An alternate reading of inheritances
in response to the themes in:
https://un-denial.com/denial-2/theory-short/
(actually to themes in the comments)
An alternate reading of inheritances:
What we resist, persists.
What we disregard fades from non use.
The patterning of physical & biological structure is assigned 'laws' in our genetically based evolutionary backstory of a materially determined focus in object continuity.
Workability is integral to function. So that our intent or desire to focus in experience as a specific representation or embodiment of significance, value and meaning is a functional consciousness within an infinite or unbounded field of probabilities drawn from 'potential' both of 'past & future' - which thus shift the gestalt of the framing consciousness through which a 'self' & a world of selves, arise as if 'self-existing' separate organisms.
That we acknowledge shared Biome reflects a shared life in terms of the edge of our visible structures, yet all perception is an organised selectivity that - like quantum probabilities - has collective predictabilities when we generalise and normalise rather than engage the specific directly - as a unique expression of the Field - that we each are as well as participate in.
My point is to notice our framing assumptions or ideas that have practical of commonplace usage - but are not directly participating in the field of aligning our current appreciation of meaning or value-fulfilment in both significance and gratitude for being.
Group-think is a habit that goes along to get along within a world of masking over back-grounded conflicts to persist a past onto a present into a future - or continuity of self-imaged meanings, as identity-complex given permission to run as 'subconscious' framing for the life we are choosing now (knowingly or as determined by narrative or mythic identity.
There's nothing but reality to experience - but we cannot define without a representational image or concept of 'What Is'. Where we 'come in' to our sense of self & world will thus shape all experience that derives from it. The release or 'death' of an identity pattern opens multiple perspectives as an integrative consciousness of resonant compassion - in place of exclusive identity struggle. Resonance is a quality of being - that can be framed by hindsight to object continuity, but is qualitative & thus the field of energy information as consciousness that we assign to levels of shifting judgement.
Wow!
ReplyDeleteThank you for this answer. Although, I don't understand much about it :)
Maybe, I will try to read it again several times and think about it... I am not sure yet...
In any case, yes :)
PS : I am posting an answer here, because I am pretty sure this is not the kind of conversations Rob would like to have on his blog.
Thanks Charles.
ReplyDeleteI gathered that Rob's blog is framed within a set of assumptions that carry pros and cons - as a spotlight focus bring out details but discards much to the shade.
Yes.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, about your initial post. In overall, I think I know what you mean. But there are many things I am unsure to understand. So I have many questions :)
* "inheritances": by this word you mean ideas/preconceptions we inherited (from our education, the society, our experience, etc...)? Or do you mean everything we inherited, not only conceptions but also material belongings? Or maybe, you don't make any distinctions because they are at the root of the same nature? (objects being the materialization of our ideas)
* "What we resist, persists.": yes that is very true.
* "What we disregard fades from non use.": I don't know. Sometimes reality slaps you in the face until you address an peculiar aspect of it, doesn't it?
* "The patterning of physical & biological structure is assigned 'laws' in our genetically based evolutionary backstory of a materially determined focus in object continuity.": this paragraph is hard for me to understand. Do you mean, there is a focus in object continuity in the way we apprehend the world; and then, we try to assign laws to what we see according to the mental frame (backstory) of evolution? But I don't understand why the focus is "materially determined".
* "Workability is integral to function.": I don't know what this means.
* ... I am skipping the middle, too hard...
* Anyway, I particularly like the fragment I understood from the last paragraph :)
* "There's nothing but reality to experience - but we cannot define without a representational image or concept of 'What Is'." Yes.
* "Where we 'come in' to our sense of self & world will thus shape all experience that derives from it." I guess by "come in", you mean the way we frame everything. From the level of the small self, to the level of Totality, with every possibility in between.
* "The release or 'death' of an identity pattern opens multiple perspectives as an integrative consciousness of resonant compassion - in place of exclusive identity struggle." Yes. By integrative you mean which does not exclude/oppose anything (only love/peace remains)? In opposition to exclusive which would mean "which separates/opposes"? This is about the artificial conflict of "I" against "them" (or any other kind of duality).
Anyway these days I have two new ways to conceptualize Reality which I cherish.
One is the image of an iceberg, where this world we experience awake is only the part out of the water and everything else is underneath (inner world, dreams, other more esoteric experiences of consciousness and that which we are not aware of...).
Another, is the image of a gigantic tree of consciousness/life, of which our material bodies are the fruits. Consciousness is being continually delivered to maintain the bodies alive through the third eye (pineal gland).
We are in this world, but not of this world.
These are just intuitions...
ReplyDeleteI chose not to use the frame of genetic evolution but to reach past what which is now used to ‘explain’ inherited traits.
But of course the application of the word ‘inheritance’ is much wider & broader than a physical code system of determinations that becomes yet another leverage for ‘risk, protections & controls’.
So yes any idea used as a lens through which to align experience of value or meaning will seed or beget in its likeness.
I sometime use ‘mis-taken inheritance’ as a contrast to a recognised inherence. The first being concept-framed and the second being the felt quality & nature of existence - that is self-awareness rather than’ self-consciousness’.
So I mean consciously disregard as the recognition of ‘nothing meaningful, useful or of value to who I accept and choose to be.
You could see it as “thanks - but no thanks!” or even “get thee behind me!”. Engaging with what we don't want reveals that at some level we do want it - or something we (believe we) get out of it.
Workability is function, not just in physical terms but as expression of ‘idea creation’. If internal conflicts render life painfully meaningless, such a life becomes unworkable and unliveable - but that is also the conditions in which deeper questionings arise despite ‘personal and social inheritances’
There is ‘where we come in’ as our formative expression of separation-conflicts and strategies of survival, & where we are coming in - right now, from our acceptance or alignment in inherited experience AND potentials of a greater perspective usually assigned to ‘future’.
We can choose to not use (or to disregard) the past that no longer serves us, so as to welcome or make way for the More of who and what we are to reveal to our current capacity for receiving and giving.
Yes a segregative sense of self (that may believe itself separately set over and against life or world) can block or override the communication of integrality of being to an identity set in conflict and control - that runs destructive or unworkable.
But forced inclusion is not a true embrace of divergencies but a groupthink under dictate of correctness, so freedom to include ourselves )live from a sense of belonging in shared value is giving as a basis of receiving.
yes the intuitive may seem in some ways weak (within our current world) but the images actually come from the greater Consciousness as part of a bridge that we have at some level desired and accepted. So let them be just (honest).
Intuitive understanding is a resonance in the heart that can be rested in. Attempts to stuff it into words or ideas can push it away even while seeming to attain knowledge. So letting a quality of relationship guide us, such as to grow within at first unformed, bit then reveal itself in synchronicities of deeper participation that are unselfconscious - but not unaware.
I wrote this as responses to your points without going back to the original context that drew me to share it.
Thank you for taking the time to answer point by point.
ReplyDeleteThere are many things I like and recognize. In particular, the difference between self-awareness and "self-consciousness". I guess there are quotes around "self-consciousness" because truly no such thing is ever given to us (we are always starring at an image in some kind of a mirror. It is never really oneself).
Thank you for clarifying the meaning of the word "disregard". Conscious disregard is a great force. "Engaging with what we don't want reveals that at some level we do want it". This is very true and quite difficult to accept.
I have fairly recently (if this word means anything) discovered the path of the heart and intuitions. A new north which I gently yet faithfully follow. It feels all nicer that way to me. Yes words are a kind of prison.
It was fun. So I think I will take the time to read some of your other entries at a slow pace. A sip at a time :)
You are welcome.
ReplyDelete