That Thou Art

That Thou Art

in response to the themes in:

https://off-guardian.org/2023/05/13/art-equals-human-not-anymore/

 

 

The word art is 'to be' - though now archaic as in Thou art.

Hence 'humans' is now current as an alien and alienating perspective from a dissociated thinking for human specimens rather than any felt appreciation of connection with human being (which hasn't really a plural as it is already relational).

The thought and world we co-create via dissociated thinking is set in a mind of predictive control. Our very definitions are attempts to grasp or possess so as to control or fit to our will and desire. But the will and desire of dissociated thinking is set in substitution for the qualities of being that are filtered, ruled out, distorted and denied by masked or distanced self-conflict. So it cannot actually create, but only gain function from the subversion of the creative, as a parasitic denial of the very life it feeds on.

Artifice operates as a virtual or augmented representation of being in replicate or copy that mimics forms but no longer embodies the same context - so providing a lens or matrix by which to 'miscreate' in terms of fear & control given power in the mind to run on false currency of thought with self-reinforcing emotional and physical expression and reflection.

For our mind can be phished by image and form or self-fixate in fantasy set in idols - acted out upon the body or bodies of others and world. This 'Narcissus' is prior to the thinking that then operates self-justifying narrative backstories before and after actions running covert - as in a sense of subjection or coercion to frameworks of perceived & believed necessity.

So the art of science is in the questions that reveal an already answer in a new light of meaning that extends or unfolds meaning rather than the 'revolutions' of shifting gods set in mutual struggle for dominance. Creation extends the Timeless - as the qualities inherent to Existence as Self-Aware. But the 'miscreative' or segregative identification set in opposition or conflict operates a limiting filtering focus by which mind - or Mind is compartmentalised in effect to a split-levelled experience of reality as -for example mind and body or thought & feeling, conscious and unconscious.

Freedom to engage experience is limited by workability that includes tolerability, for conflict dissonance as pain becomes a toxic burden to any thought system or civilisation. If reintegration to a grounded reference point is persistently evaded, the pain is masked over not least by limiting the faculty and function of thought, while also projecting out as a world of irrevocable unresolvable conflict - that invokes war, destruction and death to 'save it' from full Disclosure - as the wish to self-create locked into its own 'defences' that DO the very thing it thinks and lives to avoid!

Cognitive dissonance is not obvious to a mind-set of survival.

Even those who loved Jesus in Spirit saw only from within the mindset of loss, disconnection and threat, as a basis for the 'self-protective reflex' that was suddenly recognised amidst the cock craw at the approach of dawn - and then by the gift of prophesy for such an event as had seemed inconceivable when given.

The grace of noticing is a Gift already given, yet revealed anew from beneath the capacity to see what fear and guilt made of dissonance and disconnection - within the heart of a love that needed no word for the life it both has and is - without apology or justification.

Gain of Function runs from the idea of harnessing nature - and then by extension the minds of targeted enemies, rivals or threats. So the Trojan ruse uses the sympathy of the enemy for the horse as a divine symbol (as the horse was so across many cultures) that provided a 'back door' for a destructive agenda that could not otherwise break the siege.

The artifice of seduction, manipulation, marketing or entrapment to disempowerment, loss and death is 'war by any and all means' - and to those so given is it self-honesty in thought set over denied and stamped out feeling. For they are at war with their own being while attacking ever shifting targets of their own projective denials - and also meeting reinforcements by reaction.

But Jesus said 'even as you do unto the least among you, you do unto Me'. Not ONLY the least or especially to the least, but as you do without exception. Nor did he teach guilt, blame and moral superiority as a salvation for the 'select' but shared in any tongue to the revealing of a love, a law and a light that was recognisably shared - NOT specialness conferred.

Why invoke Jesus?

The heart of any matter is in the heart and mind to which it matters. We have collectively assigned Cause to externalised physical determinants such as germs and genes to the exclusion of the psychic act of giving meaning as a form of self-definitions that then frame our adaptive experience. Without invoking the gaslight of blame - there is a basis for recognising where we do unto ourselves - or in some way set ourselves up' - and this is the opportunity for a simple curiosity of noticing to both see and choose differently to patterns of a past made in conflict and confusion.

True presence does not 'wait' while we dissociate into past and future imaginations, but is the Call to joy or wholeness of being - even if we perceive that contagious, weakening or threat to our defences. True Perspective aligns truly felt and truly shared outcomes - one willingness at a time.

 

Spiked Narratives and the Discernment of True

Spiked Narratives and the Discernment of True

 

 Getting tangled up in details is a divergence from the original desire.
But there is a psychological defence that biases towards avoiding disclosure by framing or defining its conflict-seeking resolution or question in terms that ensure it will never truly resolve or allow answer - excepting as themes of thinking that promise much but only deliver further baits and hooks to double down in research and defence. Such that the 'search' becomes a substitute for meaning and identity (life lived and shared in creative endeavour).
So now all the invested 'identities' project their worldviews of conflict agenda or evil - such as to justify funding for R&D against threat - or indeed human sacrifice as justified neccessity - that the system (of staked identities) be 'saved'.

Narratives are 'expressions of meaning' or extensions of fundamental ideas. The belief in death as power over life is the limiting of life to the body & world - that is of imaged forms seemingly self-existing as each a cause and effect. It is perhaps impossible to convey a world experience within consciousness to those who lockdown in the belief that consciousness is somehow in a private thinking, that is in a brain and body and entirely powerless and subject to a self-existing physical determination of events - from catastrophic destructions to genetic codings for cancer.
The mind or Thought can project or externalise itself from discarded or ignored Self. We do this all the time - phished by our own thinking.

Here is a key - 'our own thinking'. For as a man thinketh so he is - or rather so he experiences himself becoming. We cannot have experience of 'Is' but to be. As soon as we set or accept definition, we behold an experience of its result. In this sense we learn by what we teach of demonstrate. Self-conditioned learning is a feedback loop of self-reinforcing investment of identity - as meanings felt resonant to desire in experience. But as we all know, we can wish for what we realise we don't in fact want and create results that run counter to our true desire.

Conflict is first within, as conflicted belief & desire, to then result in reflective experience.
I see that dissonance can be released to a realigning of decision - ie choose one and let the other go, but it can also be used as a basis for projecting the cause of the conflict out and away from a persistence of a self identification gained or gotten from the conflict itself; as a sense of lack or denial of self seeking to Get possession and control 'back' from whatever external agent is flagged to serve as the vector of risk, threat or aggrieved offence.
This is the guilting & masking of self-lack in manipulative power over life - at least in the minds of all who share in the learning and teaching of such belief.

In a crisis of identity resulting from insane reflections set in competing narratives for blame, where is a true sanity to be found? At leasy in the recognition of an insanity now brought aware and therefore partial, so that there is a light of awareness as 'eyes that can see' subject only to recognition and release of the active ignorance of believing we know - or believing we must maintain the presentation of believing we know - or else be revealed ourself the king without clothes.
But WHO told you you were naked? said the Lord.
In the story it is the foreign courtiers who respond to the king's desire for aggrandisement with a mind-trap that can only be escaped by the release of the vanity that invoked the lie - as the father of it.
What is conflict persisted in?
Draining, depleting and exhausting - such as to have to call in external boosting defences to maintain a dwindling life within. The defences are Grandiose but buried within them is every kind of toxic denial. The mind is split to learn to see the world set in narratives spun from lies like debt is spun to make money. Which came first; the debt or the loan? They are the same, but interest is set only on the lender.

There is another way to evaluate stories than weighing probability, and that is discernment.
There is generally a baby in the bathwater of anything we are preset to judge against or cast out of mind as if to get rid of. Hence there is a need to look on the hated and feared to be free of otherwise being compelled to look away - that itself is a result of a fascination and fixation in horror and the 'dynamic' of conflict that is then hidden or masked over as unthinkable or evil.
Yet still active in the mind even though masked in the belief or wish to have got rid of it - or at least mitigated and managed the pain.

Why would we want genetic control?
In life we acquire subconsciously learned patterns of perception and response to free attention. But much as may seem otherwise these are not 'hard wired' but can be brought to awareness as a choice we can choose not to persist in, and so can change our mind by acting differently to create a new habit over time. Many are so invested in the habit identity as a comfort zone as to literally prefer to die in it (or of it) than bring it to awareness as the transformative renewal of mind - for what seemed so has to be brought to what is so - in terms of presence not in terms of ticking boxes of a masking correctness.

So those who choose a spiked narrative and agenda are accepting the projection of cause to a story spun out of dark defence budgets that are one with every other kind of organised crime running 'outside of accountability' as a masked and manipulative private thinking.

Of course there is a baby in the bathwater of a bent, bought and corrupted science, releasing one to wholly embrace the other is redemption or indeed salvage of original meaning from an adulteration with wishful or dissociative thinking.

I am not accepting of biology (life!) defined in dark labs to run as risk models set as contagion in the minds that buy & sell active ignorance against fear of exposure to the fears that are in any case our own - and not the jurisdiction of foreign courtiers or fawning compliance of fear set compliant.

Is it a 'conspiracy' to mask in mutually agreed definitions as a means to 'create' our own masking reality bubble? Yet this is dependent on NOT knowing what we do - or we cannot carry it off!
But reality undistorted is always already given and received - but the 'dreaming' of a mis-taken inheritance, casts out its conflicting results as our self in world of struggle.

What is 'apocalypse' or 'revelation' but the undoing of a masking over to reveal not just the device of masking self-deceptions but the undistorted truth of life within. Is that a 'reset'? In a sense yes - but not to a zero set by the old Guard, but to a quality and flow of being that is of shared presence - regardless time & space - yet aligning synchronicity in the heart.

in response to the themes in:

https://amidwesterndoctor.substack.com/p/what-can-graphene-oxide-teach-us/

Who trusts what?

Who trusts what?

 

in response to the themes in:

A Midwestern Doctor

This also raises another question; at some point you have to trust someone, so who do you trust?

That said, Matthew Crawford has made what I believe is the most important point. For movements to succeed, their leadership has to be decentralized, so there isn't a leader that can be targeted to destroy it. In my case, the influence I have on this is purely on the basis of if what I say makes sense and people want to agree with it, not because I told them to do something, and I think that lots of people doing that is the best possible scenario.

 

There are two parts to this:
Who is?
And what is trust?
Because our current 'answers' are predicating a breakdown of communication as a starting point.
Which in some sense could be described as mass-dissociation or separation trauma.
But trust is fundamental to being. It is integral communication.
Do we trust our self? Our life? Our being?
or are we split between unselfconscious functional being - of what comes naturally to us - and the thinking or mind of masking controls set in personal and social survivals that mostly focus on learned habits for getting what we need or want that rise along with getting rid of what we don't want - in terms of suppression of our natural being for the sake of family and social order and inclusion.

So 'who do I trust?' will be answered by 'what am I currently or actively extending trust by accepting identity from? But who can even pause to ask or notice if they are already identified by their thinking so as to see only what it frames them in? This 'trust' runs blind and knows not what it does - because it comes from a mask that hides to 'make you safe'. When the world breaks such a trust -  as it must seem to do, we have opportunity to choose anew, but if we take offence in 'betrayal' we will double down in our story to effectively withdraw and withhold trust from living, to give instead to control, as fear of pain of loss averted - or at least masked out of what we set and defend as our distanced and masked 'self'. Trusting 'defences' against fears that are not here but that we thereby stamp them on our present as if slavery is freedom. For if we seek freedom in terms of personal escape from natural consequences, we will give trust to whatever seems to give power to protect an unconsciousness to pain set in distrust of self, life and others.

All the animals have their home, but the son of Man hath no place to rest - points to the nature of free will as a process of transforming consciousness - not a world in which to sleep and die - try as we may!
In this sketch is trust in the nature and flow of communication - to the freedom of any who alight in it from and for their own resonances of value - if any - to where they are now. In this I live and grow what I am consciously trusting to, as an unfolding fulfilment that shares, instead of a need to get boosted, liked or stroked by agreement -or even being noticed. So that there is also a freedom to deeply appreciate interaction as a communion of being - and live this even to those who respond with emotional reactions that in some sense code for what they haven't clearly articulated to themselves yet.

Decentralised. Yes in terms of a conscious culture held in enough individuals such as to be a leadership of fluid synchronicity by exercising leadership - which is following by listening to then act or speak with and for the whole situation - instead of taking roles and not releasing them, or giving roles as a way to escape them. Fundamental to this is that true communication is honoured as a recognition of the power of hearing and speaking. That a voice and desire for self-inclusion CAN be heard and received. Forced inclusion is not 'safe' but tyrannous. Forced decentralisation no less. The process of relationship as communication is life, Jim - but not as we know it!
(Star trek ref). 

Our desire to concretion or structure this is part of an impulse to posses & control - that underlies a mindset of predictive control. Which is not evil, but needs follow or serve Conscious purpose or shall deliver us unto evils that it was set by fear to defend against.

Siding with true freedom must live and share it - or becomes the thing it hates - unwittingly.
In human terms this is messy - in that we meet the emotional dissonances set in judgements that WERE part of our basis for distrust or dissociating from, but with some willingness to listen past the appearances, to feel through the reactions, to give as we would in truth receive.

My sense of the breakdown being revealed is of bringing a deeper questioning to who and what for, in place of persisting in futility as if 'this time' it will be different. Most of this is under Herod's radar! Or if you prefer is outside Sauron's mindset. Power in life is invisible to seeking power over life. But having taken the fruit we have taken on the self it gave us; "I Want It Thus!". I may not think I think this - but that deep or bitter grief reveals the grasp that failed.
he who binds unto himself a joy
Does the winged life destroy
but he who kisses the joy as it flies
lives eternity's sunrise
~ Blake

I trust the living - not the packaging.
I am no man's judge
including myself!

#2

Further to my other response I come back to this one.
When you release your version of another, you also release your judgements of yourself. This is not obvious, but demonstrable in practice. You can now trust the field of communication that flows or aligns without distortion - no matter what the situation or who you are in relationship with.
'Thinking' will misinterpret this because 'thinking' in the sense I am using it, is a product of symptom of distrust - or more accurately, trust in believed defences.
Because we cannot 'do' this from a control mindset, we make love impossible in practice but set as an ideal by which we 'fall or fail'. But the release of invested focus in judgemental 'thinking' allows unselfconscious flow of relationship in which we 'know how to be' in relation to what is current.
The alternative is to 'trust' in terms of social contracts, stated or otherwise, such that if conditions are not met, love turns to hate (rather than permission to share relationship). That our social masking becomes invisible doesn't mean our normal is natural! The extreme end of such 'trust' is the control file or bought and captured status of 'trusted' servants, or the elitist initiatory sacrifice of shared identity for insider status via acts that 'show loyalty' by breaking moral sensibilities for the group - which is a sort of mutual blackmail for cultic lock-in.
Likewise the "vaccine hesitant" are seen as lacking 'trust' that must be manipulated by incentivised manipulations (!).
So trust is fundamental. In fact, without trust, self-honesty will not be allowed, and as we can see, this means we are owned and controlled by the lies that we have accepted and used as our own 'defence' against a pathological or treacherous life - that as part of our self-belief, extends to our perception others.
Our capacity to become attached to the forms of life is how we relax vigilance by trusting appearances to sort of run themselves while we 'take the ride'. Yet precisely because something becomes 'trusted' sets it as the form or idea to 'mask in' as a way to seek gain of function from 'blind trust'. Without a true discernment, there is no 'movement' that doesn't soon faction to mutual distrust - helped along by the baited memes and  psyops of mind/emotional management. And I note that fear porn is just as much a proclivity of the 'health freedom movement' - not as a blame but as an awareness that we are so deeply condition to the ways of thinking that characterise our subjection, not our freedom. trusting words and phrases as if we know what they mean - within an emotional or even intellectual exchange. perhaps, I think because we are not used to taking open responsibility for our own thought and word amidst social expectations of 'normal' or risk social exclusion. Covid Op revealed fear of social exclusion set by guilting as 'virtue' to be very deep-seated.