Memes, Conflation, Truth, Paradigmatics

Key Concepts
Excerpted from a PKD FBook post 5/21

 Shanti Prema Hudes You definitely got a narrative going there.  Not wanting to intrude here, but I'm finding this conversation (with?) really fascinating about value judgements and personal boundaries and methods of accessing real or true data I'm interested in building some expertise of my own or not, or maybe I'm just curious.  But there are conspiracy theories and science and a whole gradient mix in-between.

Today, the dissonance has never been greater without the personal commitment to trust but verify. Science is the only modality in which precise repeatable outcomes can be produced. Thus, when you hear anything hearsay, like Trump's massive businesses and his cadre of medical and political and financial advisors, advising him, the fact is quite the opposite. Yeah, all of those 100s of friends he lost on 911. A complete fabrication.

 The developmental stage of evolution, called integral by Ken Wilber, is a level of consciousness which perceives the cosmos as holoarchical.  Another way of saying this is to say or perceive the cosmos as consisting of holons within holons.  This is not a conflation but a recognition of fact.  Until facts and accurate empirical data form the basis for conversation, there being an ongoing acknowledgement of "truthiness", of course there will be push back against everything seen as strange and/or a threat.  Now there's a conflation waiting to happen, lol.

  I'm amazed at how little people get the potato-potaaaato meme distinction. And to say a meme is a generalization is full stop reductionism.  The really interesting facts regarding memes has to with those generalizations, their lives (they all have beginnings and ends, although we're getting ready to burst that intellectual bubble to), relationships with cultural outcomes and horizons, and the anxiety of influence (and the complete waste it creates in society, such as Trumps National Mexican Wall.

 Any action coming from a less than integral level of consciousness will operate a meme-function designed push back and resist standing on fundamentals of boundary making and wall building.  Personal memes designed to separate and lead on into a herd mentality and Corporate memes designed to incorporate the world.  Then integral memes which are psychoactive and influence one in letting go of all beliefs that don't support love, healing, sharing, ascension in its myriad expressions.  Cheers, rj

Imperial Beach Twilight Session

The Right Worldview
 
Have you ever looked around in life and had a hard time finding anything right with the world? How many times in life have you had to stop yourself from whinning or complaining when it did no good. How many situations, people, things, places, events, injustices, crimes, opinions, fashions, tunes, sayings, creeds, prejudices, programs, decisions, changes of all kinds … in your life, just ain’t right? The question nobody seems to be asking is what to do about all this craziness in life. Why do we have such a hard life? Where this, that, and every other thing ain’t right? And then there are those people in your life who seem unfazed by the chaos, content, and unmoved? They’re not right. Some appear to rise above it, engaging passionately in some greater mission which at least generates something that is right in their lives. Thus, we really need to have our own self-correcting worldview of what’s right.

I can no longer ignore or avoid what’s not right in my world. The pile of instances of what’s not right has reached overwhelmingly into the sky and is blocking out the sun. When you cannot go through your day and find something right with it, you are in trouble. I know some people who are on fire with what is not right and they don’t even have a clue because they’re so busy fighting and resisting it. Myself, I am tired of watching people burn, myself included. 
 
The importance of being able to find what’s right with your world is primary. Because the alternative is illness, feeling ill, queasy, sickness. More important than anything else is having positive anticipation, hope, looking forward to your day with a smile and a happy thought. And all that is based on being able to find what’s right with your world. If you can’t do that, you might as well shoot yourself in the head. 
 
So let’s look at the question What *IS* right in your world? I tend to feel good about something if I get its integrity. This is to say, when something presents itself as what it holds itself out to be, then I have the space to be satisfied with it. Today, was a rather windy warm day here in Southern California. A fire erupted up around the Cajon Pass on Interstate 15 and because the fuel was so dry this fire spread with such ferocity and speed that it just ripped across the Interstate putting numerous cars and tractor trailers on fire. The view from the sky, where you could see all kinds of people hiking away from the fire and their vehicles, which now were ablaze. Well, the short of this scene, was there wasn’t anything right about it. 
 
Having your vehicle catch fire and putting you on the side of freeway on foot, that ain’t right. Those people, when they entered the onramp to the freeway had no inkling of what was about to rain fire down upon their heads. Wildfire is nature’s way of cleaning up the trash, the rubbish, the refuse. Accumulate to much of it and a fire will bring it to ash. So, what isn’t right in this scene. We can’t say it’s the fire, because nature is fine. We’ll get nowhere if we start winning and complaining about nature being herself, right? 
 
What we’re dealing with here is a need for systems thinking. The interstate is part of a system which interfaces with nature. This interface was not maintained and so when nature erupted with fire, the interstate became a victim to its destructive force. And, one of the principles in systems thinking is integrity. The integrity of a system is its independence or self-sustaining features, and that it function the way one would expect it to. It’s important to note that there are unanticipated benefits to integrity that could be inspiration for exclaiming that something is right. If using a certain medication treats a condition successfully without negative side effects, one could be motivated to say that drug was right. Another medication made to treat the same condition but having a side effect of having your hair fall out - well, that drug ain’t right, right? 
 
Things that are and do and present themselves the way in which they’re purported or expected to allows for an experience of satisfaction and this in turn expresses a level of being or vibration in us which propagates outward among others.

Answer to those known not to be "big fans" of poetry

A friend of mine wrote me recently as she and I are in the serial habit of writing each other as such ... I had recently shared an old poem of mine written in 1999 titled, Returning Word, which communicated elegantly something she has some rigid structures of resistance to, with her rational mind appearing disconnected from her heart leaving here uninformed per se. It continues to be a deep teaching moment for me as she persists in creating negations to my forays, turning them into platitudes. Such nonsense, really ... my most recent attempt to garner her understanding is of course culled by a new tact, as of course each new attempt must be I think, for me to continue to express and have any possibility for her. From using poetry I have reversed my focus back to logic and definitions and attention to meta language and communicating integral thought/thinking. 

So, my answer to her statement follows...

What prompts you too close down communication like this?  Impatience, vanity ... what? You realize that I am not my poetry, and you are not your "mission." Maybe you could suggest a metaphor for me other than language for the physical beingness we express? I'm thinking you might go with the vessel -> holy grail legend which you will always be famous in my memory for. The poem I shared with you was my expression to you, it was not an artifact per se but was as relevant the day I wrote it as it is today if not more so. Let me reiterate that - I didn't share or send you a "poem" but rather an expression I have channeled as poetry; but, which follows no formality or set of rules. If there is a basis that can be defined for choosing a creative writing paradigm like poetry to express myself at times, I suppose it is that the heart, at least my heart, I experience as a musical harmony in perfect time, and when relevant find my written discourse simply looks more like poetry than prose, voila. Whenever I speak both from the heart and without rational focus, my words found poetry far more simpatico than the rest of the possible types/classes/genres in the world. So it goes...

From another view, taking Rumi and Hafiz, as well as Whitman, Emerson, Shakespeare, Percy, ahhh, but the list could easily run on and on for me, why? Poetry is far more pleasing to read when one's consciousness is focused on the heart. As a reader, there is really nothing more exciting and rewarding than to discover a new poet, past or present; that, in the reading my heart sings and dances an understanding unto itself.

...

On further reflection I should add that my excitement over understanding a new poet emotionally is not in any sense like a liking for. In fact, a major portion of my favorite poets are really difficult reads (TO SAY THE LEAST  :-). Rather, the excitement is due simply to understanding developed with a concordant illumination within. If the truth were really to be told, I sometimes read prose poetically and vice versa. Such fluidity characterizing my style of listening and reading might be considered as weak in concentration. That conversation is far beyond the scope of this post. Suffice it to say howver, that despite this apparent dissonance in communication (as I understand myself actively through it) my intuition seems to have a precedent level role leading me to more and more properly align myself though formal dictates appear broken. The relevant issue here is of course truth and the discernment required in order to both perceive and appreciate truth. It is a judgement void of personal taste, drama, and concern for external references, standards, fads, styles, etc.

With a proper acknowledgement of my rather banal dualistic revelation on the matter, the conversation regarding the truth of all that which I just now classified as falsifying; again, is a conversation far beyond the scope of this post. Yet again, one strives to be complete, as much as possible, with the greatest most concise amount of brevity one is capable of, particularly when one's tact is rationally based.

Starting with One's First Intention

"Warriors always take a first event of any series as the blueprint or the map of what is going to develop for them subsequently." - don Juan in The Second Ring of Power, by Castaneda

 
I'm going to let this post simply be a place marker for now. The completion of this essay hasn't really surfaced in my mind, although the value of FIRST INTENTION, never seems to leave it.

What I want to say has to do with that value and it not only being the first value but the greatest and last, the alpha and omega of one's life. If you haven't asked yourself this question, you haven't lived your life yet. If you haven't struggled with this question, you haven't examined the possibiliities of your life. If you haven't lived this question you haven't tasted the beauty of truth or the power of eternity.

One of the best cracks I've found expressed by don Juan....

"Everything that we do in the world," he said, "we recognize and identify by converting it into lines of similarity, lines of things that are hung together by purpose. For example, if I say to you fork, this immediately brings to your mind the idea of spoon, knife, tablecloth, napkin, plate, cup and saucer, glass of wine, chili con carne, banquet, birthday, fiesta. You could certainly go on naming things strung together by purpose, nearly forever. Everything we do is strung like this. The strange part for sorcerers is that they see that all these lines of affinity, all these hues of things strung together by purpose, are associated with man's idea that things are unchangeable and forever, like the word of God."  - don Juan, Castaneda, Magical Passes

Just read this quote above this morning and while I have been studying the and articulating the limits of langauge and thought expressed here by don Juan, I can't remember it ever being put so well in terms of simplicity and coherence. I think he gets right to the point without even ever really labeling the nature of it. One of my fav quotes.

Emergence and organization towards a taxonomy of organizing relations

I have argued for a physical basis for all ontological forms of emergence and consequently appear to be denying the possibility of a great wonder of the universe: its meaningfulness. But I want to suggest here that in fact I am arguing for an even greater wonder and that is that the physical, material universe itself is capable of conscious existence through its interdependent accumulation of complexity. In other words what we normally think of as "mental" is in fact a characteristic of complexly organised forms of ordinary matter and requires no miracles for its development.
- Jones, S.
______________________________________

Find that explanation hard to digest? This is the state of the art as far as ontological reason applied to the subject of consciousness expressed by physical beings. It renders the flatland of reductionism with and added dimension of cascading or ordered magnitudes as an essential MEANS by which a possible explanation for consciousness as emergent from the physical stuff of our physical being's constitutent parts. In other words where ordinary reductionism satisfies the necessary links and connections which exist among an organized set of constituent parts forming the basis for the emergent coherence and object being expressed at one step higher but due directly to the interrelations among parts. What Jones is attempting to ram down our throats is that consciousenss is just a meta level spanning the entire system and emergent from both all levels, all objects of coherent function and all constitutent functioning. From that perspective he suggests what emerges is the experience of being conscious. While it extends the reason along already emerging lines of meta logic on the integrating one's VALUE across and/or spanning separate paradigms, it to do any justice to the nature of coherence which consciousness must express as emergent from the physical.
What is the snag here preventing us from languaging the reality of consciousness, of which Jones' attempt was a gallant attempt but nonetheless worthless in identifying the emergence of consciousness ontologically. He does this knowingly it would seem as I recall early in his paper him speaking about the Irreducible quality of consciousness which is non-physical, but in the conclusion he forgets to address how function emerges in a non-physical operation to create meaning and value abstractly vs among the array of methods properly defininig a neuro net and feed back system.
His attempt to rebuke I think comes in talkin about the ontology of language and how nothing in our language exists without some phyical corresponding reference. This kind of specious reasoning is a bit disappointing. On the one hand ontologically one defines language by physical measures or info perceieved and inventoried into sets which then are given linguistic names. However, that doesn't prevent the evolution of memes taking place on purely randomized non physical days of foamy chaos. We live for these days or at least our best humorists do and the reason for that is because it is precisely this ontological blind spot of Jones' which completes us as human beings.

Rally Against My Insanity

*dedicated to John Stewart's Rally for A Return of Sanity, 10/30/2010

To issues of complexity, is something thus contrived?
I look at the ocean and see complexity truly alive.
I cannot concur a self so responsive, while I aspire
No is a facade I present to balance a chaotic rivalry
between knowing and believing, real and imagined.

For just this moment, if I may cast a new self to make
A real no for a stand, against my negative expression
where I halt steps to my ill-conceived myriad manners,
like so many recursions over simplicity reduces friction.
Sing against mechanical knowing of what will proceed.

Perhaps no better a place exists to purchase a cliche
just this once, for a successful rally against negativity
having surrendered to a self lacking the eloquence
to reject the incompetent manner of a self negated
by the twisted false self, self serving act of hypocrisy.

How I manage all defeat by self prophecy, is less -
than my own untoward rejection of good, by fuzz
I offer a homage to humor's value in this process
and understand other's laughter provides focus.
"Blah, blah, blah," I said missively, "or something."

I now rally against that innocence as contrivance
And note the cliche of truth equated to something
and my sincerity juxtaposed to my teacher's dismay
in a class laughing uproaringly, skipping the question.
Pride, rebelliousness, vanity - conspired to make me.

The tension my manners, innocently suggesting, are
a discordant state of mind seeking a quest against
true answers, true questions, and smart relevance.
Pure vanity and pride matter if we lack a response.
And rallying, a question asks how to restore sanity.

Let this moment rally against din of false begging
where innocuous logic using innocuous notions
stated simply as something, raise a veil of derision
instead of being honest about asking a question
where no right answer begs us yet, to stumble on.

~Convergence of Child

When the tide is right, is the view masterful in the light
and when the master looks, is not all - a tsunami of love?
What better manner of recognition lends itself to man
once a child, consumed by his own windy exuberance
defining such delight, twirling for the crash standing up?

Discovering higher dimensions exist to bring us to a halt
understanding nothing exceeds boredom quite as well.
Requires something more than reverence and willful fall.
Of timing, this present moment expires, in eternal irony.
A true man humbly begins again until converging it all.

© 92010 rjduberg

Fragmentation a Syndrome of Sleep and a Bitch

I'm counting on most not reading beyond the title of this entry post. The real story is that in men I don't find fragmentation the same way I do in Women who bitch. Men are more apt to whine or quite often resistance across the board makes the whole of them asses. The problem is just as much an issue with women but not spoken about with as much tolerance. Women don't tolerate other women or themselves speaking about fragmented women going over the top when it comes to behaving decently.

Their negativity exists in their having killed the segue in their intellect.

Non-fragmentation can mimic this condition when the woman is anti-partriarchal (every woman by default who never experienced one positive male role model growing up in life ). This leaves lacking precisely that kind of function in her being which men are gravitational at intellect. Beginning with the simple make wrong act or role in the simplest mind and ending with literary masterpieces transcending whatever genre they manifested evolution in. With the grey inbetween filled with intellect of such color along the gradient going from black and white through (infinity -1) colors.

Understanding how math relates to language for instance is a question of intellect which would never be found fragmented, assinine, asleep, bitchy, unkind, or otherwise insensitive. Actually stepping it up a level to transrational thinking, in observing how Math grew out of being an thus it's dialect might be called Being.

In the flip side of this, using words for their mathematical principles and relevant structure objectified in symbols. But words, can represent infinity in a way perhaps only a shadow at this point but something which mathematical computation breaks down when articulating the relation. The equals sign means relation however infinity = nothing in classical math which quantifies. In order to fully understand how language can communicate to a mind still ignorant that dimension of experience that relates to infinity, the shadow of words ie math, must be placed at the floor, b&W and fragmented. This involves our being as I've already suggested, when I made gender an issue for distinction. In our being, ignorance is controversial, the main issue for those a step up from being complete asleep, that rise in consciousness reflects in parallel and encompassing one's being. Leaping ahead to the point then ...

Almost a ceiling, which itself remains objective consciousness for me, being able to link parallel perspectives on present circumstances is a question I was in earlier tonight, before the pressure of corresponding became dominant.

My insights tonight were inspired by the recognition that placing spirituality before and above anything else dimensionally to one's being, removes all attachments and connections to the floor. Once one frees oneself from anykind of static relationship to themselves, one is able to know their spiritual possibilities and start actualizing their potential. One is not free however to respond to freedom by increasing one's ego.

Today, I observed myself chasing self satisfaction and saw the ego for what it was. Dreadfully seductive and the site of expectation. Such is the nature of all expectations, that they are really just one of a number of pillars holding up the ideal which was the seed of our indiviuality and the extent of our belief in it. While this could be called the Psychological dimension of our being, distinct from Spiritual, there is a fundamental principle regarding decency of behavior which correlates in the Spiritual. It is a pillar because it is much more than this or that but achieves appropriateness in relationship to present circumstances and conditions. These words all have a dynamic operational bias and that bias is relative with the balance between almost all static and all dynamic makes sense when one integrates physical correlates.

At any rate...the question right now is whether or not enlightenment which is universal and absolute can be articulated without the disclaimer regarding words having significant relativity yet in our being to succeed in that articulation?

~ The Blind Word

One morn I rose and looked upon the world,
"Have I been blind until this hour" I said.

Announced, declared, original copies presume
to a repetitious brew, aligned with flow so special
every rhetorical, historical, relevance queues culture
of an ordered feeling of confidence in knowledge.

As language recombines subjective memories,
the calculus strips the juice leaving mass illusion.
Does anyone know who to blame for this loss
where being awake is unoriginal, so mediocre?

Kung Fu Panda knew a blank scroll for his due
It was your authority of assumption to mention
that made Dragon Warrior a manifest illusion.
Still Panda original, our hearts retained delight

Forwhatis eternally original?

Mistaken Panda's secret lesson in hour, profound
feigned in poetic tribune, achieved in your muse
that little colorful swirl in the flow, fluidly balanced
made a drop of word burn, unblinding presence.

© 7/2010 rjduberg

... Ignorance Unground

3 So much matters, life clogs a homey's high here
no focus and our intellectual reasons collapse
focus of flatland, I say; to the fellows of the hordes
prepare n pay for cliff notes, all the time, or fail
while i disappear behind a veil you think is noise
even as many play this longfast i know, unseen
when you remember yourself totally new, a state
where everything plays a part with parts
rhetoricizing, at least twice, or more
time stops in play of quantum classic
Intellect of scale is only access
to all probability...

Conserving one's energy in reverse induction
and essence of notion is that time is countable
in the same way diversity, ultimately manifests.
Without being able to understand man misses
integrity of his relativity to the purpose unseen.

Ways and means we find, in time, not within
Calculus moves mind to infinity and eternity
maybe exists, perhaps, mistakes made here?
Most mistakes happen in parallel, to alertness
It is no mistake that the less you listen a ...
Having fun depends on knowing cosmos
and being a sun doesn't limit evolution,
unlike suggestion intellect retards, witcha
though oblivious will NOT believe, logic
saves time, including all possibility, cognition
simplified, no conflict, conscious ma(r)king
not desire alone, does ignorance ungrind.

COPYRIGHT © 6/2010 rjduberg

Note: Can you imagine a real goddess and being unable to live your life? Funny how it happens all the time, badly acted, in dreams, people act this way and are NOT awake while some get phase to awake ... punk called 911, said The future blightest, gonna kill myself, of open insanity" 911 asks what band? The Doors, said the punk. She will speak about the Work, and wait, after sending you on your way.

You wrote ... "I don't mean it as just an awake/aware state- but as "known or felt by one's inner self" and also... "It’s important to realize that consciousness is NOT a state. It sometimes gets confused for people and I’m not sure if its because they haven’t yet integrated the true definition of consciousness into their general world view. Is this because there are multiple levels of consciousness for man? For man, HIS LEVEL or where and how he contacts Consciousness as it is (defined in its essence as the source of Unity behind all Diversity). This CONTACT gives us the value consciousness has for our lives and being. Our value is for the Field we’re able to find touch and its expressing the Unity in the Diversity. Nothing more can be said about consciousness in words per se that makes anything clearer than this. Why? Consciousness is NOT finite nor does it have a beginning or end. States do, beyond our limited subjective STATE or LEVEL of CONTACT, they exist as an abstract idea we made up to bridge our spiritual limits of DARKNESS or SHADOW with the infinite nature of Consciousness’ essence.

So, at present it looks as if you’re suffering under two layers of error and falsity regarding principles concerning abstract qualities of existence. Consciousness is NOT a state, its essence being Infinite Unity and understood as the field in which awareness expresses the physical plane of existence within certain very small ranges of perceptual dimension and the outer reaches of frequency range our biology presents. The awareness itself is a minimal intersecting vortex across dimensions of connected wave patterns that taken together and filtered (no filter returns happen with or without and active engagement of the mind) these patterns are perceived in the foreground of our awareness in total. Our total awareness fluctuates but can be trained to cover the entire field we’re able to access consciously. It’s important to remember however that awareness is merely the quantum counterpart to particle state, the wave keeping an analog function in our brains which automatically serves up reality in a predictable reliable fashion which in sane individuals reflects their intangible and metaphysical cogitations which act together to provide an evolving organizational form that modulates space and time, attaches links ranks, and ultimately determines what can harmoniously be added/changed for evolving liberty.

If that didn’t succeed in making you think twice, the second layer is a massive puff of smoke that mirrors something like the beyond. However, the vagueness of terms used creates a quagmire here. To know is to LINK and all links fall inside the paradigm of mind, which is a gestalt of things, which function but in and of themselves have no self awareness. To link awareness to self is a huge unnecessary complication which tries to combine that which finite with that which in truth isn’t. I’ve already referred to that unique relationship in noting the common term for it being the Veil. ‘Felt’ on the same level with different modality of perception and energy frequency used.

I guess it’s important to answer why I’ve made such a fuss. The reason is that without shining a light on the wiggle room which our usual expressions more and more often seem to let creep in, one is in truth forced to make assumptions. If others become negative over the effort or lack of therein over not keeping up. Don’t reply, refute, defend, or argue the point. Any responses I receive can only benefit me if only educate me. There’s nothing I can do to teach anyone the PROPER and RELATIVE meanings that preserve truth as much as possible. One develops a burning desire and cannot help but sympathize and understand OR choose to accept a status quo which marks boundaries around unconsciousness. The unacknowledged disaster about that is dispelling or lifting oneself out from under shadow karma becomes impossible by default of one’s own boundaries now existing. To transform and liberate requires the abiding of liberty in a descending to within. Liberty does NOT overcome, LOL. Liberty is simply a very intrinsic possibility which happens when the door is open. One cannot talk about IT as Liberty as such because it exists as a meta –characteristic responsible for transformation. That term and idea is a perfect balance of the Destruction which Creates or the Cruelty which is Nice.

The joke I love about it my Brother first said in my memory during a MX tour down a few hundred miles to the dentral Mexican continent to a place called Mike’s Sky Ranch. We stopped to chat with a couple of riders we encountered at one point and one of them asked directions however my brother took the request as some kind of jab of humor and answered, “You can’t get there from here!”

Just in closing ... There is no application of consciousness. That field allows for Infinite diversity eternally. The question then what does focus and dichotomize our awareness into unique and personal subjectivity? The beauty you are so passionate about regarding the relationship between physics and the resonation and harmony with a vague but subjective understanding you have between thoughts and matter, suggesting a powerful verification at play AND HERE YOU LOSE ME which is ALSO spiritual I admit I do not understand. Most of all how or why you introduce spirituality in this discussion with NO reason or and offered that connect that paradigm seems PRETTY LAZY. Perhaps its simply due to my own mother being the queen of laziness which has provided me with a certain sharpness on how I go after WOMEN in my life. Haha ... Men are just too dump and ADD programmed. I’m not just messing with you though, your assertion regarding spirituality having any relevance or connection to what we’ve been talking about is a fundamental fact about how we deny ourselves the power of balanced processes of apperception. Think of vertigo for the mind. Ask yourself now how Spirituality is best verified from your zen mind,

The only answer I recommend is the mystical one. Any answer coming from a level lower than mystical will only restrict and limit your capacity to have fun freely with liberty.

On Huna, one at a time ...

1) The World is What You Think it is
What you think is The World is part of and our personal interpretive link to the world. All thoughts are recursive and able to transcend as well. Despite the essence of human language providing us an expression generating computation, the self-referencing algebraic branch where we represent infinity and zero, fitted and designed to go the distance are nothing but illusory tokens we use and forget we mean absolutely nothing when speaking such language as such. The world we can think about does not contain the world we can’t. That’s everything that exists which we don’t know anything about, plus the stuff we don’t know we don’t know anything about. A less rigorous approach here however confirms that YES the way we think of the world is the way we think of it, defining Ontology or the natural structure of truth stated. This principle however depends on the reader getting what is not being said as the Object relationshiph between World in first position is twisted into the second position which IT references UNSUCCESSFULLY back to the first. Here’s the proof...

I think the world is the full order of chaos expressed diversely in essence and its representations and expressions. The existence of echoes which are oscillating progressive fade outs of rare but powerful refractions of significance is neither orderly or chaotic as such but both. Like 0 and 00 at the roulette table, the world has a cosmic crack in it. For most however the statement applies without disturbance.

2) There Are No Limits
Once again this makes sense only from a nonpragmatic perspective. Profoundly involved in every thought we have and its power to ACT is the limit of its foundation.


3) Energy Flows Where Attention goes
This is more specious reason, more precisely pure redundancy providing yet another false insight revealing nothing, capable of confusing the unprepared or at least distracted. Attention is energy flow in a certain direction which we call at times where attention goes. If you think it meant ALL ENERGY, nope. Then what about SOME energy, well we’ve already made that redundantly clear haven’t we, still the question remains about what other possibilities may exist and for what kinds and types of energy. Not all energy is benevolent or well received, wanted or desired, eh?


4) NOW Is the Moment of Power
Not too much to find at fault with this only because the idea given as Moment of Power here has none of its own. NOW is NOW, ontological and reliably so, there it is now, there it is again, same now. What can a notion called Moment of Power add to our appreciation and value for NOW? Nothing. I am wholeheartedly against this kind of crap as unevolved positive thinking. I prefer the deeper and more complex sense of Power as a kind of personal toolbar linked to my accounting skill preferences. The moment of power in my world might best be expressed as a summary statement of the status of my balance sheet.

5) To Love Is To Be Happy With
Just depends on your definition of happy I guess. I’m sure there are some people who are literally unable to consider happiness as a function of relationship and vice versa. For some who fall in love expressions like this begin to shine however given the usual limit even love has for us, that ends, and thus we have yet another stalemate either present or on its way. Now, if you’re going to say these very same people don’t Love, you’re going to set yourself for a brutal contest, I think <Vbs>.

6) All Power Comes From Within
More positive thinking aggrandizement is further redundant and means nothing to characterize as POWER in any principled categorical way since the aggrandizement itself is called in more or less power.
Diverse redundancy expressed in a group like this reflects something deeper about where this author is coming from. I can think of one word summarizing it ... LOL ... Spun.

7) Effectiveness Is the Measure of Truth
Once again he expresses yet another twisted redundancy. Effectiveness is redundantly itself not THE but A measure of truth. To measure truth is to be effective. The manner of expression here implies principle which cannot be right. For THE MEASURE OF TRUTH does not exist and cannot possibly show up. To measure is to comprehend and grasp by some perspective or limiting view which is relevant and meaningful somehow, it is ONLY effective as far as the measurer’s grip is solid and the meaning has important value. Otherwise all such measures won’t possibly be effective ACTS by those performing them, right?

The Paradox of Man's Evolution

I remember Ken Keyes Jr. speaking about this issue when I workshopped the pathways for more than a month with him ‘back in the day.’ He was very emphatic about the pathways being an intellectual reformation. There effect when repeated consciously over time in association with ‘machine like’ behavior is to succeed in ‘aiming’  or ‘pointing’ one’s field of possibility in the direction where liberation may ultimately become real on the horizon. However, the pathways do NOT extinguish or stop or liberate one from being mechanical but are rather antidotes of the mind in the classic buddhist sense, I think.

The statement below is an example or proof of this as being nothing more than a mechanical production caused by incorporating the pathways as part of your associative memory. Before we get snagged on the semantics of liberation, let us understand liberation to be the cessation of ignorance. Ignorance is the gravity or the specific condition present which results in addiction. Addiction is a complex of mechanicalness such that a disease emerges from the knotted dysfunctionality and the corruption it presents to one’s energetic system. One can recover from addiction. There is no recovery or ‘program’ allowing a human being consciousness which is free from mechanical behavior, emotion, and thought.

I could continue this thought on liberation regarding the PROCESS in which it is attained, but I think I have already shown the defect in your idea of liberation, especially as you have it related to the idea of addiction. But, just for your consideration, may I say that Liberation or the freedom from Karma and Reincarnation cannot be programmed. There is no ‘genius’ level of thought or wisdom that one can program the mind with resulting in liberation. If this were true, then the Buddha’s teachings would be producing Liberated immortals 100% of the time, or at least that is what I infer would happen based on what Buddha said about his Dharma. Over and over, he says that the doctrine of his teaching was perfect and complete. However, at the very end what the aspirant practices takes place beyond doctrine and the mind. It is nevertheless a ‘space’ one must make the effort to produce, and yet nothing can be said regarding the exact essence and nature of that effort. So is the Buddha a fibber?

There is another angle to this situation representing the final penetration through veil of illusion and mechanical or non-liberated states of consciousness. This insight comes from The Fourth Way, more specifically Ouspensky rather than Gurdjieff, at least for me. The principle states the situation rather plainly regarding how higher consciousness is possible for man, and how it is produced. But throughout all my fourth way study it was a consistent idea that after a certain level of evolution by man, the ‘system’ is no longer of any value and cannot take the student any futher. This is often referred to as the beginning of the path. It is centered on how only through a man’s CONSCIOUS EFFORT is he able to generate higher consciousness, which presupposes that he already has higher consciousness which he doesn’t. This little paradox is so elegant in its representation of the reality it’s poetic.

There’s so much I am not saying which is crucial and given within the fourth way for example helping the student to pass the elephant through eye of the needle, but is far outside the scope of my response. Suffice it to say then, Liberation remains only an idea and in reality it is only by NOT following a pathway, ANY pathway, that one has the possibility of making their first step on the PATH of LIBERATION.

The Gold Aesthetic

I really haven't been so immeresed in issues regarding aesthetic communication for awhile now. It correlates directly with the heat one's evolution is generating in the moment. The quicker the transformational pace or harder, always reflects the temperature.

And the hotter, the clearer aesthetic communications derive miraculously.

Right now anything I do is in the question of whether its being a possible necessitates manifesting accordingly. To express directness in a complete way is validated by this correlation in the proportions.

The evolution of beauty reaches but stays aesthetic in these moments of higher conscious integral functionality, disappearing along with the extant flow of relevant energy. Well until some guy named Sai comes along and without doing anything in particular sucks the wood of the true cross out of the piece of wood he's holding.

I can't think of a clearer way to distinguish a difference of degree in terms of consciousness being focused, one over the other, defining part of the scale quantifying enlightenment.

Letter to the Good Hearted

My concern here is that first you do not appreciate the story you are presenting as truth and your belief in it. When one sees and opens themselves to having a still mind, practicing and developing a clarity regarding it being THE SOURCE of suffering for mankind, this response by you seems disingenous and defensive, an attempt by the ego the reassert its position of dominance/control which in truth is an illusion kept in place by mechanically by our mind and its ignorance.

From this perspective, ALL forms of judgement and dualistic assessment good/bad and the like are useless and extend the ignorance Osho's view dissolves in principle. The issue is whether or not thought controls your sense, and by default, any story regarding the process which is what you are presenting here, is nothing but a form of control. Negative and Positive are merely how the ego escapes responsibility for itself and how it simply has NO ABILITY TO REPRESENT TRUE REALITY.

Then one must ask themselves, is there any value in continuing to pay attention to the veil given the core values of the illusion being all about transcending our suffering and expressing values that represent our harmony there? That's my question to you. I would like you to answer this in all fairness and not cycle another iteration and assertion of your story since it fails to acknowledge anything I've been writing about given my quote from Osho so far.

And giving some slack here in order to accomodate what may simply be your preferred style, understand that I have NOT referred to in anyway how or what is involved in making one's sensation and perception free from the effects of thought as well. Simply given, that state is an accomplishment only the self knows, only the pure wordless expanse of presence remembers. Anything my ego says about it you can be sure is false and a lie. Why? Because the ego can't go there, period.

Everything above appears to be egotistical if simply for the fact that it reports to know what cannot in fact be known only directly sensed in our contact and conscious awareness right now. So, as wonderful and logical and comprehensible as your story goes ... believed and valued it only further pushes a person's true capacity to experience real unconditional love farther away.

My guess is that if not you, someone else reading this is begin confronted by the simple reality that what I'm presenting does not COMPUTE for their ego in the sense that it provides any ground on which their dualistic minds can stand and thus exert itself by thought between reality and the truth which is our self. This is a situation defined by ignorance referred to in Buddhism as the grasping nature of the mind. When we take this as our path in life, paying attention only to what we can and what we cannot grasp, comprehend, understand, etc., we travel misery in karma.

Speaking the truth doesn't change reality however, only one's consciousness can create that possibility. One of these days, I might accidentally come across a procedure or invent the technology to raise that possibility in relation to those who listen to me. I've been horribly deficient and ineffective so far but that has never stopped me from spouting off and addressing this whenever I find someone who is foolish enough to think they know a way to articulate paradise or happiness.

I will eventually point out the flaws of language and its relationship to reality analogous to a menu to food. At some point in one's practice words serve an entirely ancillary role like railroad ties to a train's final destination. You wouldn't place all the ties at the end of the railway would you? The roll of the process is critical for being free and clear of 'ties' other than just those necessary to keep one's movement in the present and optimal.

Namaste,rj

~The Rig of History

He was dying at the time and with him went a life.
Memories are habits designed to help others survive.
Oh Mercy, that's what's really going on, at the mercy.
Kazaam, totes a line, and represents nothing so fragile
flashing its pow, no one considers the pause as eternal,
the infinite opening of space in which life finds itself.
Too involved in the status quo, signs and banners - the fare.

Those dedicated studiers of culture's creative language-
I fear for their souls, locked up in our town squares.
Someone made up a loosely collected record as history
and the rest of us were unable to resist this formal bias.
We can't make any new moves dimensionally, together,
precisely because nobody sees history, endlessly absurd.
There's a real abyss between relativity and death in life.

This is a well documented backbone of history's crest.
We call it a biography, a guest list to test with the rest,
calling attention to life on end, clowning and infantile.
Anyone can do it and everyone has - at some time.
Is there a real way to fabricate immortality this way?
Unable to know anything beyond our own eventuality
we spend our time constructing bits of fish tales, in bliss.

Oh but, why? I wouldn't cry out, except I decry this.
For those of you focusing on history in consciousness
don't forget your time is limited; make haste not to waste.
Can you resonate, echo the world's symphony today?
How else to move or progress without flowing in this,
a presence we express simply being alive with all life.
It's the rules and boundaries, rigging we're snared in.

Dec 2009, rjduberg

On Community Response

Burn, Baby, Burn.

I saw the post by Robin and my first thought on responding was not to, reflecting an attitude of non-identification. It's important to see that drama is a vortex that can become so powerful it can override and dominate a person's natural gravity and ground of being.

However, I just got done viewing Jim Carrey's YES MAN on MAX, a beautiful film starring Carrey and Zooey Deschanel (girl in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy), just a continuous series of scenes in which YES becomes a mantra to situations most would never say YES to nor find even remotely appealing. The beauty of it for me was the humor. So here I am saying NO, contemplating the universal YES to everything often chimed by Tantric sloganeers, and still laughing over the possibilities created in Carrey's film. How could I not take advantage of this GREAT OPPTY to say YES and do some personal lab work of my own. Huh? Are you kidding? LOL

So, after reading your post, my assessment was anything like disgust, in fact. I totally got your active transformation, and enjoyed reading your writing about it.

The only thing I guess I can contribute is that assessment is absolutely natural and critical to life and how we judge the relative value of anything and everything. Negative assessments are just as important as positive ones. From others, as unique as each of us are, it really is counter productive to enter into debates or engage people's assessments. There personal in nature and as one comedian said, "I don't like applause, just throw money!"

In response to Robin's question, which was way too open-ended for me, I think a little context would go a long way in shifting the conversation to being valuable on the level of community which is where it seemed she wanted to take it. My choice is personal responsibility. So how can I respond and be personally responsible with my negative assessments within a community?

It seems to me, by doing the work of transformation, practicing Tantra, saying yes - creating lemonade from lemons, and whatever cliche you have to add to the list - the most important bets are covered. But what about those negative assessments in which we are so identified that we begin to feel disgust, for instance? What I do is create some space, take a break, get a cup of juice, go look at the waves, you know...

And then, ask yourself what your committed to, and consider how relevant the negative assessment is to that context. For the most part, a person's associated disgust is NOT a relevant assessment to the context called OneTantra because OneTantra is like a wave, it only carries information, itself a "community" of relations. Work on the community (how relations are configured, energized, weighted, integrated, etc., etc.) is something that takes place on an entirely different level and is outside the scope of this question. But, for anyone who has ventured to this site with any background in online communities, LOL, disgust is pretty much the overwhelming assessment to include - and Moses is responsibly addressing the source of it. Nuff said bout that.

So, after establishing what rank a value has...  well there it is. This is in my opinion the way to "DO" something about negative assessment on a personal level. At the level of community however, the question for me is whether or not such assessments actually exist at all. 

Suffice it to say, if you have a community based on a negative assessment, your going to promote the transformation of it. The real chore comes when personal negativity corrupts a community promotion. Communities have mandates with purpose. Responding to negative assessment is only valuable then when the assessment is regarding the health of the community.

On Creating New Possibility

The key here is to recognize that circumstances are your biggest adversary. As circumstances change, it goes without saying that possibilities will resonate those changes when one's consciousness is not up to a level of originality and creativity. It is agreeable to me to designate circumstances as fundamentally comprising a set. At some point, circumstances become irrelevant and valueless to enumerate. With respect to finite sizes of the set, it is important to see that the meta-set or super-set of circumstances is infinite, always changing, with a flow that can and will at times not repeat or overlap with previous sets. Such super circumstances will not resonate to any set of possibilities because the set of possibilities is entirely based on past responses foundationally and is finite, limited in terms of being a kind of referential database, kickstarting our best case scenario responses when circumstances dictate, for efficiency's sake.

When an original set of circumstances emerges, lower states of consciousness will employ simple denial to cope with the impasse. Evolved minds capable of originality, creativity, and receptivity based on the causal level are active at the meta level and have the ability to create possibility anew unencumbered and irrespective to any and all past possibilities as would be necessarily the case, necessary to keep 'the ball rolling' as it were.

To say that one possible response is just that, the ability to recreate one's moments and their possibilities as such is quite different than how your speaking. Such a response exists quite outside of any causal dependence or correlation to circumstance, but rather impact the wider field in which circumstance shows up in, on purpose, and paradoxically, sinse this level of possibility itself is unchangeable and never at effect, is causal and at source.

If i have this right, LOL. For me, language challenges my attempts to be rigorous about my understanding and knowledge of greater truth. Knowing the perfect clarity and stillness at the highest level of all truth and knowledge as unmanifest and unknowingness, is the ultimate expression of this difficulty, I find myself unable to do anything about it much other than dance around it. Higher levels of consciousness then do not respond but instead originate creatively with what appears to lower levels of consciousness as miraculous intervention or magical manifestations of help, etc.

Tantric Master - Barry Long

My inquiry into Tantra has not been very significant yet, except for the discussions I've participated on at OneTantra online. I was prepared to make a serious committment not too long ago to hands on training and study but my offer was not reciprocated properly or equitably by the instructor I contacted. NOW, one of the ladies at OneTantra mentioned Barry Long, which I spent a good deal of time last night briefly reviewing, when I ran into a wildly powerful teaching which was at the same time expressing much of the corruption which destroyed my relationship with the Fellowship of Friends Fourth Way School.

Additionally, I found years of blog posts, both praising and criticizing him. The manner in which he expressed himself was familiar to me as I read his words in a published interview with a journalist at an online magazine dedicated to enlightement and spiritual issues/teaching.

The egoistic lack of compassion and perversion he evidenced (2nd hand for me) said to me that there was a limit to his realization. This limit, this self-centeredness, was a mega contradiction to his teaching, something which was clearly echoed among his closer students' observations about how he would say one thing and do another. The response of course is no one can comprehend the behavior of a master, especially using ordinary social standards.

That's not going to fly with me, however, after reading quite a bit of him about his ideas and teaching, I cannot deny that I was left with a powerful impression regarding what he was offering in terms of a perspective on the relationship between men and women. Clearly, he made it up.  The thing I read which was the key to this was a statement regadrding how every 5 minutes men and women are constantly thinking about each other throughout the day. For him, this was something he expanded and USED to be creative regarding his higher realisations of mind.

I'm certain that there is a distinction between objective knowledge and subjective knowledge. What I've described here is a man who tasted objective states but returned to a very high subjective creative state and began to REASSEMBLE himself there. My bet is that his mechanics produced a continual stream of 'teaching' and because he was able to disentangle himself from that enough to gain some fairly distilled higher thought forms, his words began to ensare those listening like a web. The glue or stickiness came in the form of creating enough insightful space between his ideas that those listening were able to relieve themselves of useless suffering.

He assumes the title tantric master and yet it isn't at all clear whether he wasn't in fact harming more than he helped. The few nuggets I gleamed far underweighed the mass of red flags et al. I found opposing his legitimacy as a true spiritual teacher.

On the Subject of Intent

Does it occur to anyone that focusing on either Yin or Yang, Yes or No, even Unconditional Yeses defined by the acceptance of both; all of these states or positions or perspectives set one up against being in the Golden Mean. And by that, I'm speaking about the truth of what is, simply being present AND awake. I caution against the thinking concerning affirmations which do not account for intrinsic value and meaning in a human's life. To me, such flatland thinking shows up like an eagle mingling on the ground with chickens. If one is really interested in the function of intention in our being then surely it has nothing to do with agreeing with popular and/or better, different or greater expressions regarding the human condition, PRECISELY because all of that is reactive, a product of the past, languaged in jargon and cliche, a message just like the writing on the wall. The purpose of real intention is to bring forth here and now from nothing and spirit. The power of intention is in one sense all inclusive ("the great yes?") however that's like saying a car has wheels.

Please forgive my lack of simplicity on the subject, I have a lifelong issue with my highest intention, and have yet to resolve certain aspects of it. The question for me is regarding how often our intentions are expressed incompletely or in a manner not completely conscious. At some level, the truth is that everything we experience including our own being is directly a function of our intention. If intent is real and matters in the flow and creation of being in the world, then it is not related to subjective interpretation, reasonableness, or explanation. This FACT is consistent with what we all know intention to be in our hearts. Our desires are an expression of our being and uncaused, while all thoughts connecting their details to circumstance and whatnot are at best clever fiction. We may tell ourselves that the reason we intend something is because of such and such or x or y, however we are really lying to say this is why we intend what we do. What we do and our story about it or two completely distinct phenomena, one expressing our being, and the other expressing our culture or style of belonging.

When it comes to manifesting intent then, one's results are more of a benefit if we stop denying them with affirmations which disconnect us from being able to language that which needs to be spoken and heard in our conscious awareness. I'm not saying that affirmations like the 'great yes' are missing the point, they speak something which we all need to hear but like a note in a symphony designed to tell the story of our heritage and culture as humanity they are not intentional, and intention is not dependent on them. Intention is dependent on consciousness to function, which begs the question regarding what consciousness is as I digress. The relevant question is how to resolve our intent by being conscious of its shadow realms, where we've forgotten intentions which are now opposed, crosspurposed, or in some other way degrading to our being satisfied and confident, clear and effective, powerful and magnanimous.