What is love without compassion for all things? Love in our traditional sense becomes fragmented, partial, selfish, securing, isolating and conflicting inwardly. Is this what we want love to be--being separate from something? Meaning, "I'm in love with this person and only I can have them." Isn't "love" supposed to socially bring us together? The "idea" of something surely is like that, isn't it? Desiring something from the idea? And when we're in love, do we stay together in harmony, balance, without fear, conflict? Don't say, "that's relationship", "it's normal", "it happens to all couples sometimes". True enough in this conditioned state, but we're discussing "love" and what it is and does. Why do we embrace this form of love and its content? The content of conflict, jealousy, death and fear. Why is that love? To be fearful of someone leaving or getting too close, causing some form of discomfort inwardly and socially. The question should lead to an awareness. So, what then happens when we "fall in love"? Lets see. Initially, we're told through social contact that there is this thing called "love" out there in the world and you have to find it within someone, someone "special", of course. I'm not trying to be cynical. We're told "you'll know you're in love when you've found the right person, trust them etc." Really? Is that what's really taking place? Is "love" happening or is that attachment? Now we're getting somewhere. Is love embodied with hate which is confusion, misunderstanding and, thus, conflict--ever fighting for love? One of the early actions in our lives is finding a friend, and what takes place in that action--that is, when we're old enough to consider love in our lives. Basically, when we form friendships, there is initially common ground, isn't there? We like what we see, hear, touch, anything sounding ideally similar, religiously, politically, or culturally stimulating and ultimately accepting. When we accept these things, we accept the person and we build the relationship on this "common ground", don't we? It builds and builds and we become more and more dependent on the sex, company, plans, desires, fear, conflict, dreams and all that which we at some point equate to being "in love", but don't see as attachment. Why? Because that person is comforting you psychologically and physically, keeping you from feeling alone, keeping the anxiety at bay, keeping your dreams and aspirations for the future alive and, thus, keeping you both from seeing the attachment. Now, as time passes we slowly become attached to all these actions, and mostly dependent on the security the relationship is providing, right? When we're alone, the other person is "a call away" or in the next room or coming home soon--we don't see it as a dependency, however, we say "it's a relationship" and "this is just how it is, normal." Do you see how we just accept it as "normal"? Remember, we're just looking at what is taking place, not implying it's good, bad, right or wrong. See this--what happens when the relationship is severed? What happens? All the very things the relationship was built upon; the "good times", plans, aspirations, beliefs, sex etc., all come to the surface, showing you what the relationship was dependent on--you feel it pull at you as the distance between you both widens. We think, "what am I going to do without him or her? " This question will come to mind, it must because humanity always questions its survival in the face of vulnerability and insecurity. Right? We were once secure in a relationship and now we're not. Most of us have heard or either said this. How is it that the "coming together" or development of a relationship, all the dreams, fun, feelings, sharing and the rest of it, reverse themselves as the relationship ends? Is this what love is? Going from "loving" to despising someone? Why isn't it everlasting when the relationship ends? Then one must question if "love" really existed in the first place. Did love or did the attachment end? Because pain only comes from being attached to something. This is not to say "love" is not without forms of pleasure and happiness, but the content of conflict and sorrow are ever present. What then is true compassion? So often we hear that he, she or they are compassionate about this or that, and have been doing it all their lives, or a long time etc. Is that compassion or just drawing pleasure while engaged in an activity, something stimulating the mind or body? "Liking" something and compassion are not the same thing. Because compassion is not of the past or future, it isn't something handed down by history, culture, religion and tradition, for then, it would contain conflict, progression, control and so on. Is compassion control or progressive? It doesn't start here and end there. No, compassion is an action with no past nor future action, therefore, it doesn't contain the effects of conflict, pain and sorrow. How do you recognize it, though? Do you think you're a compassionate person? We like to think we are...when the time comes. Note, true compassion isn't waiting for circumstance to reveal itself, this is merely being advantageous, right? If we're waiting for a moment, waiting for a time, event or whatever, and suddenly think it's "time to be compassionate and show how much I am about something" then that is the sound of the ego, justifying itself as a securing social action. The ego is creating that action behind our image--the one we face society with, meaning, friends, family, colleagues, strangers etc. The image of ourselves is egoistical to say the least, always wanting, desiring, fearful, seeking attention and being advantageous. Do we see this? Compassion seeks no advantage as "love" does, it isn't attaching itself to anything because there is no past to confuse, conflict or contradict with the present and future. Do you have compassion for other human beings like you do for your hobbies, food, events, foundations, own family and friends? Look and see. It is very likely we've been given a false sense of compassion, associating it with the superficial pleasures in a given society, and, therefore, never questioning what it factually is. A society which never questions its action never sees the truth of itself, and merely accepts and "hopes" for the best. Again, what then is compassion? Is it just "liking" something or someone so much that you devote many hours of yourself to it or them? No. See it this way--when you look into a babies eyes and they smile at you, even without the smile, there is unlimited compassion coming at you. Behind those eye is an energy that is alive, vital, fresh and active, at attention. Do you see that a "still" mind is most active? Not a mind that is full of the clutter of "knowledge" (more on that in article#13). Compassion asks nothing of you, there is no ego, no past conflict, contradictions or future aspirations. Do you see this? That is the ultimate compassion, when it asks nothing of you as love does, and will do anything for the world and requires nothing in return as love does. In understanding the construction and action of "love" in our minds and society, we also observe the conflict and trappings of it as well. In seeing this clearly and factually as a human being in a structured society, one uncovers the conflicts of love and and observes the difference between that and attachment. Only then will we abandon the isolation of "love" and express the compassion we have for all things. Seek and spread this form of love.
Saturday, January 3, 2015
Friday, January 2, 2015
What happens when we don't accept something or someone? What takes place in that moment? Are we observant or aware of that action? I see that we are, it is a matter of survival, perhaps not 99% of the time, but it is a necessary human mechanism. We must reject some things in order to keep survival in motion, no matter how trivial it may seem at the time. The question is--what is that something up against when trying to get past our defenses? What is that block? Have you ever tried to get someone to try "just a little bit" of something and they just won't budge, almost to the point of your frustration? It won't hurt?...We say or "come on ya wimp". We say anything to get them to accept our offerings. Yet, we all have this mechanism at some time under various circumstances--inwardly or outwardly, it happens and is universal. I still won't eat peas by themselves (what a wimp). Why? Well, they're nasty, period, but in that moment my defenses are on high alert, warning me of some pending doom. There is reason beyond our reasoning for justification, as the body alone reacts. Can you imagine all the low-level chemical reactions taking place when the mind perceives something the whole body is prepared to reject? My whole physical-being is reacting to a pile of peas on a plate--first the smell, visual, touch (maybe), and finally taste. All these senses are screaming--No! No! No! Therefore, the body is preparing for that attack--we make faces and noises etc. Right? That's part of its defenses. What is that block we mentioned earlier? Simply, put, our total consciousness throughout the body/mind--how can it be something separate from that? It is everything, the total content of ourselves holding off this or that, anything threatening. Watch yourself, observe the words you speak, observe how you react when listening. In short, be aware of the action of nonacceptance, you and I might be on the other end.
Wednesday, December 31, 2014
The title of this work is familiar, but I've never asked anyone to explain their interpretation and nor have I been asked, but I'd like to express my interpretation. However, if you follow this blog you know I'll speak as factually as possible because the title work, in my observance, comes from a very observance psychological and social awareness. One my say it stems from a belief in how we see ourselves in a world of evolution as in we come from the earth, live and return to it. I'm sure there is much more to say, but I'd just like to get to my awareness--you can find out what you want on your own. I'm not going to talk of my understanding, because it's not that, what we understand, but what we see or observe in our actions. We are born and from that beginning we accumulate information in forms of education, so called experiences, memories, fears etc. but then what? Well, we just carry it around until we die or go to heaven. Sounds simple, but that's about it, it isn't complicated. Think about those people living naturally who tend a farm and raise animals and pass on to the next generation what they know of that life. It's not a matter of comparing our lives to theirs because it doesn't make much of a difference, we basically do the same thing, right? Don't we learn, experience and pass it on the next generation? Sure, we do, it's how you know what you know and understand at this moment. Anyway, I've found that we don't always express our potential as human beings, simply because we're not in an environment for "all" of us to do so--there are various social barriers put here and there and you know them. This is why we must take every opportunity to express what we've accumulated thus far in our lives, spread whatever wisdom you've accumulated whenever possible. By the way wisdom isn't education or knowledge in a traditional sense. Why wisdom? Because the next person you meet might need to hear it--if some stranger or friend hasn't ever told you "I've never heard it said like that before", "I'm glad you said that" or "I was proud of you for doing that." Then perhaps you're being too safe, concerned about hurting someone's feelings (then don't and choose other words) or appearing weird. Remember, there is always a small or big price to pay for being outside the social norm. Let's look at it this way--whatever wisdom you've discovered, it isn't yours in the first place, it was given to you as a riddle in the form of information. It is meant to spread because it is within us already waiting to be set free. You've unravelled this information which is the "I", "you" or "mine" and now you've come upon a depth of wisdom which cannot be contained, so why not spread it at all times because the next person might need to hear what we need to spread. Thus, creating a trigger in their search towards wisdom born from the dust.
What are the changes taking place as we develop from children into adults? Are we learning which creates change or is it a matter of biology/Maturation? Firstly, the act of learning is relative to the environment and the expectations thereof. For instance, a child born on the open plain with nature, animals and the raw environment will utilize 90% of its biology and the rest taught of learned from family. Now the same child in a modern society will flip the scale to 90% learning and the rest biological. Environments such as artificial and natural will dictate which is prevalent. Also, expectation is a variable of the environment or exposure which is culture based. What does the culture want from itself? It wants expectation of the present, its way of life, belief, honor, faith etc. So in order to look at this question of Learning vs Maturation, we must remove ourselves from the process which is cultural expectation and all it involves or contains. What do I mean? I don't, there is not meaning to observing oneself, that would be the expectation of learning, an outcome etc. What do we do as humans to observe animals in their natural habitat? We observe, keep quiet, stay out of site, remain still and keep our distance. Does this not sound like the methods and desired effects of Meditation? To remain still in the mind and body, to still our thinking, step back and watch and observe? Are we doing that with our children? Watching and learning or waiting for an expectation via changes or development? Again, the act of learning is relevant to the environment a child is exposed to and the expectation of culture, that determines if 90% of development is Maturation or Learning.