separation or limited consciousness amidst One Mind.
Yet for any who come to look not out there as if it really is out there – but see their own non-existence or pseudo-identity, not as conceptual fodder but directly as an ultimate humiliation to any capacity to maintain their image and control over their experience – a transformation occurs; a shift in which something actual has replaced what was before conceptual.
The ‘mind’ habit usually ‘restores normal service, such that intuitive insight and revelation is as if a timelessness that get covered in time – yet it cannot be the ‘solid’ reality that it once took for granted and a process of metamorphosis now occurs because there is some part of the mind that is awake to that it is a direct expression of Actuality – no matter how much else is brought to bear.
The self of the ego personality tries to use all things to make its identification valid or solid- be they apparently material or apparently spiritual, and yet in the process reveals itself step by step in its strategies and intent. Once one knows, one cannot live as if one knows not except as a lie and with the cost to truth that defending a lie demands. So we are progressively undone of what once we thought real – and yet become more open to communicating or expressing a passion and a presence of life in whatever fields our movement uncovers and shares in – if we release the blocks of a false self-protectivism in embracing what we feel called to engage in.
Life Works, in that we cannot escape our ultimate self-inclusion – but from the posture of reactive self-interest in feigned relative innocence or feigned insignificance, it doesn’t work – even if warring is given sanction by its high priests, and psychological sickness is redefined as healthy, and the whole mess massed into the ‘human condition’ and given over as a problem to be endlessly engaged in distractive preoccupation.
Whatever the presumption of self is – or the presumption of reality is – the mind will extend out from in support of its premise.
Change the foundation and all else MUST shift.
There cannot really be a war in our mind, but only an interpretation that conflicts with itself and yet is maintained as if in compartmented thought.
Yet the identification with our thought should not be underestimated and the tragic misery and pain of fighting such war is an isolation of meaninglessness that really operates as if it is winning – or holding the fort – or being persecuted, betrayed or abandoned.
We do what we can with what we have. Both fear and the light of awareness are in our mind and much of the fear is hidden beneath layers of fear disguised as protection, for it is the fear of light that keeps our mind tiny and ineffectual.
Science is expanding our vision but it also feeds the mentality of control. To try to keep both is to re-enact stark insanity.
A true control is not imposed upon a wholeness – but operates within it as its own process of communication.
I read most all the commentary here and join with the willingness to reach for better ways of communicating. It is I feel a wholly worthy goal and a very relevant skill.
But it is true that the new foundation cannot ‘talk’ to the old and nor can the old ‘talk’ to the new. So no need to polarise in failure but simply be alert for all signs of life and join with willingness wherever it can be discerned.
My first experiences of opening consciousness were terrifying, because in simplest terms, the love of life was not expressing and the attempt to control was dominant.
Yet an honesty of not knowing is the condition in which true learning occurs, and that remains so no matter what we think we have learned or become. Not knowing is the resting in the emptiness of self definition or assertion such that it is full of the edgeless intelligence of being.
One doesn’t learn how to be – though one may have to learn to release the blocks to its native awareness.


(THis was written into comments on TED's blog regarding their reaction to Rupert Shedrake and Graham Hancock's respective TED lectures being 'disowned' and defamed and in some sense censored). See the TED Blog for more information).

No comments:

Post a Comment