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.
It is invariably heartening and uplifting to read about a genuine spiritual experience, as well as go on to read about how their life changed – or did not appear to change – after it.
I challenge anyone to read DC’s autobiography without being moved, for instance.
I will often read and watch comedy as a pleasant way to allow the body to unwind. Being aware of the gently humorous side of life is absolutely essential for most of us who are unfolding our awareness, in order to retain brain balance. I’ve been reading the autobiography of the comedian Jack Dee, and was surprised to read about several obviously genuine experiences that he has risked describing. Here is the first one:
“During one of the readings, my mind wandered and I started to stare at a large statue of Christ on the cross. I remember wanting to look away but being unable to. At the same time I became aware of a sensation of complete tranquillity, a feeling that I was cherished by God and that everything would be alright. I can’t account for why that should have happened other than to say that’s what happened.” (p110 Thanks for nothing, 2009, Transworld)
For those unaware of Jack’s “oeuvre” here is a sample.
DC, in his terrific “Open Letter To The Body” talks about that fear in the body which is difficult to work with. There are a few different ways of looking at this fear from a psychological perspective.
Existential “Angst” is said to come about at the same time as one fully owns one’s life. The idea seems to be that as time becomes less important, the imminence and certainty of death loom larger. In my own case the belief in reincarnation is so strong and firm, the certainty of death has more to do with the promise of a blessed release – from a blessed life.
Another possibility mooted by some has to do with seeing the earth as one giant cafeteria, where everything feeds on everything else. Having around five billion years of experience of waiting to become some other animal’s next meal, this theory goes, will mean that we have developed in our DNA the memory and feeling to keep us cautious, and hence alive for longer. Yet, the birds sing louder than the tiger.
The theory of projection, in the Freudian sense, would suggest that we experience fear and anxiety because we have a personal knowledge of our own inner capacity for violence. We know what we are capable of, and at an unconscious level assume others are the same. Result: fear of random acts of violence, out of the unknown. The Jungian idea is superficially similar: we cannot accept our own violence, so we banish thoughts of it’s existence far away, from which psychological place it appears to sit as a malign force waiting to attack us.
Reincarnation is seen by some as having given us a lot of experience of dying, hence we know dying is something to be feared. However this is in contrast with those who have had NDEs (look it up) who say that the experience of dying is in fact wonderful.
Developmental psychology has a good idea, that as helpless babies we will all have had experiences which created fear and anxiety. These experiences will not have been coded in memory in the same way as later experiences, because of the absence of language. Continuous conscious memory seems to be connected with language skills. Before language, we are left with what are literally nameless and indescribable fears.
DC’s implicit suggestion that we need to look after and care for ourselves in order to heal has to be a good strategy.
It isn’t so often that I can direct people so exactly to the source of a quote:
“When you can allow a room full of dumbfounded dipshits to wallow in the swill of their beliefs…and not react to it…then you know you have found at least one liberation.”
comes from Corvus (DC Vision) of course. Never have I heard a family party summed up so concisely. Add this to my body/brain preference for peace and quiet, and it is easy to understand how a reputation for antisocial behaviour can be created!
Corvus regards dealing with such occasions on Paltalk as a hobby. For me they remain something of an unwanted challenge. Plenty of room for my expanding consciousness, plenty of room to practise blessings!