At the dialogue I attend, we were speaking of how first world countries export their rubbish to the third world, and it occurred to us that the proposed payments to the third world to cut energy use so that the first world can continue producing greenhouse gasses is just another example of this.
Then a thought came that shocked us all: perhaps we are also exporting low life-expectancy. We know that in the developed world we are living longer, and in the third world with AIDS, pollution and tribal genocides life expectancy is much lower.
Can we really blame all of that on the indigenous population?
When several spiritual traditions/religions/cults share characteristics, it can be useful to consider why. It could be that they have fed off each other, and the practices are of no value. “Dusty disciplines”, as DC describes them in his writings.
But it may also be that there is some underlying truth to a practice. Take the widespread practice of praying several times a day. Christianity has its matins and vespers, and several more. Judaism has its morning and evening prayers, and also several more. Islam has its set of prayers and prostrations done five times a day. Wicca has its welcoming to the sun at dawn, and its farewell at dusk.. Is there something that may be gained from using or adapting this practice?
The practice of “remembering” – by which is meant, keeping in focus that
I am this
Everything else is that
is not easy when faced with the distractions of the material world.
Is it possible that committing to a regular period, several times a day, when this sacred truth is repeatedly realised and affirmed will help?
Everyone does NOT follow the same script.
I heard today a friend of mine say of another, “Diane’s so egoless, I’m quite in awe of her.”
What was meant by this was: “If I were able to live my life like Diane appears to me to be living her life, then I would have had to have learned to live beyond my ego.”
And, as I pointed out, if Diane lived her life like my friend lives his own life, Diane would have had to have learned to live beyond her own ego.
However, my friend has an advantage. By incorporating some of Diane’s qualities into his own life, he can begin to do just that. I have had the benefit of being trained in the Enneagram, which allowed me an awareness of other’s scripts – and my own. (A useful link is www.enneagramcentral.blogspot.com).
It is often confusing, but always beneficial, that everyone does NOT follow the same script.
What’s in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
So said Juliet in Shakespeare’s play “Romeo and Juliet”
I was tasked by DC some time ago to find a new name symbolising my emergent Self. He said that DC was taken, but that left a lot over to choose from!
Originally my brain alighted on Quiettime because it wanted to be left alone, and this nickname has only been used in DC’s room on Paltalk. So, yes, it has fulfilled its purpose, and perhaps it is time. But what to pick?
Obvious criteria are: the name will support emergent awareness by symbolising a quality reflecting the Self’s specialness and uniqueness.
Nothing has presented itself to awareness yet. It is proving to be an interesting exercise.
(DC soon after chose to name me Aerist.)
A lot of the body’s scripts are to do with allowing it to feel itself to be unique and special.
Unfortunately, it doesn’t stop there, because in the ego’s hands this searching for recognition of specialness can turn into a bruising competitive sport.
The irony is that your Self is individually unique and especially special.
The paradox is that so is everyone else’s.
The charming lady asking me this has been fortunate in her experiencing!
I have noticed there are two motivations for asking a teacher questions.
The first is an honest and open attempt to understand a concept, and is characterized by open questions, of the “Would this mean…..?” type, amongst others.
The second is an attempt to demonstrate the shortcomings in the teacher’s material, and to have the teacher substitute some of the “questioner’s” own superior material in it’s place. “Surely you don’t mean that ….?” might be one way this can appear.
Mostly questioners fall into one or other of these groups. However some flop about a bit. The teacher and aware onlookers can amuse themselves by watching closely for the transition point, at which time it is pointless to go further if the questioner is moving from type one to type two. On those rare occasions the movement is from type two to type one, then it would signify a real opportunity for the questioner to expand their knowledge and understanding, and the atmosphere immediately changes.
Either way, of course, the teacher will come to a greater understanding of the needs and capabilities of the questioner, and will act to bring the student to a greater awareness of their true nature by whatever means possible.
So, it’s good to question, but that doesn’t mean that the benefit will be in the answer (if given).
The piece on “Little Boxes” – will appear when Aerist notices the urge to type it out a third time.
It Was Meant To Be. Or was it? Well, Half an hour had just been spent typing up an idea into some paragraphs here*. “Publish” was clicked, and the software lost the lot.
I am aware of thoughts arising about the suitability of the posting (you can make up your own mind in a day or so) and of the phrasing involved. Was it clear? Did it express what needed to be expressed?
Yes, it was, and it did. The cause was operator failure: a failure to remember that this is what software does, and this is what cut and paste is for.
It was meant to be. Or was it?
(At the time this was sited on “Blogger” – one of the reasons for the move to WordPress)
Our egos can be likened to our personal citadel, and the standard instructions are that it is to be defended to the death, at all costs. It might be imagined that, as it is OUR citadel, that we have some choice about how this might be done, and how much bystanders might get hurt, but I’m afraid that the truth is that until we become very aware of how our ego workss, the detailed plans of our citadel, if you like, and the way it was built, we don’t. In fact, at the beginning of our journeys we don’t even realise the citadel exists.
Each citadel is very much strengthened around it’s biggest cracks. Let us contemplate that for a moment. If you injure an oak tree, it lays down immensely strong tissue around the injury site. We are like that. And our defence of our citadel is particularly intense around these fault lines, to the extent that even the existance of these fault lines are completely and aggressively denied.
An example may suffice. Early experiences caused my developing body/brain to feel insecure. My citadel, then, was built to protect itself, but was built particularly strongly around inner fears of insecurity. Most of life, then, became biased towards providing the body/brain with greater and greater feelings of security. This was uncovered – along with some useful coping strategies – during years of therapy, and self-enquiry using the Enneagram. Whenever anyone appeared to threaten David’s security – people rarely got that close, of course – then the defences were really alerted. No-one (especially David) was allowed to even suspect that insecurity was the weak spot in the citadel.
Our own citadels were, without exception, developed so that neither we nor – hopefully – others would be aware of the weakness in it’s foundations. And without a knowledge of that weakness, we have no real control over it’s defences when it feels under attack.
The scientific idea of an experiment is that you come up with some observations, form a hypothesis, and then test the hypothesis using experiment. If it checks out, then the hypothesis becomes a theory, and eventually part of a law.
Actually, what is tested is the null hypothesis, that is, you try and prove that nothing happens. If that “fails” then usually it means the experiment has been a success.
DC said today in the chatroom that experiments were a good thing. Follow his suggestions, read his essays, and try and prove that nothing happens.
Each has to prove this for themSelves.
Lately I have been talking to DC from time to time about the various assignments he has given me, to expand my awareness. We were speaking about boredom, which he has not experienced for years http://theawakeningself.com/perpetually-awake/ .
I disclosed that it is difficult for me to sit still, as the feeling is that I need to be doing rather than sitting. The energy rising within my body is a stimulus to doing.
His answer, which I thought was pure gold, is that the problem is that I’m trying to quiet the wrong part down, The body is currently usurping the Self’s energy. The energy that the body wants to use for doing is the energy that should be arising. The part that wishes that it wouldn’t, that it is troublesome, is the part that needs curtailing.
I am identifying with the wrong energy.
I am identifying with the “doing” energy, which is the energy of the body, rather than the active animating force, which is the Self. When I notice a needing to “do” in these circumstances, I am to check that I am identifying with the Self, using DC’s formula “I am This, everything else is That” and dis-identify and observe the body in its neediness and discomfort. (That may be unpleasant for the body, but it isn’t boring!)
The key, as DC put it, is to use the body’s signs, but not the body’s interpretations. I am to identify with my Self, the animating force in the environment, being fully ACTIVE as the being self, not passive as the doing body.