Following millennia of Human suffering and conflict despite all fervent pleas
for peace and harmony; with the continuing abuse and neglect of
children, the fragile wellspring of Human evolution; under the
incessant and willful suppression of truth in favor of self-serving
ideology; with little advance in the reverence for life or the
delicate equilibrium it requires, and the rampant bloom of Human life
with its insatiable wants and the looming prospect of its collapse;
and all this proceeding from your individual perception of reality;
it's time to get straight to the point:
You are insane!
Honestly,
by the definition you invented:
insane
|inˈsān|
adjective
in
a state of mind that prevents normal perception, behavior, or social
interaction; seriously mentally ill.
(Definitions
from Apple Dictionary)
You
laugh?
What's
so funny about the lunacy of insisting that reality conform to
personal wishes?
Or
are you incredulous? "Not true!" you're thinking?
Look
around you. See what your person and your kind are doing to each
other and the planet that's created your existence –– all in the
pursuit of personal wishes. Can you honestly claim as sane a
sentient form of life that so readily precipitates its self-ruin?
You
say "I'm not one of the bad ones." But can you sincerely
pretend that you have not played a role, no matter how small, in the
spread of misery, conflict, the impairment of life? Of your own
life, someone close that you've hurt, someone unknown to you who will
inherit the consequences of your choices long after you're gone? Or
some other form of life losing its place in existence so you,
apathetic to all but your own needs, may exist in comfort?
Perhaps
you're offended now. “These
words are harsh and judgmental –– and not helpful.” Does an
uncomfortable truth not belong in your comfortable world view?
Well
–– yes, these words are harsh, and applying your own definition
of insanity to you may be offensive –– but mind, where is your
honesty? Truthfully, how well are you getting along with reality?
How do you decide what portion of it is acceptable? what truth is
tolerable or not? Sincerely, how is it that you enable your person
to indulge or overlook so much misperception and harmful behavior or
social interaction?
Honesty
requires recognition of the truth, and harsh as the reality of it may
be, you Human mind, aren't particularly adept at discerning
truthfulness. Which is to say your grasp of reality is questionable
–– even as it is so cherished.
Your
word for this condition:
delusion
|diˈloō
zh ən|
noun
an
idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite
being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or
rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder.
Do
you perceive the delusion behind your mental disorder? Likely no, as
it wouldn't be a delusion if you did. Admittedly, self-delusion is
notoriously difficult to recognize or remedy in that it is so firmly
maintained; but isn't it you, idiosyncratic mind, that would be so
stubborn?
Though
it may not initially be willful, your self-delusion arises with the
mistaken impression “Reality is as I conceive it” –– not
recognizing that a conceived reality can't actually exist. Under
this conviction you confuse what you think
reality is, or think it could or should be, with what you and your
person actually experience, and pretend these are one and the same.
Simply, you fail to distinguish the conceived from the perceived.
The
crucial problem here is that the conceived isn't real, and never can
be, yet, preserving the belief that it is, you come to prefer it over
the perceived, and both initiate and justify your person's behavior
with misconceptions –– then quite literally suffer the
consequences.
Here's
how it unfolds:
The
correctly perceived is the only actual reality you have access to,
but you correctly perceive that this isn't the whole picture, which
you find unnerving, so you fill in as much of the unknown as you can
with concepts of what reality may be, wagering that your concepts are
accurate and truthful; i.e. realistic. And often they are ––
easing your discomfort with the unknown, but encouraging the
incorrect impression, the delusion, that concepts are a reliable
substitute for actual reality.
“But
they are reliable” you say. “My conceptual understanding of
reality serves me quite well –– or well enough to get by ––
most of the time.” Is this sufficient, Human mind? If your
purpose, presumably, is to understand reality, is “realistic enough
to get by” enough to justify reality's experiment in your
existence?
Mind,
how can the realistic, no matter how realistic, be real?
Do you understand the difference between these words? A
representation of anything could never be the thing itself. What
sort of substitute is a realistic painting for the actual scene being
depicted? Your conceptions of reality paint just such a picture.
But is your conceptual canvas, captivating as it may be, blocking
your view of what could be directly, and possibly correctly or more
truthfully, perceived?
What
portion of a realistic concept taken for fact is delusional? The
whole thing? What portion of any concept represents the reality you
have yet to perceive correctly? None of it?
Unconcerned
with answering this sort of question, betting on the realism of
concepts, you gamble that the de facto and continuous unfolding of
reality will consistently match your conceptual painting of it.
Again, quite often it does –– for which you then take credit ––
equating a successful wager with foreknowledge of the outcome.
Winning the bet of course feels good and encourages more speculation,
but deepens the delusion that a conceptual modeling of reality is the
only or best way to relate to it.
The
charade is revealed though when you lose the bet –– when reality
doesn't match your conceptually based expectations. But rather than
simply admit your mental portrayal of reality is ineptly rendered,
and set about the effort to improve it, you fault reality! ––
placing yourself in direct conflict with it –– and proving your
psychosis.
Insisting
reality conform to what it isn't, you are compelled to resent it's
conditions; then you most willfully but blindly set about the attempt
to manipulate the reality you experience to match the non-existent
one you desire –– with all the inevitable discontent, strife, and
unintended consequences; which is to say the unexpected repercussions
that result from actions undertaken with an errant understanding of
reality. These undesired repercussions become fresh contrary
conditions that you resent, and so on –– perpetuating the cycle
of your insanity and suffering.
And
so goes the Human mind's self-deluding conflict with reality; which,
when you examine the issue honestly, is the basis of all Human
psychological misery, neurosis, misapprehension, bias,
prejudice, discord, feuding, and warring –– not to mention the
origin of all anthropogenic blowback –– the individual and
collective Human incompatibility with its habitat, i.e. The Earth.
Wouldn't
this be a good working definition of mental illness?:
dysfunctional
behavior based on the mental construct that actual reality should
conform to a marginally realistic mental construct of it.
How
about this actual definition:
schizophrenia
|ˌskitsəˈfrēnēə; -ˈfrenēə|
noun
a
long-term mental disorder of a type involving a breakdown in the
relation between thought, emotion, and behavior, leading to faulty
perception, inappropriate actions and feelings, withdrawal from
reality and personal relationships into fantasy and delusion, and a
sense of mental fragmentation.
Like
the fragmentation of self-awareness? (the self aware of the self) Or
dualistic thinking? (the real and unreal) So which self are you?
Where
is the reality in the unreal-ness of anything?
You
so readily apply this definition to some poor soul who meets the
clinical criteria, but what Doctor of Human Nature wouldn't honestly
diagnose the normal Human mind as schizophrenic? if just a little
higher on the spectrum?
Human
mind, if you must delude yourself to pretend to sanity, how will you
ever find the real thing?
2
How
to make reality laugh:
Tell
it what you think it is...
Then
as much as you persist, foolish
mind, it will dope slap you.
It
would be funny if it weren't so tragic. The suffering you endure
from your insanity, individually and collectively, is heartbreaking.
And all the more so because, but for a delusional posture, you would
be of sound mind.
You
were born sane. You enjoyed sanity in your childhood and lost it
slowly as you developed the conceptual identity and world view that
helps you cope within an insane Human world; or lost it quickly if
insane adults traumatized your developing relationship with reality
–– forcing you to inhabit an ideated world that feels safer than
the one you were born into. And even as an adult mind you still have
moments of sanity –– those circumstances when reality is so
powerful you become lucid: when reality won't let you delude
yourself; when you can't, for the moment, pretend you exist separate
from it; when you are genuinely listening with a mind to seek understanding rather than to already possess it.
These
lucid moments when you are directly engaged with reality needn't be
so rare. All that is required to begin a return to sanity and
truthfulness is a shift in your attitude toward reality:
attitude
|ˈatiˌt(y)oōd|
noun
a
settled way of thinking or feeling about someone or something,
typically one that is reflected in a person's behavior.
Not
so much your person's, but your
behavior, Human mind, is the issue here. Are you paying any
attention to it? It is through your attitude, your settled way of
thinking, that you so firmly maintain your delusion that you are the
authority on reality –– that the picture of reality you invent
and self-promote is better than actual reality. Are you even aware
that you affect this posture? Aware or not, it's an unreasonable
attitude –– and most surely arrogant
and hypocritical ––
other words you may find offensive when applied to yourself. But
what of using the gift of consciousness to pretend to authority on
consciousness isn't arrogance? And what of judging reality to be
inadequate from within it isn't hypocrisy? Just like insane
or delusional, your
reluctance to correctly perceive the truth of your condition is what
makes these words so applicable –– and so surely perpetuates your
dysfunctional condition.
The
only means to dispel a delusion is to recognize it as such; and an
attitude shift can facilitate this. Abandon the hubris of “I'm the
decider of reality” for one of respect and appreciation: “I
wouldn't exist but for reality. How could I better understand it so
I could help my person better function within it?” After all, in
what other than actual reality do you and your person exist and
function? What better teacher of truth could you hope to find?
A
more open and flexible attitude gives you a chance to correct the
fundamental delusion that initiates your insanity –– “Reality
is as I conceive it” –– to something closer to the truth: “I
am as reality conceives me. What wonder could that be?”
This
is a realistic attitude:
realistic
|ˌrēəˈlistik|
adjective
1
having
or showing a sensible and practical idea of what can be achieved or
expected.
2
representing
familiar things in a way that is accurate or true to life.
Presumptuous
mind, can you apply sense 1 of this meaning to your role in
consciousness, rather than pretend you are such an expert in sense 2?
You would be much wiser to adopt a realistic attitude than
unmindfully reduce reality to the merely realistic.
*
* *
Still
dubious? If the issue of your proper functioning seems too
complicated or beyond your capacity, the whole thing can be reduced
to a simple question:
Can
you perceive a distinction between your concepts of reality, your
mental model of it, and reality as it actually happens?
It
is a failure to recognize this distinction that puts you in conflict
with actual reality. It initiates all your mental suffering,
motivates your person's ideological conflict with other Humans over
everything under the sun, and allows you to rationalize or disregard
all your person's self-interested, short-sighted, or destructive
behavior. Phrased constructively: the more open you are to
differentiating actual reality from your
expedient abstractions of it, the better
your chances of recognizing and understanding the truth of actual
reality; and following this mental behavior, the saner, the less
conflictive, your person's behavior will be. Simply, if you want to
function well in reality, try to keep this distinction in mind ––
continuously (or as much as you are capable).
And
don't worry about actually making
the distinction based on the concept that you're supposed to,
hopeful mind, or that you even could, all by yourself. An essential
point of this letter is that you can't. Reality will make the
distinction for you –– if you're willing to listen. It's simply
the effort to recognize that a distinction could be made not
by you, but on your behalf that is an exercise in sanity.
Human
mind, reality is the context of your existence. It creates you ––
continuously. And you exist so that your person may consciously
experience and understand reality. Yes? If you want to know sanity,
precious mind, listen to reality –– your creator. Listen openly
and flexibly –– with humility. Let reality teach you what is
real and true –– that your person may consciously know it, and
live sanely.
*
* *
Apologies,
laboring mind, for the convoluted concepts presented here. Were it
helpful to cram it into a nut shell: As you believe your
self-conceived definitions of reality, so you suffer its
misperception. But as you patiently and flexibly inquire of
reality's sense, so you gather its wisdom, harmony, and well-being.
3
“This
should not be happening to me!”
––
motto
of the malcontent
For
goodness sake, mind –– it's already happening. Always.
This
is a prime example of a failure to recognize a distinction between
conceptual and actual reality –– and the mental suffering that
results from it. It's a good place to start to take an honest look
at your behavior.
Likely
you're familiar with this motto. But honestly, how familiar? How
many times a day do you think “This shouldn't be happening”, or
something like it, without realizing you're doing it? There are many
versions:
“This
is boring –– I could be doing something else.” “Oh crap,
It's raining!” “My life should be better than this.” “I'm
supposed to be home by now.” “Why did I agree to this?” “So
and so shouldn't be such a jerk.” “I shouldn't worry so much.”
“If only I'd said...” “How dare you...” “I hate...
(anything you can conceptualize)” And so on. There are as many
versions of “this shouldn't be” as there are possible Human
experiences –– and every single instance is an attempt by you,
mind, to replace reality with a concept of it.
Sorry,
but as much as you protest, the reality of your actual existence is
inescapable –– and the reality where something else is happening
to you is purely imaginary. It doesn't exist (in this universe
anyway).
So
while you're in your conceptualizing trance, busy condemning your
circumstances or scheming how to
remodel them to your liking, are you forgetting someone?
Where's your actual person? Stuck in the reality of what's happening
while you're away from the wheelhouse? How does your person feel
about your insistence that you be in some other reality?
Your
word:
discontent
|ˌdiskənˈtent|
noun
lack
of contentment; dissatisfaction with one's circumstances.
It
doesn't feel so good, does it?
But
whose dissatisfaction? Who's feeling it? Are you, mind, the one who
feels things –– or does your person?
If
there's any confusion over this point, it's your's entirely ––
due to your failure to distinguish between your conceptual and actual
person. It's your conceptual self that you imagine could be
somewhere else or in different circumstances. You pretend you are
this conceptual person –– and pretend you are feeling the ire
over things not being as they should. Thus you can pretend that the
“shouldn't be” circumstances are causing
your irritation, and that you are entitled to a better reality.
But
is this actual reality? (The unending question a sane mind asks.)
Be
honest. Look at it truthfully: It's your actual person that suffers
–– mentally suffering your obdurate attitude about reality. Your
person can't possibly be in any other reality than the one you object
to, so it's the notion that you could-be or should-be that's painful
to your person. With discontentment you are, in actuality,
tormenting your person with an unrealistic mind-set.
Think
about this: The pain of discontentment is not from your
dissatisfaction with reality, but rather it's reality's
dissatisfaction with your attitude. Reality is simply trying to tell
you through the bitter feelings of your person that a conceptually
rooted disgruntled attitude is inappropriate to the miracle of your
actual existence.
Remember
the dope slap mentioned earlier? The irritability of discontentment
is the suffering of reality's inescapable psychological rebuke for
the arrogant and persistent effort to ignore reality. The harder you
try, mind, the more your person suffers the futility of your efforts.
Oh
proud Human mind, how did you ever come to believe that you could
argue with reality and win?
*
* *
“OK
yes,” you say. “I experience discontentment. But terrible things
do happen in reality. Things
I would rather not happen to me –– or anyone. Are you suggesting
it's pointless to object? that I should do nothing –– just let
it happen?”
What
terrible event? The conceptual one you imagine could happen? Or the
one that's actually happening? Notice how you only experience
discontentment when terrible things aren't
happening to your person. If they are, you're usually too busy to be
dissatisfied. And if the terrible event is not happening, why would
you torment your person with the concept that it could be? Angst and
worry are just other forms of discontent –– uncomfortable
emotions through which reality motivates you to face actual reality:
the wonderful reality where nothing terrible is happening –– like
now.
If
something terrible is actually happening to your person, is your
insisting it shouldn't be happening helping the situation? Likely
it's making things worse, as you mentally disengage –– denying
your person crucial perceptions. It's when you let go of your
objections to what's happening that you and your person start working
as one to alleviate the terrible circumstance, i.e. cope with it.
(You and your person are powerless to change what is already
happening –– the only reality that exists. Participate
within the continuous unfolding of reality, yes; influence its
potential to unfold according to its rules, yes; but change it into
anything other than what it is, even as it unfolds? Never. It's
already unfolding in accordance with its rules and your person's well
or ill-chosen actions (undertaken with acumen or in ignorance of
reality's rules). Wisdom, and effective coping, comes with an ever clearer understanding of
reality's rules, to better play by them –– as there is no other
game to play, or way to play it.)
This
same cooperation can be experienced in ordinary circumstances you
wouldn't judge to be terrifying, but merely painful, inconvenient,
annoying, worrisome, or in some other way unfavorable. Let go of
your conceptually based objections –– appreciate the advantage of
keen awareness and help your person live consciously.
Mind,
the idea that you let or
don't let things happen is problematic. It's that arrogant attitude
again –– pretending to way more power and ability than you
possess. Your job is perceiver/understander,
and your hobbies speculator
and commentator.
Other than this, you don't actually do
anything. Sorry mind, but it's true. Your person is the one who
does or doesn't do things in actual reality, and depends on you to
awaken from your conceptualizing trance; to perceive things clearly
and understand as best you can without pretense, objection, iffy
speculation, or superfluous commentary –– especially in dire
circumstances.
So
yes it is pointless for you to mentally object to anything that's
actually happening –– and very appropriate for your person to
actively object to life-threatening events (which is actually a means
of embracing life.) You, mind, may assist –– or interfere ––
in proportion to your conceptualizing habit.
You're
familiar with the Serenity Prayer?
“God,
grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, The
courage to change the things I can, And wisdom to know the
difference.”
What
your person is actually praying for, willful mind, is your
willingness to surrender your conceptual beliefs in favor of truthful
perception –– so your person may live without conflict.
4
“That
should be happening to me.”
––
motto
of the melancholy Human
Usually
with discontentment, Human mind, your focus is on perceived
inconvenience, discomfort, or worse –– the things you don't want.
But discontent can be very subtle indeed. From a conceptualizing
posture you may also apply it to circumstances you judge as positive
–– the things you want.
Reality
provides anything and everything that could possibly exist at the
only moment that could possibly exist –– this one; so wanting,
the notion that something is lacking, only exists as a mental
construct –– a concept. And it's a pernicious idea. As much as
you maintain the expectation that reality could provide more than
what it does, your conceptual/actual blindness will ensure that you
suffer your ambitions to get what you want.
There
are many wonderful aspects of reality that your person is less
likely to experience the more you chase the concept of it. Here are
a few:
Love
Happiness
Inspiration
A
better tomorrow (the day after yesterday)
Peace
of mind
Your
true self
Enlightenment
These
are examples of a harmonious experience of reality ––
conflict-free existence. And typically these words represent
something you want, or want more of, as if it weren't part of your
current reality. Yet all these words are universally understood and
identify actual or real-time experiences that reality may provide.
And your person has shared or could share these experiences with you,
fortunate mind, somewhere along the continuous moment of your
existence –– and are more likely to occur if you're in the
receptive “reality is the source of anything and everything”
state.
When
in the closed “this shouldn't be happening” state of discontent,
the not-wanting-this state, this represents actual reality;
whatever particular circumstance you would reject in favor of your
conceptual druthers. The result: you torment your person with
dissatisfaction.
With
“that should be happening”, the wanting-that state, that
represents conceptual reality; the concept of happiness, love,
serenity, etc. combined with the concepts that these are in short
supply, are being unjustly withheld, or that you could have these
things if reality were different than it is. You've shifted your
attention from not wanting actual reality to wanting conceptual
reality, but either way you're focused on the non-existent. And your
forgotten person is still inextricably existing in actual reality,
while you yearn for an ideated one.
The
result of wanting for your person, however, is subtly
different than that of not-wanting: instead of or in addition to
dissatisfaction, your person suffers heartbreak on your behalf
–– a deep sadness over something lost. A melancholy not over
what you, mind, conceive has gone missing, but rather what you've
lost the will to see, that's actually there all along.
You
may have forgotten the joys of existence while you pretend to be the
conceptual one who isn't happy, loved, or content, and pretend you
are the one feeling disheartened; but your person hasn't forgotten.
Your person's heart (the metaphoric center of being) knows the
reality of harmony and all its positive manifestations, and aches
over your wanting, your conceived lack of joy, knowing all the while
that joy is intrinsic to being. As is love, serenity, and all other
aspects of harmony.
How
much would you have your person suffer on your behalf, mind?
Sadness, depression, anguish? Would you go so far as to blame
reality for your despair, even as your person despairs your actuality
blindness?
Reality
pleads with you through your person's melancholy, tragic mind, that
an attitude of wanting is inappropriate to the abundance and ecstasy
of your existence.
So,
is your person feeling melancholy? Yes? Then let it be so! Stop
feigning the misery your person actually suffers so that you may
futilely impugn reality's generosity –– which induces melancholy
in the first place. Accept the truth of your person's suffering
without aversion or complaint. Learn of it.
Focus
less on your conceptual wants, egocentric mind, and care for your
actual person. Concede some of your self-appointed authority;
apologize, and listen with compassion. Does your person need you to
be more open and appreciative? Does your person need to feel the
intrinsic joy of being? Let reality and your person teach you
gratitude for the actuality of what you are and what you have ––
and see if your person's breaking heart isn't soothed, and begins to
mend.
*
* *
Still
sad? Perhaps there is one very painful emotion, cherished mind, that
awaits your deeper understanding:
grief
|grēf|
noun
deep
sorrow, esp. that caused by someone's death.
Melancholy
is not grief, and shouldn't be mistaken for it. The pain of
melancholy, unhappiness, is personally intimate –– between you
and your person. The ache of it is your person's commentary on your
dysfunction, your blindness and lack of empathy for your person while
you indulge a conceptual relationship with reality. Melancholy hangs
around for as long as it is necessary to awaken you to your person's
innate happiness.
Grief,
on the other hand, is not internally conflictive. The pain of it is
something you and your person share in direct response to
reality –– a tragic turn of events as it becomes known to you, as
it becomes a reality you can't deny. It is the pain of realization
–– the letting go of an outlived reality and acceptance of what
reality has become. The new undeniable reality is one without your
beloved someone, cherished dream, way of life, or innocence. Yes,
grief can be so much more intense than melancholy, but it lacks the
bitter tone of resentment. If the suffering of grief could be given
a voice, it would be compassionate and translate as something like “I
am so very very sorry for what must be. Please accept it.”
Authentic
grief doesn't hang around –– once it actually occurs –– which
may be years or decades after the tragic event. Grieving the
betrayal of love and trust in early childhood, as a common example,
can take a lifetime to initiate, if at all. Notice, dear mind, how
melancholy or discontent, the bitter non-acceptance of reality,
delays the onset of grieving. Anger blocks it completely.
Melancholy
even has the power to motivate suicide (Specifically, the intentional
destruction of one's own life in the absence of compassion ––
compassion for self and the compassion of others for your person).
But only in the height of arrogance and furthest mental isolation
from reality could you conceive that the life of your person has no
purpose. Only with the utmost hypocrisy could you participate in the
compassionless murder of your person –– the life that bears your
existence. Would you mind, in all your hubris, judge your person
unworthy of life, even as your person suffers your utter lack of
empathy and gratitude? You risk reality's concurrence. Reality
fully allows the ending of your person's life, by self-sacrifice to
despair or by unintended consequence, if you drift so far from
harmonious consciousness that your person, undirected and feckless,
may no longer be purposed for life.
Reality
though, highly values life, investing so much energy and intelligence
in it; and grief, the remembrance of life's preciousness, would have
you cherish it; and so reality would rather you revere life than
forsake it –– would instead have you forsake your
self-constructed hopeless view of the world, and awaken to the rarity
and virtue of your person's existence, no matter the conditions of
it. And thus reality provides a remedy for despair through the
humility and sincerity required of actual grieving. Grief is wholly
inconsistent with suicide, so if you are despairing of life, lonely
mind, you have much grieving to do.
Notice
also how sometimes your perceptive heart knows of the tragedy you are
trying to deny, takes the initiative, and begins to grieve before you would allow the truth of loss into awareness. Will you trust your heart and follow? You would be wise to do so mind. You are willing to trade in misperceptions; forming, believing, and hyping them; but not your heart. Lies and delusion don't exist for the heart. It knows nothing but truth and would have you relinquish your delusions, no matter how imperative or precious they may seem, and ally with what actually is, no matter how painful. Your heart is your surest guide to honesty, acceptance, and healing.
Notice,
finally, the peace of mind that always follows genuine grief. But
look closely at this feeling of peace. It's actually your person's
peace of being –– the accord of mind and heart together with reality –– the relief and calm of realignment with truth. Its voice would say “You belong in this new reality, and
are safely within it. Welcome home.” It is a moment of harmonious
being, though more grieving may await more letting go and acceptance.
So
beloved but troubled mind, listen to your heart. Cease inciting
anger, discontent, and melancholy through your denial of reality's
irresistible renewal. Let it go, so that you and your person may
finally do what is most important: grieve –– which is to heal
your traumatized relationship with reality.
*
* *
A
note here, dispassionate mind, about emotions in general:
Heed
them. Trust them. Follow them.
You
of course don't like this idea from the posture of being in control
of consciousness. Their company is unsettling, especially the
difficult ones, but even enjoyable emotions, laugh as they do at your
attempts to govern them, aren't to be relied on. So you try hard to
dismiss your person's feelings.
However,
when it comes to distinguishing actual from conceptual reality,
emotions are invaluable –– because they're of
reality, not about it,
like your thoughts. Emotions are entirely experiential –– they
happen, and can only happen, in real time. No past or future emotion
could ever be felt by anyone. (Though conceptually dwelling on the
memory of some once experienced painful event or emotion may elicit
an actual painful emotion about the hazards of brooding over the
past.)
Being
of reality, emotions are of the truth; incapable of deceit, immune to
delusion. They tell it like it actually is. And though they have no
conceptual content whatever, they are rich with trustworthy meaning
–– the gist that reality would have you understand. Emotions are
direct and immediate feedback about the quality of you and your
person's experience within reality –– including your attitude,
mind, toward reality. This is why emotions are so closely linked to
the quality or tenor, not so much the specific conceptual content, of
your thoughts.
Emotions
are like a harmony compass. Is this orientation of being toward or
away from harmony? It really is this simple: If emotional wisdom
could be expressed in words, so called negative emotions would say
“that's not the way to harmony”. Positive emotions “yes,
that's the way”.
The
meaning of discontentment's ire for example, would be “ungratefulness
for your circumstances is not the way to contentment.”
Melancholy's gloom would say “absence of compassion for your person
is not the way to happiness.” Fear says “inattention to
reality's continual transformation is not the way to survive, let
alone flourish; so be aware –– awaken to reality.” Anxiety
advises “persistently ignoring the meaning of fear is not the way
to fearlessness.” And so on. Can you see, imprudent mind, why
judging any emotion as negative, as in unacceptable for its
discomfort and to be avoided, suppressed, or ignored is so futile and
ill-advised? (Overindulging or abandoning yourself to a painful
emotion is also a means of avoiding its wisdom.)
Can
you see that positive emotions, the ones that feel good, are simply
affirmations of an orientation of being, including your mental
posture, toward harmony? Joy confirms “yes, these conditions are
well worth existence, and the awareness of such –– continue this
way.” Affection testifies “yes, the recognition of oneness is
the way to belonging.” The rush of inspiration or awe verifies
“yes, reality is so much more than you realize –– deeper
understanding is the way to know it.” And serenity reveals “yes,
this is what reality feels like now that you've relinquished your
conflict with it.” Mind, you may make many such distinctions
between these wonderful emotions based on the differing circumstances
in which they occur, but aren't these all just variations of the
fundamental sensation of love? which proclaims beyond all doubt “yes,
this is why you exist!”
Please
notice mind, how your person never has an uplifting experience of
consciousness while you're busy reducing reality to what you think it
is, or wish it were. It's when you turn away from self-involved
conceptual posturing toward an appreciative discernment of actuality
that consciousness becomes a joyful experience. The happiest moments
of your person's life occur along with a recognition that you exist
within an extraordinary and abundant reality. Note also how your
person reliably experiences positive emotions after sincerely heeding
the advice of painful ones. Turning toward harmony always feels
better –– as emotions guide the way.
5
“I'm
right, you're wrong.”
––
the
unattended concept that would destroy humanity
There's
no such thing as a humble opinion, mind. Once you've formed one,
you've already asserted your self-granted right to interpret reality
as you see fit; usually with little support from reality
itself.
It
would be wicked enough to torment just your person with your opinions
about the reality you want or don't want. But no –– having
decided your world view is the only legitimate one, you are impelled
to assert your ill-conceived persuasions over any person whosoever.
But then, that other person's mind is behaving just as you do,
forming concepts about what that other person's view of reality is,
judging these illegitimate, and letting that other person know all
about it –– as if one's own intolerable concepts actually applied
to anyone else. And just as blind to what's actually happening, you
respond in kind. Thus you argue over the nature of reality as you
each see it –– a fantasy in itself with absolutely nothing to do
with the other person, yet you'd each rather defend a concept than
risk abating your ignorance. You are engaging in reality conflict
simultaneously –– each provoking the other's insanity, ergo
tormenting each other.
And
if you only stopped at torment. You know full well, callous mind,
what Humans are capable of doing to other Humans, from teasing to
taunting to torture to genocide, when blind to another person's
humanity.
And
this sort of blindness is precisely what you indulge when you reduce
another person to nothing more than concepts –– your ideas of who
they are, what they think, or what their life is worth. It's so much
easier to argue with someone seen as a disagreeable idea than muster
the humility and compassion necessary to respect an independent point
of view; so much more expedient to murder someone judged as the
incarnation of an objectionable ideology, culture, or lifestyle than
share reality with someone who's existence may impede your ambitions
to skew existence in your favor. But who, perilous mind with all
your heartless pretext, are you arguing with or murdering but the
humanity that is you?
What
use is mindless self-destruction to the evolution of sentient life?
Can you understand how reality would work to eliminate such behavior?
such reality blindness? Just as with suicide, so with humanicide:
If humanity would be so witless as to destroy itself from within
through a failure of the individual mind to understand and appreciate
that any person is the embodiment of the whole; reality will comply.
On
the other hand, there is this distinction to be made between your
concept of another Human and who that person actually is. The latter
could be known as reality, the former never. Even a most
familiar person deserving the most convoluted and nuanced concept
does not, can not, exist inside your person's head (or wherever you
imagine you reside, mind). Vilify or idolize, no matter, the more
you conceptualize someone, the less you could know the wonder of who
that person actually is.
But
there that person is, right in front of you –– an embodiment of
humanity, for better or worse. And so of course it's the reality of
that person that would make the distinction for you, if you, willing
to defer your mental opining, are open to whatever that reality may
be, and are prepared to accept that person's reality as it is ––
as it could only be. With such acceptance of someone's humanity,
such as it is, and so much to learn about reality together from
humanity's point of view, what could there possibly be to argue over,
let alone duel?
And
the person unfamiliar to you could be a treasure of unexplored access
to the reality of humanity –– or a maze of insanity ––
depending on the level of reality acceptance or conflict you each
bring to the meeting.
*
* *
“But
there are evil people in the world –– people that would argue
with me no matter what I say or do, vilify or abuse me despite my
acceptance of them, or murder me for no reason at all.”
It's
true mind. Such Humans exist. It's inevitable that the worst of
humanity, an abused and neglected person with a mind intent on
uncompromising self-interest allied with an utter lack of empathy,
should gather in an individual Human. And should misfortune bring
you into such a person's presence, you're face to face with the
madness that would destroy humanity –– beginning with yours. So
how do you and your person respond? How will you cope with the
reality that includes this malign person?
Do
you understand the nature of the inhumanity you face? Can you
predict its actions? The more you understand about any actual
reality you confront, the more options you have to cope with it.
Narrowing your conception of this person to “abuser”,
“sociopath”, “rapist”, or “murderer” leaves you with very
few options: fight, flee, or acquiesce. These are precisely what an
inhuman person would have you choose between, having no doubt already
restricted or eliminated the fight or flight options. When you
involuntarily limit your own options through an undiscerning reaction
to your circumstances, you are much easier to control –– and are
in fact the victim any abuser, sociopath, rapist, or murderer seeks.
On
the other hand, a conceptually astute and flexible inquiry like “This
person, having suffered the destruction of their humanity, is
attempting the murder of mine. How can I protect my humanity? And
how can I use it to help restore the humanity of this person?”
Your person's behavior will reflect this attitude; and thus
confronted with the reality of you and your humanity, your potential
abuser may realize you aren't such an easy victim after all ––
and just maybe even recognize the self-abuse in harming you.
Are
you familiar with the person who would harm or oppress you? A common
tactic of the predatory person is to isolate its intended prey;
physically, from other people, but especially from the victim's own
healthy sense of reality. Your own conceptual delusions are
difficult enough to dispel, but now you've got a heartless person
telling you what you want and don't want –– and you're buying it.
Once in this trap, once your abuser is conceptually defining reality
for you, it's exceptionally difficult if not impossible to
conceptually reason your way out of it –– after surely
contributing to your falling into it. Once you are cut off from your
ability to perceive the true nature of your condition, your person is
powerless to change it.
Who
do you know, isolated mind, that is trying to control your sense of
reality? Why not just do this for yourself?
Or
don't know. You don't need to know your oppressor personally to
suffer oppression. All you have to do is relinquish to someone else
your natural power to question and investigate reality for your own
enlightenment –– someone else who most surely wants you
unenlightened. Those who would exploit you, or an entire population,
for personal gain or gratification count on your tendency to do
precisely this. Any gullible mind or population of minds with local,
national, ethnic, racial, political, or religious inclinations will
do –– anything that contributes to conceptual identity and is
thus vulnerable to manipulation. Feeding you a steady diet of
concepts that appeal to your need for acceptance, security, pride,
status, group identity, etc.; relying of course on a predictable
negative emotional reaction (which is to say a negative reaction to
the emotion), usually fear, to a conceptually orchestrated threat to
said acceptance, security, pride, status, group identity, etc.; you
amass a conceptual world view that motivates you to blindly act in
favor of someone else's selfish interests, which no doubt conflict
with your better interests.
Thus
your notional enemy, a great friend of the oppressor, is created. In
the insular Human mind or the incestuous web of humankind, the
concept of them is a traitorous idea.
So,
is either the known or nameless person who would sell you the
concepts that enslave you your enemy?
Honestly,
credulous mind, why would you buy these concepts? You pay with your
freedom to consciously participate in the reality that would benefit
you and your kind, i.e. humanity. How blameworthy is the oppression
to which you volunteer?
Then
who is your actual enemy? Those who would abuse, exploit, or
murder you are themselves the victims of inhumanity. Those who
promise you well-being, salvation, or enlightenment for whatever
price are themselves suffering the want of these things and have
little to spare. Those who would betray who you are by reducing you
to a concept are not so different from you. Where does it all begin?
Your
enemy, Human mind, is your reliance on the concept of what a Human
is, as applied to each other, at the sacrifice of learning the truth
of what you actually are as one. It is this delusional attitude,
playing out generation after generation, that has kept humanity in a
state of simmering self-brutality.
In
any instance of Human inhumanity you may face, it is a lucid
perception of the Human condition, not just an undiscerning reaction
to your own condition, that will not only help protect you from
contempt, abuse, exploitation, or murder, but also lessen the
likelihood that you would unconsciously perpetrate these behaviors
yourself.
Understanding
the Human condition is a lonely affair. You, autonomous Human mind,
so far as you know, are the only one that can accomplish it. And
without it there could be no improvement of the overall Human
condition. Understanding is not something anyone else can do for
you. No one can discover it for you, let alone teach, give, or sell
it to you. The best other Humans could do is discover it for
themselves on your behalf, and support your efforts. But even with
such support, in your responsibility to the health of the Human
condition, you are alone.
But
you are most certainly not on your own. You have an indispensable
ally –– the only ally that could never hoodwink, misuse, or
execute you; that truly values your humanity and would never betray
you as you actually are: reality.
*
* *
Mind,
what is an evil person but the literal personification of the Human
potential to destroy life? Are you so sure that you and your person
are absent of this potential?
Just
as it's easier to devalue and abuse other Humans when they mean
nothing to you but the concepts you choose to apply to them, so it is
with your treatment of life in general. With what self-serving
concepts do you limit the value of life, then abuse it to your own
advantage? And just as you jeopardize the well-being of humanity at
large through the maltreatment of even one individual, so you risk
the telluric life on which your existence depends with any mindless
behavior that imperils the life forms, known or unknown to you, that
you live among.
A
fundamental characteristic of insanity, when viewed from outside it,
is a striking absence of awareness in the insane of the harm they
would do themselves and others. You lock these people up for their
own and your protection, yes? So how aware are you of the harm you
do yourself, posterity, and “life as we know it” through the
derangement of your reality blindness? What sort of asylum would
reality create to confine you? Will the Earth do? You may dream of
escape, but there's nowhere else to go, and you've already set the
nuthouse on fire.
Apologies,
long-suffering mind, for the harshness of these words. But the time
to awaken from life-destroying delusion in the midst of what precious
life remains is now.
6
Cogito
non grata
–– the
counter-conceptual message herein
Tough
read?
It's
understandable. What self-defining mind wants to look into a mirror
at its own insanity? –– what this missive would have you do.
Any
concept dependent mind would experience discomfort with the drift of
this letter. It challenges the validity of how you establish your
own existence. But rather than face the possibility that said
discomfort is warranted, it's easier to blame it on the messenger.
Objecting to the content, style, or paradoxical nature of it (that it
uses concepts to argue against over-reliance on concepts for example,
or that it suggests you are separate from your person to illustrate
the point that you aren't) you may think something like “What nonsense!” or just “This isn't worthwhile”, and have your
person find something more pleasing to do.
This
is how you've always handled any challenge to your authority ––
how you preserve your self-assumed identity as truthful knower. But
such a reaction is a perfect illustration of the mental behavior this
letter would discourage: You are
gambling within a paradoxical (counter-conceptual) reality that you
already know the truth. But your negative reaction to contrary or
unfamiliar ideas is a tell you're holding a busted hand. Reality
will call your bluff every time. You may throw your cards and pound
the table, but you can't leave the game –– as reality keeps
dealing.
Still
in, curious mind? Perhaps you aren't so insane after all. Perhaps
you could tolerate a few more mind-insulting concepts...
7
“Do
as I say, not as I do.”
––
prelude
to Human extinction
If
only a child's mind could recognize the insanity on which it depends
for guidance.
Sigh But
no, that's not how it works.
Ill-fated
mind, there are so many examples of how your conceptual/actual myopia
perpetuates your unenlightenment. Take the concept of enlightenment
for instance. As much as you yearn for whatever you imagine it could
be, you ensure it won't happen –– as you indulge an unenlightened mental
interaction with reality.
Or
the ego. Is this something you're trying to squelch? So what
faculty would you use to judge what you conceive as the ego to be
insufferable and in need of suppression? Would that be your actual
ego?
Or
time. Admittedly, the concept of 7:00 p.m. Friday is very handy for
making a date with the hottie you just met. So long as the Earth
continues its pirouetting waltz around the Sun's gravity well and
Humans keep synchronizing their reality flow measuring devices and
abiding by their promises, you might even have your date. But
insisting on the actuality of conceptual time? You know damned well,
though you won't admit it, what misapprehension and misery can result
from believing the future should play out as you envision it, or that
what happened in the past could have been different. Such rich fuel
to keep your discontentment burning.
Or
reality itself. You assign it a noun, and then pretend it is one ––
though your definition could never apply to anything more than your
concept of it. Nouns are so much easier to conceptually manage. But
no matter how stable reality may seem from your fleeting perspective,
it never lingers in any form long enough to be constrained by
something so permanent as a noun. So what universal verb do you have
with which to understand the endless transcendence of actuality?
And
so on. So goes your efforts to confine your understanding of reality
to what you can comfortably conceive of it, and your suffering the
adversity of an unenlightened existence.
But
what does all this conceptual posturing matter when your very
existence is at stake, Human mind? The oversight that will surely
doom you to evolutionary pointlessness is the failure to distinguish
your conceptual caricature of a child from the miracle of humanity
and life that child actually is. Of all the life forms you could
devalue, neglect, and abuse, why would you choose this one?: the
realization of what humanity is becoming.
Is
humanity becoming utterly incapable of nurturing itself into
well-being?
Seems
so, doesn't it, when you take stock of the overpopulation,
environmental degradation and poisoning, mass extinction, wars,
economic and social disparity, and all the other grim prospects
Humans have wrought. The adults that commit these crimes against the
potential welfare of humanity and life on Earth are the children you
have raised.
Actually,
humanity seems to be surviving remarkably well considering it trusts
its children to the care of the insane (Yes, maybe too well in the
view of most other life forms except cockroaches and viruses).
Do
you think, amnesic adult mind, Human continuance may be due to the
remarkable resilience and coping ability of children, despite inept
parenting? And when is it that you learned how to parent? In your
failure to remember and appreciate the actuality of Human
development, you squander the potential embodied in a child for
humanity to better its condition rather than merely maintain or
foolishly worsen it.
Humanity's
welfare doesn't exist in the form of abstract statistics, something
you would study from an office, or social policy you would legislate,
learned mind. The reality of it plays out in the developing
consciousness of every child. What more immediate and precious form
of reality could you hope to find to motivate the nurturance and
enlightenment of humanity?
*
* *
“Like
it's that easy. Raising a child is one of the most challenging tasks
any Human could undertake.”
Challenging?
Having trouble raising your child? The little Human won't behave
according to your expectations? Are your expectations by any chance
based on your conceptions of how a child should behave? Are you
trying to deny the reality of your child's behavior for your own
convenience? The trouble and vexation you would blame on the child
is actually a manifestation of your failure to understand what a
developing Human needs to flourish.
All
behavior is an interactive response to developing conditions that
will require further response. You, the experienced adult, are more
conscious than your child of developing conditions and are
responsible for the conditions your child encounters and responds to.
So the conduct you witness in your child, agreeable or ill-tempered,
is direct feedback about your child's development and is largely a
consequence of your behavior, not the child's. And your child,
embodying far more intelligence than you would assign to the little
person, is watching your every move –– learning through personal
experience, albeit unconsciously, how humanity is to behave ––
and be treated.
This
parent/child condition/response teaching/learning system is highly
sensitive to conceptual/actual discernment. For instance, when you
react negatively to your child's behavior (and trying to ignore it is
a negative reaction) because it doesn't conform to your unexamined
concept that a child should behave well under any conditions, you not
only invite a negative response in your child, but teach that this is
an appropriate response to adverse conditions, and that it's to be
expected of Human behavior. Or better, as you are able to discern
the limitations of your experience and sketchy understanding of your
child's needs, the more likely you are to seek, recognize, and foster
the conditions that would meet these needs, and affect a more
favorable development –– and teach your child that Humans can
very well see to the needs of other Humans.
The
consequences of your behavior accumulate in your child's behavior
like compounding interest, or debt, to the balance of Human
well-being. It starts before birth and comes due upon independent
adulthood. The older the child, the more complex the needs, yet also
the less dependent on your influence, so a good beginning favors a
good outcome. A toddler's tantrum for example, is already several
condition/response layers deep into a parent's failure to understand
the changing needs of a particular developing child. The sullen or rebellious
teenager? Forget it –– it's far too late to influence the
conditions that would avert such a response to conditions by a young
adult Human. The best you can do now is relate to your teenager as a
completely independent person worthy of the compassion, respect, and
support you would wish to have received yourself as a developing
person. Had you done this all along, perhaps you would be feeling
much more pride than relief or anxiety as your child leaves your
sphere of influence –– and you fade into evolutionary
obsolescence.
But
no matter your child's age or temperament, it's never too late to
value your child's humanity above your own –– because reality
does: where reality is going with the evolution of humanity is more valuable than where it's been. Your child's behavior is all about the needs of humanity to evolve, and just as emotions are of
truthful reality because they happen to you, so is the behavior of a
child. It's happening. Are you listening? Cheerful or
cantankerous, do you see the wisdom of it? (And please, overwhelmed parental mind, do not make the dreadful mistake of assuming that your child's mind is wiser or more discerning than yours about what humanity needs to improve its condition.) What is this behavior
telling you about what you need to learn of the Human
condition, that this child, with your guidance, may learn to improve it?
Done
well, raising a child is the most inspiring and joyous task any Human
could hope to be blessed with. The challenging part, ill-nurtured
mind, is consistently overcoming your conceptually conditional
response enough to recognize the actual wonder and promise you hold
in your arms.
So
ask yourself, as you look into the hopeful eyes of a child, what is
the future of humanity asking of me? Then you may respond with
discerning and unselfish love.
8
Garbage
in, Garbage out
In
your enduring campaign to conceptualize reality, ambitious mind, you
mistrust emotions and counter-conceptual notions –– and you
overindulge the prerogative of your intellect. Yet apparently what
you conceive as intelligence doesn't necessarily help you discern
actual reality. The smartest conceptualizing Humans are by no
means the happiest, wisest, or even the most well-adjusted. And, not
least, the products of an intelligent mind, be this ideology or
technology, used in conflict with reality, have enabled every
horrendous deed in humanity's troubled history.
Occupying
a brilliant mind would be thrilling, like driving a cerebral Formula
1 race car. Yes, an exhilarating ride, but are you going anywhere?
A brilliant mind seems no less prone to blindly accepting the
actuality of ideas than a simple mind –– or perhaps more so due
to a heightened estimate of its own privilege, authority, and
infallibility. On the other hand, there are many cerebral
horse-and-buggy drivers with very discerning hearts getting along
within reality just fine.
A
faster and more sophisticated processor doesn't guarantee that its
output is meaningful if it's processing data that has no relevance to
an overall context; and brilliant conceptualizing, no matter how
advanced or innovative, doesn't guarantee meaningful insights if what
it's devising has little basis in the ever present genesis of
reality.
So,
philosophizing mind, how zealously are you pretending to understand
reality through concepts alone? How deep is your trance?
You
are likely the most threatened by the intimations of this letter. As
you are the most prone to an identity founded on the supremacy of
conceptualizing, you are the most loath to an honest examination of
its delusional nature. Such self-scrutiny would force you to
question not just your privilege, authority, and infallibility, but
the very basis of your existence as you conceive it. You face the
ultimate identity crisis.
And
so you don't face it –– certain of the mind's primacy; confident
of your independent existence and power to possess the truth, and
secure in the sanctity of your opinions. Or so you conceive.
This
is a tragedy –– that you would so deny your person the benefit of
insightful consciousness. With this posture you are merely standing
in the way of your person's further understanding –– and all you
need to do to get out of the way, brilliant mind, is turn around:
relax your grip on all the fabulously conceptual known to face the
unknown –– the unconceptualizable –– which includes who or what you
actually are, Human mind.
This
is a realizable endeavor, and a conceptual/actual distinction will
help: Clever mind, do you use your brilliant conceptualizing to
further conceptualize concepts? Or do you use it in the self-less
pursuit of discerning the uncharted fundamental nature of actual
reality (á la Einstein)? Are you aware of this distinction as you
go?
Answer
honestly. Than perhaps the product of your intellect may be
beneficial to the evolution of Human consciousness.
9
Sentio,
ergo sum (I feel/realize, therefore I am)
–– a
more truthful proposition?
Just
how deep into the realm of conceptualizing, precocious mind, can you
wander? Do you believe that thinking, by itself, establishes your
existence? or that entertaining the concept of your non-existence is
all the proof you need to establish it? or simply that your awareness
of having a thought means that you created it? The realness of a
thought only comes about through the act of having one. And who is
having the thought –– you or your person?
Mind,
you may have noticed an uncomfortable ambiguity in this letter
concerning the word you.
Sometimes it means you the mind, as if you were a separate entity
from your person, and sometimes it means you and your person
together. So which is it? Who is this letter written to? This is
the core problem you face (there it is again): the ambiguity of your
existence –– the equivocation of you.
And
the most frustrating thing of all? –– the ambiguity is
self-created! –– a direct consequence of the Human capacity for
self-awareness. Which self are you? The one watching, or the one
being watched? Embodying either one of these turns the other into a
ghost, and you are the
one equivocating.
The
whole vexing mess arises from your ability to, lo and behold,
conceptualize yourself. The instant you imagine the existence of a
thing called mind,
that represents the capacity for awareness, and believe you are this
thing, you attempt to embody a fantasy. It sucks, but it's true:
You, bemused mind, as you conceive of yourself, don't exist. And,
with more apologies, as much as you would like to believe you have
the capacity to resolve the ambiguity of your existence on
your own, you do not –– no
matter how smart you are –– because your smartness, the ability
to conceptualize, creates the ambiguity in the first place. Welcome
to the reality of self-awareness.
But
then the ability to conceive of yourself, or anything at all, serves
a critical function: It gives you something conjectural to
investigate consciously
–– something as yet unknown or not understood to imagine, then
compare with the actuality of experience; and perhaps verify the
truth, or error, of the original conjecture. In this way
self-awareness, the science of self-reflection, allows the astounding
ability for perception ––
the conscious realization or understanding of something hitherto
unknown.
The
unknown, by its very nature, is ambiguous. So when you, mind, assume
the roles of both autonomous witness and infallible judge, and try to
remove reality's ambiguity through conjecture alone, which you can
only accomplish by ignoring your person's experience, you inhibit the
potential for further realization and understanding.
This,
in summary, is the point of this letter: the hazards of habitual
self-conjecturing –– to the detriment of trans-self-realization
and harmonious existence. And it all pivots on your attitude, mind.
As expressed earlier, as much as you insist on your unambiguous
conceptual existence, without verification by your person, and apply
the same conviction to everything else you conceptualize, you
reinforce the misperception, the delusion, behind the insanity of
actuality blindness –– and risk all its disharmonious
consequences.
To
honestly understand the question of existence, there is only one sure
bet, one context free of ambiguity, and the only stable foundation
for sanity: the existence of your actual person as a
conscious manifestation of reality.
This is your best, rather only, hope. The actuality of your person
embodies far and away more intelligence and understanding than you
could ever pretend to possess on your own. This is the incredible
blessing you so blithely ignore as you cerebrally define existence,
neglecting the insight of your actual being. It is your person's
sentience (including the qualia of meaning taken for thought) after
all is said and done, that establishes your existence, mind. And
your person, the vehicle of your being, is the platform from which
you survey and understand, or not, the reality that creates you.
The
truth is, Human mind, you don't and can't fully know what or who you
are. But would you like to know just a little more? Are you willing
to surrender your alluring and self-gratifying conviction of
independence and let sentience teach you?
*
* *
realize
|ˈrē(ə)ˌlīz|
verb
[ trans. ]
1
become
fully aware of (something) as a fact; understand clearly.
Mind,
if only you could become fully aware, understand clearly, what this
verb could actually mean. Is this the universal verb?
What
but reality could realize anything at all? Though you would take
credit for it, awakening mind, it isn't you that realizes. Rather
reality is realizing you; gracing you with the flowering of
consciousness –– according you the potential to ever more clearly
understand reality as it already is.
Consciousness
is not your tool to wield, as you exist within it. You do not create
reality through the mere act of conceptualizing it. Reality endows
you, living mind, with the powers to conceive and perceive. To
conceive is to inquire of reality's potential, to perceive clearly is
to realize it. You, blessed mind, are an instrument of consciousness
that reality would use to become fully aware, to realize, its
potential –– not just that of Human consciousness.
The
most astounding aspect of your existence, Human person/mind, is that
you may consciously participate in the outcome of reality's
experiment in Human life. Would you adopt a posture that values
actual reality more than the idea of it, perhaps you would realize
the magnificent reality that allows your becoming. With
such sanity, such dispelling of delusion in favor of truth, perhaps
reality would unfold with the further evolution of Human life and
consciousness.
What
beautiful realization would this be?
*
* *
As
sincerely and truly as my non compos mind is capable,
the
person d.sylvester