<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/platform.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar/4053797?origin\x3dhttp://absentofi.blogspot.com', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>

Hunted and haunted Thursday, March 22, 2007 |

One of the things that brings up discomfort in me (=shadow) is people who seem agitated, driven in an unsettled way, haunted, hunted... who perform daily activities in a harsh way.

I notice for myself that when I feel this way, it is because I have created a box for life and myself, through beliefs and identities, and life comes up with something that is outside of this box, reminding me that it is too small. It comes knocking, I try to ignore it, it keeps knocking, and I become unsettled and agitated, haunted by its presence.

So what happens when I become unsettled when there are unsettled people around? I have a belief that people should be more conscious, more at peace with what is, and I also have an identity for myself as more conscious than that, and more at peace. So what the person is doing comes up outside of the box, and is unsettling to me. Their behavior becomes a reminder of what I left out in my views and identities, and that is exactly what unsettles me and haunts me.

As usual, what I see out there, in someone else, is exactly what is happening right here, at the same moment. It is a precise mirror.

I think he is stupid, and maybe it is a little stupid of me to believe that? What do I really know? Maybe there are some good reasons for his choices and actions? I think she is agitated and shouldn't be, and as I believe that, I am agitated because what is shouldn't be, according to my story. I think someone is brilliant, and right there, there is a hint of my own brilliancy in even noticing. I admire someone for having an open heart, and if my own heart was not at least partially open, I wouldn't recognize or admire it.

The whole process of having things show up outside of the box can be unpleasant, but it is also a good thing. Life invites me to examine those beliefs and identities, broaden them to make them more widely inclusive, and eventually allow any identification with them to release.

Labels: , ,

Shadow of beliefs, and shadows of identities Tuesday, March 20, 2007 |

Beliefs have their own shadows, and beliefs also create identities with their own (very similar) shadows.

The shadow of a belief is all the reversals of the thought or idea believed in. The shadow of an identity is anything that does not fit into the identity. And any belief creates an identity.

Say I have the thought that people shouldn't lie, and believe in it.

The shadow of the belief is the grain of truth in each of its turnarounds, mainly that people should lie. Why should they? Because they do. And because people often have good reasons for it, at least as it appears to themselves. There are many reasons why people should lie, and even the gifts in it, and I can always find one more.

The shadow of the identity is the ways I lie. My identity is as someone who does not lie, so the shadow is the ways I lie in my own life. How do I lie? At one level, everything I say is a lie, or rather at best only a relative and limited truth. At another, more conventional level, I lie as well. I may come up against a threat to an identity, and come up with an (apparently innocent) lie to protect it. And I also lie to myself in many ways. I lie to myself when I believe in any thought, since I at another level already know it is not true. The list is endless, and here too, I can always come up with yet another example.

The shadow of the belief has to do with how I box the world in, and the shadow of the identity has to do with how I box myself in. And the two are of course closely related, just two faces of the same boxing in.

Labels: , , ,

Relationships with the ultimate, and inflation Friday, March 16, 2007 |

In terms of avoiding or minimizing inflation, it is safer to actively explore the 2nd, 3rd, and zero person relationships with Big Mind (see previous post), and then just allow the 1st person relation to come and go on its own.

Inflation inherent in a sense of a separate self

Although even here, as long as there is a sense of a separate self, there will be some inflation, and it is good to notice it and take it for what it is.

There is a sense that I, as a separate self, have a relationship with God, understand something about God, or am someone who has glimpses of the ground of all existence. So I am special, different, am in a special relationship with God or existence, and so on. All of this is inflation. We take something that is inherently neutral, place a value on it, and take it as happening to a separate self.

It is inevitable, and happens all the time anyway.

There is a sense of a separate self, and with it comes an automatic sense of superiority and inferiority, richly diverse and with many different flavors. This form of inflation is just one of those, although it can be an especially nasty one, and annoying to those around, if left unchecked.

So what can we do?

Working with inflation

Again, we can work with it from the form and the emptiness sides.

From the form side, one way is notice and work with projections, and especially shadow projections.

From the emptiness side, I can find myself as headless and see that all of this is (apparently) happening to an individual who is inherently free from a separate self, and more precisely that it is really happening as awake emptiness and form, inherently absent of a separate I.

In both cases, we come to see that it is all inherently neutral, and only takes on significance, meaning, and a sense of importance, through our stories about it, and through believing in those stories.

Labels: , , , ,

Views and their reversals and shadows Sunday, March 11, 2007 |

I realize this could have been more clear in some of the previous posts...

Views all have their reversals, and they all have limited validity and a grain of truth in them. They are all relative truths.

When a view is believed in, taken as an absolute truth, that is when it creates shadows. I am this, not that. This is true, not that. I am right, you are not.

And a view is any abstraction. Any thought, image, identity, ideology, framework, map. Anything that helps us navigate in the world. Anything that is really a question, but can be taken as a statement. Anything that, when believed in, we use to box ourselves and Existence in with, saying that it is this way, and not that. Anything that, when believed in, makes it appear that we know how things not only are, but how they should be.

Seen as just innocent questions and relative truths, they are immensely useful in helping us orient and navigate in the world. Taken as statements and absolutes, we try to box the world in, and the world comes knocking on the door wanting to be let in. Which can be quite stressful if we don't allow it to. It is a big world, and our box is small.

Labels: , , ,

Three relationships with the reversals of views |

Related to the previous post, but also a little different...

I see how I cycle among three relationships with an awareness of the reversals of views.

One is happily oblivious, using or attaching to a view without much awareness of the grain of truth in their reversals.

The other is releasing views. Having seen how each view has innumerable reversals, and they all have limited and relative validity, I become more cautious. I release from them, as much as I can. There may even be ambivalence here, because I see that I cannot continue in my certainty of particular views anymore, but I am also not quite able to play freely with them either. So I hold back. And I investigate.

The third is a free play with views, first using one, then another, then a third, the a view that includes some of them all, being able to find the truth and validity in each of them, and also seeing the limitations of each. This comes from a more thorough investigation of particular views and each of their reversals. There is a more finely grained familiarity with the terrain, so also more freedom.

Examples and flavors

There are many flavors to this.

One is in terms of views in general.

Another is with shadow projections, where I am first blindly caught up in it, then learn to recognize the symptoms and become more cautions, and then more free around it as we become more familiar with the process.

And yet another is in the belief of a separate self. Initially, we take it for granted. Then, when we see that too as just another idea with relative truth, we may get a little stunned and hold back for a while while investigating further. And finally, there is a freedom around it, a free play, allowing it to be there when it is, yet also seeing the insubstantiality of it.

The three relationships play themselves out in each of these situations, and many more than involves views and beliefs.

Labels: , , ,

Transcend and exclude Saturday, March 10, 2007 |




In my own life, and of course... more easily... in other's life, I sometimes see a tendency to transcend and exclude.

And it has a direct connection with the shadow.

I am identified with a particular identity, and what comes up does not fit within that identity. The box I have made for myself is not big enough, and leaves it outside.

One of the more recent examples is with the movie The Secret, where my initial reaction was of pushing it away, putting it down, seeing it as inferior, not really worth existing.

But then, as soon as that happens, I also notice all the signs of being caught up in a shadow projection: pushing it away, putting it down, seeing it as inferior, not really worth existing...!

So shifting into a transcend and include mode, I am more free to find the grain of truth in its message, and also appreciate how it... obviously... fills a real need for many people. I can explore its value, its gifts, and see how it fits in with the bigger picture... what role does it fill? What can it do for people, and where are its limits? I can explore it in a more receptive and nuanced way.

And working with my own shadow projections around it certainly helps me in this... for instance by using The Work.

Labels: , ,

Islam's golden age Thursday, March 08, 2007 |




In our post-cold war times, where Muslims are the new villains and scapegoats, and the Islamic world the new favorite shadow projection object, it may be good to remember what we owe Islamic culture.

The most obvious example is the role of the Islamic world in the birth of modern Western culture: the Renaissance, which would not have been what it was (or may not have been at all) if it wasn't for the Islamic Golden Age, and their preservation, enriching and transmission of elements from a wide range of ancient cultures, including the Greek and Roman.

Labels: , , ,

The stink |



An open sewer in Lublin, 1930s.


As long as there is a sense of a separate self, there is a sense of being better and worse than others. And there is also a stink, which is especially noticeable when we cling to a sense of being better than others.

This stink is quite noticeable in much of the integral world... In those who use integral theory to put others down and elevate themselves. In those who find it necessary to see themselves as second tier, and pronounce it to the world. In those who find no use, and not even a right to existence, in less-than-integral approaches that obviously fills a need for others - such as The Secret and the Law of Attraction.

It all comes from a lack of investigation.

Anything I see in others, is also here.

The more I see that, through my own investigation, in a finely grained way, in daily life, the less there is a sense of being better or worse.

There is just a human life being lived out. And anything I see in others, is also here.

On the surface, in my face to the world, there are certainly differences.

But in the vastness of the depth of who I am as a human, and what I am as awake emptiness, there is none... Just intimacy, connection, recognition, and even that is saying too much.

Julian at Zaadz is saying something about this: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent.... (Thanks to William Harryman at Integral Options Cafe for finding and linking to that post.)

Labels: , , ,

Projections - of what is alive here and now |

In reading Brad Warner's post on the Big Mind process, I took the opportunity to explore my own shadows. From my most juvenile and petty aspect, a voice said "this is just an emotional rant with no substance."

And as usual, when I look at this, I find that what I see in him describes me in that very moment. In seeing his post as an emotional rant with no substance, I am engaging in exactly the same - an emotional (reactive) rant (story) with no substance (not based on much and not very informative, apart from describing what is going on for me right here and now.)

Something arises. It doesn't fit a particular identity I am identified with. So I put it out there, on the most convenient target - in this case BW's post.

It is very simple. Very obvious, when I take the time to look. Very humbling. Revealing the inherent neutrality of any situation, when the story is taken out of it.

More details

Here is another way to look at it...

  • Something arises in space: a (metaphorical) stick with two ends. Right and wrong, mature and immature, kind and unkind, and so on.
  • At one level, closer to the absolute, it belongs to no individual. It just arises.
  • At another level, closer to the relative, we can say it belongs to this individual, to me.
  • Space is split, into I here and Other there.
  • One end of the stick is here, with me (for instance right, mature, kind, etc.)
  • The other end of the stick is there, with you or them (wrong, immature, unkind)
It is also interesting to note that to an innocent and more dispassionate bystander, I will be seen as expressing both. My conscious image, reflected in my words, is that I am right and mature. But the emotional tone will most likely be of someone who is defending a position (afraid of being wrong), and of someone who is reactive (emotionally immature.)

Labels:

What I don't want to hear Tuesday, March 06, 2007 |

In our local The Work group last night, we explored our least favorite things to be told by someone else - what are they, where can I find it in myself or my life, can I also find their opposites, and what are their gifts?

For me, the list can easily be quite long. Here are some that come to mind...

  • You are weird
  • You are incompetent
  • I don't like you
  • You are a liar
  • You are selfish and self-centered
  • You are a loser
  • You are oblivious
Funny how these all seem to bring up least-favorite childhood memories...!

So let's see if I can find these in myself, their opposites (finding myself as big enough to contain both), and also find the genuine gifts in each.

You are weird

Yes, I can see that I am weird in many different ways. I have some unusual interests (including in whatever I write about in this blog). I like unusual music. I don't do much of what many do, such as going to bars on weekends. I prefer more quiet conversations with friends to big parties. I don't always join in conversations on topics others find interesting, preferring to listen. I am sure my look can be seen as somewhat weird in different ways and different contexts (I especially noticed that when I was in rural Nepal!) A specific instance: I felt weird at times during the Breema retreat at Breitenbush this weekend, preferring to sleep and go on walks on my own rather than socializing (apart from meals.)

And at the same time, I am normal. My life is a human life, with all it means to be human. Nothing I have ever experienced or thought is something that I haven't found expressed by someone else. My fears and insecurities seem to be quite ordinary, even common. A specific instance: last night during our local The Work meeting, where I saw that anything coming up for me - including the things I was most embarrassed about - was shared by others, sometimes all, in the group.

What are the gifts of being weird? Well, I am part of expanding what is allowed and expressed in human experience, maybe allowing others to be more comfortable with it as well. Others seeing it (and especially if I am comfortable with it) can help them be more comfortable with themselves and what they go through, maybe even enjoying it! I also get to explore areas of human experience where some others don't go, filling out the map a little.

To be continued...

Labels: , , ,

Inferiority and superiority Thursday, March 01, 2007 |

As soon as there is a belief in a separate self, there is a sense of superiority and inferiority.

Existence has an inherent neutrality - it is all a field of awake emptiness and form, and the form itself is nothing other than awake emptiness. It is all Big Mind, God, Brahman, Tao. One field, awake emptiness with a thin surface of innumerable and varied forms.

When there is a sense of a separate self, this neutrality is automatically split into a sense of being both better and worse than others. We believe in our stories about how we are simultaneously better and worse than others, in different areas, in different ways, and even these stories are in flux, so I may see myself as better in a certain area at one moment, and then worse in the next.

The antidotes to this are, as usual, to be found in emptiness and in form.

The emptiness side is to notice all forms as awake emptiness (and equal).

The form antidotes are many. One is to examine our beliefs and finding the grain of truth in their turnarounds (dissolving our grip on one story as absolutely true, being able to hold many stories and perspectives at once.) Another is to find in ourselves what we see in others, and the other way around (which is actually an outcome of finding the truths in the reversal stories.) Here, although there may be many surface differences, we find that we are all in the same boat.

Labels:

The nigredo, albedo and rubedo of no defense Monday, February 05, 2007 |

Any framework (model, theory, map, perspective) is a filter for exploring the world, and each one brings certain aspects out (and is blind to other aspects.)

So here is a basic alchemical take on defense and no defense, of that feeling of having to defend (or not) a particular identity.

Nigredo: the misery

Whenever there is this sense of having to defend a particular identity, role, belief, view, perspective, there is also a certain amount of misery. Will do they attack me? What types of attacks can I expect in this situation? What if they are right? How can I fight back most effectively? How can I shoot down their perspective? It is endless.

Even when there is a certain enjoyment in the battle, of maybe feeling more alive, of the possibility of winning or the appearance of winning, of strengthening and supporting a habitual or desired identity, even then, there is a certain amount of misery there.

A lot of energy goes into preparing for battle, strategizing, fighting the battle, and licking the wounds afterwards. There is reactivity, which a part of us is not comfortable with. We may feel stuck in old and sometimes unwanted patterns. And there is a basic sense of a split here between myself and others, which is only reinforced by the battle, and this too gives a sense of misery.

In alchemical terms, this is the nigredo, the misery that nudges us to look for a resolution, and this time not (only) by changing the rest of the world, but changing something in ourselves.

Albedo: the work

The albedo, the whitening, the clarification, is the work we do on ourselves.

In terms of having an identity to defend, we can work on it in many different ways. The Work is one, allowing us to release our grip on a particular belief, view and identity. The 3-2-1 Shadow Process is another, where we also find in ourselves what we initially only saw in the other. We can simply be with our experiences, which similarly tends to loosen any grip we have on anything arising, including our beliefs, fixed views, and identities. We can use active imagination, other forms of self-inquiry, or anything else. And we can use any combinations of whatever is available to us.

This is a process of bringing attention to our habitual patterns (calcinatio), of differentiation (separatio), of dissolution of rigid and habitual patterns and views (solutio), and of shifting into and becoming familiar with new patterns (coagulatio), which together and over time brings a clarification (sublimatio.)

Rubedo: the resolution

Eventually, after some work, there may be a release of defensiveness in certain areas, and then other areas, and ultimately, if we keep going, in all areas and situations in our life. Instead of feeling that we need to defend certain identities, we welcome whatever comes our way as a reminder that yes, I am that too, and that, and that.

Somebody tells me, one way or another, that I am stupid, and yes, I can find that in myself. That is part of my identity. Or that I am wrong, and yes, that too is there. Or that I am arrogant, yes, that too. Or insensitive, yes. Or boring, yes, absolutely. Or fun, yes, that too. Or a bad friend, yes. Or a good friend, yes... Or smart, yes. Or right, yes. Or sincere, yes.

It is all there. I am familiar with all of this, and it is all right here. And if someone says something that I haven't explored yet, then I can find that too.

There is nothing to defend. Just ease, clarity, simplicity.

Woven together and in cycles

Over time, we may be able to see this general pattern, from nigredo (that was the time I didn't see this at all, and also all the times I fall into defense in general), to albedo (that was when I started becoming conscious of all of this and started working on it), and rubedo (that is the general sense of ease that came out of all the work, and also all the glimpses of release and peace throughout the process.)

But they are all also woven together, especially clearly so in the middle of the overall process. There is defensiveness and misery, then some work on it, then some release, then back to defensiveness, work, release, over and over, within the same issue, and across different issues.

Nothing to defend, yet also taking care of myself and others

Eventually there is a general sense of nothing to defend, of ease, peace, even in the midst of daily life and interactions with others. There is no particular identity, or viewpoint, or belief to defend. Only a fluidity among numerous views, perspectives, identities, theories, maps. Whatever works in the situation is what comes up and is used, without any need to hold onto it.

At the same time, there is the ordinary taking care of myself and others. If a cougar attacks me, I'll try to defend myself. And I'll take care of my own health and well being. And I'll defend others if they are in need of it, including defending their identity if it is attacked and they feel hurt.

There is no fixed identity to defend, and also the ordinary taking care of myself and others. And the fluidity of identities, views and perspectives is what allows me to take care of myself and others with more ease, and in more effective and effortless ways.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Why people focus on refuting Ken Wilber? Monday, January 29, 2007 |

WH's speedlinking for today has a link to a post on why so many focus on refuting Wilber (although the post itself seems to have vanished.)

When I saw that brief description of the post, what immediately came to mind is KW's personality. His writings reflects a personality that invites, if not begs, people to tear him (and his theories) down a few notches. Whenever a particular identity and image is held onto and presented as strongly as in KW's case (of being macho, smart and hip), it invites others to punch holes in it and tear it town. It is quite beautiful in a way, although can get ugly as well: if he doesn't do it himself, others will do it for him, reminding him of his own task.

I am not saying that he is not macho, smart and hip. He is very much all of those, and genuinely so. There is just a very strong air of it being a particular image as well, and one that he spends a great deal of energy building up and presenting. And that draws some people to tear it down as flies are drawn to honey.

There are of course other aspects to all of this as well: inaccuracies in how he presents the views of others (it seems that he sometimes almost deliberately misrepresents the views of others), the way he puts down people criticizing or questioning his theories and models (sometimes harshly and with little compassion), his status as one of the most brilliant thinkers of our times (which in itself is reason enough for some to focus on punching some holes there), how he has a God-like status among some (again, a good reason for some to bring him down a few notches), and probably genuine holes in the theories and models themselves.

So in a way, it may all be part of a natural compensating process. He strongly holds onto a certain image so others want to deflate it, showing that it is only an image. He misrepresents certain views of others, so others naturally react. He puts others down, and this attitude is then mirrored back at him. Some of his followers are a little too enamored by him, so certain folks want to show that he is not quite the god some make him into.

It is all a natural, inevitable, process. One that is beautiful in the way everything is a perfect mirror, inviting us all to see in ourselves what we would rather not see. And one that also can get quite ugly through our resistance to this process.

If I hold onto a certain image, others will try to deflate it. This is an invitation to myself to see how I am holding onto the image, and let go of it. If I resist, it gets ugly and everything only intensifies.

There is a reason this happens with Ken Wilber, and not people like Dalai Lama, or Douglas Harding, or Adyashanti. And it goes beyond just his role as innovator and theory builder. In their cases, there is no resistance, so no need to punch holes in their image or theories, and no need to pull them down a few notches. In KW's case, there is resistance, and this invites attacks.

To me, it is not so difficult to image someone developing the exact same theories and models as KW, but with no identification with a particular identity, and no resistance. In this case, there will still be questions and criticism of his work, but it will (mostly) happen in a far more uneventful and less dramatic way. And probably with more of a sense of partnership and collaboration, at least from his side, than of advesarial positions.

That is not to say that it would be better that way. When we are attached to a particular identity, then drama is good. It helps us see our identifications. And it even helps develop the theories, although sometimes in less comfortable ways.

Labels: , ,

Feeling all arising as Spirit and me Thursday, December 14, 2006 |

Throughout the day, and especially when lying in bed before falling asleep or waking up, the practice of feeling all as Spirit and me comes up.

Whatever arises is felt as Spirit and as me. It is awake emptiness and form, and it is me or a mirror for me as a human self.

I especially do this with anything arising that is outside of my habitual identities, such as fear, people I am attracted to or feel aversion towards, fatigue, pain, even countries and the Earth as a whole.

I feel into it as Spirit and me, and along with this is the seeing of it as Spirit and me, which in turn awakens the loving of it as Spirit and me.

Reorganizing the three centers, and allowing anything human to be experienced as me

This helps reorganize the three centers of view, emotions and heart within the context of all as Spirit.

And it helps transform my identity as a human being to be more inclusive of anything human. To feel, see and love anything human as not only it, over there, but also me, right here.

Labels: , , ,

The One Taste of public and private situations Friday, December 01, 2006 |

A while back, I used this practice more regularly, and still find it useful.

How would it be if there is One Taste of public and private situations? If I act in public as if I was on my own, and when I am on my own as if everybody could see me?

Acting in public as if I am on my own helps me with finding ease, comfort, allowing pretense to fall away.

Acting on my own as if everybody could see helps me find a sense of transparency, nothing to hide or protect, allowing the light of awareness into (more of) all I am and do.

Together, it helps me find ease and comfort with myself, as I am, accepting it as it is, be OK with all of what I am. It helps me find a sense of wholeness, of transparency, of receptivity, of nothing to hide, noting to protect or defend.

This is one of the many forms of One Taste, one that plays itself out on our human level.

Labels: , , , , ,

Feeling into Wednesday, November 22, 2006 |

After the dream yesterday, I have had several periods of feeling into a parade of things coming up, from shadow aspects to memories to sensations. There is a sense of fullness tinged with bliss and a new deepening, and it seems to be part of the endarkenment process. Different forms of shadow work, such as The Work, includes an owning of the shadow and a feeling into it, but there is a new deepening into it this time.

Labels: ,

Levels of oneness: all as Spirit, and everything I see out there is also in here Tuesday, November 21, 2006 |

Some levels of Oneness...

All as Spirit

Ultimately, it is all Spirit. The field of seeing and seeing is Spirit, absent of any I. The Ground of seeing and seen is Spirit, absent of any I.

And we can have a glimpse of this, maybe interpreted as an experience of oneness between I (as this human self) and Other (as nature, God, Spirit).

We can have an intuition or a sense of it, again typically interpreted as a sense of Oneness of I and Other.

There can be an immediate and more stable experience of this Oneness, that it is all Spirit.

Also here, there can be a sense of I and Other overlaid on the sense of Oneness. The volume of both can be turned up or down, one going into the foreground and the other in the background, shifting back and forth.

Finally, there is a realization that the field of seeing and seen is inherently absent of an I. There is no I anywhere, just a field of Spirit as Ground, seeing and seen. The sense of center falls away. The sense of subject and object falls away. Spirit as the field of seeing and seen, as a whole, is its own subject and object.

It is not touched by oneness and multitude, yet arises and can be seen as either and both.

And it is still functionally connected with a particular human self, which now arises as anything else. It is just part of the field, living its own life, just like clouds moving across the sky, cars passing on the street, other people living their own life, the world living its own life. It is Spirit as form, unfolding on its own, absent of any I anywhere.

Human level: deepening into knowing myself as an individual

Since Spirit, in our case, is functionally connected with a particular human self, and lives through and as this human self before and after awakening to itself, the forms oneness takes in our human life is also interesting.

At the ultimate level, all is Spirit independent of its particulars as form.

And at our human level, everything I see in the world is also here in me. This is a deepening of knowing myself as a human being.

Every quality and characteristic I see out there, in the world - in the universe, in the Earth, ecosystems, animals, plants, humans, cities, stories, mythologies, movies, fantasies, dreams, they are all also in here, in my own human life.

It is a deepening of knowing myself as a human being, and also a deepening of the realization of all as one. In my human life, all I see in the wider world is also right here, closer than my own breath.

At the most disowned, Spirit can recognize all arising as Spirit, but still see some qualities arising in other human selves and not in this one. This makes for a less complete, less human and more frozen way for this human self to function in the world. It makes for a less healthy and mature vehicle for Spirit in the world, even as Spirit has awakened to itself.

A little less disowned, Spirit can recognize all arising as Spirit, recognize in this human self what is sees in the wider world, but not be much familiar with it in this human self. It is acknowledged, but there is not much familiarity with it. Again, it limits how this human self can show up in the world, it limits its repertoire and what is familiar to it.

As these aspects become more owned, as they move from "it" to "me" and "mine", there is greater and greater familiarity with it, not only out there, but also in how it shows up in this life.

It becomes known in a far richer way, and with a different (more conventional) sense of intimacy. It becomes part of the daily repertoire of the human self, available when needed.

There is a sense of deepening humanity, a more intimate connection with others, and more juiciness in life in general.

It is even a part of developing skillful means, since this human life is the tool of Spirit in the world, even after it awakens to itself.

Human level: deepening into knowing ourselves as us

Spirit also shows up as Us, as the multitude of beings and all of our many relationships, and this is another deepening into oneness.

When Spirit awakens to itself, what does that mean for all of the relationships of this human self to other people, to animals, plants, ecosystems, the Earth as a whole, past and future generations?

What does it mean to relate to those where Spirit has not (yet) awakened to itself? What does it mean for groups where Spirit has awakened to itself, to varying degrees, in many of us?

Again, as with the deepening into seeing everything in the wider world also in my human self, this is an infinite exploration process. As long as there is the world of form, and a vehicle in this world of form, it has no end. It continues to richen, deepen, mature, develop, evolve and change.

Deepening intimacy

In all of these ways, there is a deepening intimacy.

At the Spirit level, it is beyond intimacy since it is all Spirit. It is the most intimate.

At the individual human level, there is the deepening intimacy of finding and knowing in myself, in greater and greater richness and depth, any and all of the qualities I see in the wider world.

At our collective human level, there is the exploration of the infinite ways Spirit shows up as Us, in all of our many and varied relationships.

Labels: , , ,

The split covering up the ground Friday, November 17, 2006 |

From the previous post:

..................

If the world of form is split into good and bad, and the division is seen as real and important, the drama will hinder us in recognizing the ground that is always there. The fascination with the drama itself distracts us from noticing the ground. The dust kicked up in the drama of pushing some aspects of form away and holding onto other aspects, covers up the ground.

It covers up the Ground of seeing and seen, it covers up the fertile dark ground of form, and it covers up the inherent absence of an I anywhere in these grounds and all form.

..................

Or put another way...

When there is a belief in the idea of I, the world is split into I and Other. And in the ensuing drama, we just don't notice what is always already here: the Ground of seeing and seen, and the fertile ground of form, and the inherent absence of I anywhere in all of this.

The field of seeing-seen temporarily identifies with just an aspect of itself, creates a drama for itself, and temporarily forgets that it is the Ground of seeing and seen, absent of I anywhere.

The drama draws our attention to it, not leaving much space for noticing the ground. And even if the Ground is noticed, it is not taken seriously. It does not fit our conscious view, our beliefs, our worldview. It just cannot be, according to our stories about it. There has to be an I here, as an aspect of what is. There has to be some anchor point in the world of form.

But there isn't, and the world of form is a stream in flux, so the drama goes on.

A sequence of forgetting

Here is one take on the sequence of forgetting....

There is the Ground of seeing-seen, a seamless field of seeing and seen absent of I anywhere. Spirit arising as emptiness, wakefulness and always changing forms.

Then, two things seems to happen:

It somehow forgets about its own nature, absent of I anywhere. It creates a sense of I and places it on something in the world of form. The seamless field of seeing-seen, absent of I anywhere, filters itself through a sense of I and Other, and identifies as a segment of the field.

And somehow, even more mysteriously, it gets functionally connected with a human self (or any other being arising as part of this field).

So there is a sense of I, and this human self seems the best candidate to place this sense of I on.

Or there is this human self, which the field is clearly functionally connected with, so then a sense of I is created and placed on it.

Or maybe it is both.

A sequence of awakening

First, the field is completely absorbed in the drama and it seems very real. It may also have glimpses of itself as a field, absent of I anywhere, maybe filtered and interpreted as a taste of no separation.

Then, the sense of I may weaken and be gradually placed on fewer and fewer phenomena in the world of form. Here, there is simultaneously an experience of the seamless field of seeing-seen, yet also with a vague sense of I floating around. There is I and Other, and no separation between the two. There is a sense, intuition, or even direct experience of all as Spirit, an early taste of One Taste.

Finally, the Ground of seeing-seen awakens to its own nature, absent of I anywhere. Even the sense of I is revealed as always already being absent of any I.

And the funny thing is that there seems to be changes within what the sense of I is placed, on within this human self, that sets the stage for Ground to awaken to itself. Changes within the world of form, pointing Ground back to itself, allowing it to notice itself, to awaken to its nature as Ground of seeing and seen, inherently absent of I.

Micro and macro: forgetting and awakening, involution and evolution

This is of course the process of forgetting and awakening occurring at an (apparent) individual level, that so many have talked about. And it also seem to parallel a larger scale involution and evolution which seems to be happening through the evolution of this universe, the earth and humanity. The small mirrors the large.

And while the big picture evolution may remain more theoretical, the process of forgetting and awakening, paralleling involution and evolution, happens right here now in immediate awareness:

The Ground of emptiness and awakeness allows form to arise here now, within and as itself. It believes in the idea of I, and places it on a segment of this form, on this human self. This is the forgetting, and parallels involution.

And the Ground may have glimpses of itself, intuitions about itself, tastes of itself, as the Ground of seeing and seen, absent of I. Eventually, it awakens in a stable way to its own nature. This is the remembering, and parallels evolution.

(It is Ground awakening to itself, so no evolution is really necessary - or possible - there. In its emptiness and wakefulness aspect, the field is timeless and stays the same.

At the same time, this awakening appears to be dependent on a certain level of evolution in the vehicle the field is functionally connected with, at the very least for consciously working towards awakening, and for a conscious reflection on and exploration of living from awakening. Ground may awaken to itself, accidentally, while functionally connected with a mouse. But, as far as we know, only humans can systematically work towards setting the stage for awakening, and consciously explore how and what it means to live from this awakening.)

Labels: ,

Inner and outer shadows and darkness |

In any explorations of the world of form, even within the utterly simple context of all as Spirit, it quickly gets very complex - infinitely complex.

The whole topic of the fertile darkness, and it symbolisms and archetypes of the dark goddesses, is one example of this. There is so much here, explored to far more detail and from far more experience and clarity than I can bring to it, but here is a simple overview of what comes to mind right now.

First, there is the projection and shadow aspect.

Consequences of the split: covering up the ground

If the world of form is split into good and bad, and the division is seen as real and important, the drama will hinder us in recognizing the ground that is always there. The fascination with the drama itself distracts us from noticing the ground. The dust kicked up in the drama of pushing some aspects of form away and holding onto other aspects, covers up the ground.

It covers up the Ground of seeing and seen, it covers up the fertile dark ground of form, and it covers up the inherent absence of an I anywhere in these grounds and all form.

Inner and outer consequences of the split

In our western culture, we associate light with good and dark with bad (or evil). Light is used to describe the light of consciousness, of what is known, of the divine, the masculine, mind, heaven, civilization, technology, purity, truth. Darkness is used to describe the opposites, including the unknown, the feminine, the body, the earth, nature, the uncivilized - all seen as less desirable.

We all know what this meant at our collective level: men, (western) civilization, technology, mind, the known and purity is elevated and gain power, while women, non-white, non-western cultures, nature, the body and the unknown have been seen as defiled, less valuable, and is excluded from influence.

The same split is of course right here as well, at our individual levels: we value the mind as a source of information and less so the body, we want to be right not wrong, we want knowing not not-knowing, and so on.

Reversals

As with life in general, at whatever level we look, the pendulum eventually swings back. So now, there is a growing appreciation of most of what was left out: non-western cultures, non-whites, women, the feminine, the earth, the body, and even - in some circles, not knowing.

A good examples is the flourishing of Wiccans who explicitly include women, the feminine, the goddesses, the Earth and the bodies. Within traditional religions, there is a similar shift, for instance seen in the renewed interest in the Black Madonna (of interest because she is dark skinned, a woman, and also represents other things left out by the masculine light-seekers.)

Shadow work at collective and individual levels

So there is shadow work at both collective and individual levels: we notice the split, the (undesirable) consequences of the split, and try to mend it at social and personal levels - using whatever means are available to us.

Shadow work, in whatever forms it takes, cannot itself bring about a shift, but it can certainly set the stage for shifts and deepening to take place. Without it, there is little chance for any shift to occur.

And this includes, for those of us into those things, a shift into endarkenment - where the fertile and dark ground of form comes alive in immediate awareness.

Labels: ,

I know the first step, but what is the second? Sunday, November 12, 2006 |

I overheard a conversation a couple of days ago...

Somebody asked another how it is possible to not be reactive to what is happening in the world. The other said, I find in myself what I see in the other, and see that we are no different. And the first responded, impatiently, yes, I know that is the first step, but what is the second?

The second is the first step, all over again, and over again, and over again, until it deepens, becomes indisputable, is a lived realization, deepening and maturing over and over.

Whatever I see in you is also here in myself. Whatever I see anywhere out there, is also here in myself.

Knowing this as a general principle is useful as a pointer, as a reminder to look for the specifics. How is this true? How can I find in my own life what I see in your life? How does it play itself out here. How it is alive right here and now?

This exploration, over and over, is what deepens the realization. It is what puts meat on the bones. It is what fills it out. It is what makes it come alive. It is what allows any sense of absolute separation to soften, dissolve, melt away, leaving only an open heart - available to you and me as we are.

It is what any sense of boundaries to fall away, until there is only Ground left - the Ground of seeing and seen, absent of I anywhere.

Labels: ,

›› Note: Moved to new address!

Please go to www.absentofi.org for current posts.

Continue the exploration...

integral & buddhist blogs
blogmandu › joe perez › integral options cafe › integral harbor › ken wilber › pongsatorn › this is this › ~c4chaos

the work blogs
byron kate › let's do the work › soul surgery

websites
a. h. almaas › adyashanti › big mind › breema › headlessness › integral institute › integral spiritual center › process work center › the work › zaadz

websites ii
center for sacred sciences › global mindshift › imaginify › integral wiki › joanna macy › kosmos journal › parabola › seti institute › the great story › tricycle › wikipedia › wikipedia spirituality portal › worldchanging › yes! magazine

miscellaneous
my starred items › my library › moe at technorati › moe at icerocket

items of interest

Creative Commons License StatCounter - Free Web Tracker and Counter