The more we come to learn (by experience) about the nature of ourselves, the world, the universe, structure and the inner forces which shape our being, then the less options we each have in our freedom of choice regarding our actions on earth. Learning eventually leads to one place—understanding; and understanding limits our options on earth. The existing paradigm has it that there exists two kinds of ‘reality’, the objective and the subjective. It is thought, or it certainly seems to be the case, that truths can be stated about the nature of the outside objective world and the physical universe, and yet any statement of so called ‘truth’ relating to the inner dimensions of ourselves are but subjective personal feelings and views. This view creates a dichotomy in mind which does not exist in reality.
The sun is at a distance which we can measure in terms of the tools and criteria by which we use to measure it, and that is a fact. But, they say, there can be no known facts with regard to subjective data. (a) Because we are, on the face of it so different, and (b) because we cannot substantiate those ‘facts’ by the empirical process of objective observation. Thus to assert that it is wrong to kill, torture, rape, exploit other life forms is nothing more than a subjective truth, and it does not relate to the nature of reality as a whole. This view is also a very part and product of assuming that we are free floating isolated lumps of stuff in the universe, as opposed to being a part of it all.
What happens on our inside, and all those depth inner levels are a part of creation, not something outside of it looking in (or out). We are creation, we are an integral part of the whole. What happens on our inside is a part of the process. It is inwards from the reference point of incarnate consciousness; but it is not inwards in the nature of the sum of the all—for it is but a dimension of it. If one is standing on the tenth floor of a twenty floor building then which way is up and which way is down? Is everything which is up real and yet everything which is down subjective? Can facts of truth only be known about that which is upward? What then happens when you go down to the ninth floor? Are you then living in a make believe reality? And even though that reality is as real as the one above it when you are there? And what about the basement? Is that also a relative illusion of subjective view? One must keep in mind that reality is not relative, it is experience which is relative to where we are each at.
It becomes a part of the learning process that there are things which you and I cannot prove, but they are still real and a part of creation. Likewise does the nature of reality not require us to be able to prove it, for life itself reveals these things to us directly, and to all of us directly. I cannot prove to any living person that morality is a factual part of reality, but I do not have to, for life proves it to them also. I do not need to prove that love feels good and that hate (important though it is) does not feel so good. But I do not have to, for they know it. And those who do not know it yet will know it in due course, for that is what life teaches and reveals. It is not a relative fact, it is only relative with regard to who has learned it yet and who has not.
Now, there is no way that I could knowingly torment a child (tease them yes, in fun) but giving them bad experience, no. One does not have to be in this world long (a couple of years) to fully realise that is not the case with all people. I could not do it because I am not at that place. It is not a mere matter of choice that I cannot do it. And neither is it the case that I am nice, or wise, or good, or clever. It is to do with the soul and the spirit—and what they have learned throughout their existence as yet.
Thus it is that I hate such events. And that means that I am repulsed by them. Repulsion is like negative ends of a magnet—it pushes away, repulsion. This is not a matter of choice; I did not decide to be repulsed by it. Moreover, societies moralistic indoctrination had nothing to do with it—for I never listened to them any way. It was damned obvious that most of them did not have a clue what they were talking about, and that they were merely repeating what others had pumped into them. People do not teach and instil morality—life does. And life alone. And that is an objective factual truth about the nature of real reality—not man-made sociological myths.
Our individual moral code of conduct comes from a very deep place in creation. But to the degree (relativity) of which we are each aware of it (and hence are motivated by it) is dependent upon our own integration and awareness of those inner realities. Morality does not come from the outside, but from the inside. Paradise is not outward, it is inward. The seed of creation and the implicate order is not outward, it is inward to all things extant. If it is inside me then how can it be inside you? We all meet up at the same place inwards and downwards—the seed of the implicate order. Where is the centre of the earth? Under your feet, and no matter where on earth you are standing. That is where its centre is. The centre of creation is within you and downwards, and it is not relative to the observer, and neither are its essences.
Now, naturally enough, every human being is going to judge moral questions from where they are at right now—not where they were fifty years ago, and not where they will be in fifty years time—but here and now. They are going to judge by where they are at. Now, if a person feels no remorse at torturing another person, then they have no problem with doing that. True enough they would not enjoy it being done to themselves, but that does not bother them, for they are not there yet. All the talking and all the preaching in the world is not going to alter where that person is at. There is only one course of action, and that is to prevent them doing it in a society which is more evolved than they are. Difficult, true enough. What best to do? By the same token they must be allowed to experience life and grow—but on a tight reign at times alas. If everybody was allowed to do what they like, when they like, and how they like, then civilisation cannot work. It would only work if we were all perfect and all at the same place at the same time. Incarnate life does not work this way—not on this level of reality at least. Creation delegates. We all learn from others and we can all teach something to others. Do not the rank immoral fraternity teach us what it is like to be there? Does that in itself not repel us in a forward motion towards a better reality on earth? And does not our repulsion show us where we are at?
I would imagine that somewhere out there in the far depths of space there must be a planet, or many of them perhaps, on which the highest level of incarnate mind is at the level of cave dwellers, stone age, and whatever. We here have moved on a little, well most beings here have. Do we each land on a world which is about right for our own needs and requirements for further growth? Well, who knows, but it seems to make sense. This world is about life, but life is not about this world. And neither is it about this particular level of incarnate existence which we experience here in the normal day to day conscious state. This is only one level of incarnate reality and creation. Do we not have an abundance of that evidence alone on this little world? What is dog consciousness like? You and I cannot imagine, for it is not our food to digest.
Moreover, by throwing all these levels together is it not also more fun, and moor food for thought and experience? Do not the animals make this world a better place to be? And is it not axiomatic to everyone that there are many levels of human incarnate existence on this world alone? How could we ever learn more, grow, understand things better if all that existed on earth were people who are where you are at? Variety is also a part of the spice of life. We do not only teach mathematics to children in school, we give them a variety.
Now, by virtue of the fact that morality is so important (because it is a fact of life) there are those, and always have been, that assume we have to have a known sociological basis as a premise of justification for that moral code. For the large part this has always been done through indoctrinating a religion and making that religion the basis of truth for our moral and ethical condition. However, if the ultimate ground of substation of a moral reality is based on a fairy tale which most people can see through like a pane of glass, then what becomes of morality itself? They assume also that morality is of the same order of myth. By virtue of the fact that so many assume that facts can only been known of objective reality, and that all else is mere subjective feeling and wishes, then the world finds itself with a self-evident inner personal morality but no known truth to tie it to. Mankind does not need Neanderthal religions to justify a self-evident fact of inner reality; they need to look within themselves to find the very ground of the moral impetus. And when known they will also know what it is for and from whence it comes and why.
In the meantime, and until such time as it is revealed to their own topside mind, then there is nothing wrong in teaching a consensus morality—the one which most people on earth adhere to, and where that consensus is at, and for no other reason than that it is effective. Morality does not need a coat hook for justification. When a child asks as to why, then do not create a fairy tale in order to give it credence, but simply say that you do not really know as to how and why it is, but it is just there, and that is how we experience it, feel it and live it. Tell them that the spirit (or human mind if you prefer) cannot live in a world which does not measure up to where we are at.
Your kid is involved in a life/death accident. A car with the ignition key in it is nearby. Do you take it in order to get the kid to hospital as soon as possible? Yes indeed, pinch the damned contraption and get the job done. Is that stealing? Well by law it is. However, not many cars are stolen for that reason are they? Why do people take each others property? They are not adequate to the world they live in, so they need help. Are they too egocentric to admit that they need help—or is society just not interested in them and their own personal needs? How can we all live in harmony when the things which we require in daily life on earth are stolen every day? You cannot. Why are so many kids on drugs? Because society is not interested in them and does not go out of its own egocentric ways to make life a better and more exciting experience for them. We cannot live alone. We all need help every day from other aspects of society and individual people in that society. I need this computer to write with, but I do not have a clue as to how to make one; and neither do I care, for it is not my job or concern. But I expect them to get it right, for it is their job and it is their concern. Same with the shoemaker and the dentist. If the dentist tells me that I am not looking after my teeth well enough—then the dentists is the expert not me. We all need each other. Life is very complex and interrelated—because it has to be in order to work.
Also is it obvious that we do not all come into this world like a blank floppy disk with nothing on it. True enough we have no memory of anything (Cosmic Amnesia). Did Mozart come into this world with exactly the same potentials in music as the rest of us? It would take a very gullible (or extremely intransigent) person to believe that to be the case. True enough he had to learn the language of music. But he did not have to learn music—for he knew it—he was it—it was him, and others like him. Was it nothing more than an accidental ‘gift’? Or had he worked at it for aeons? Why are we inwardly motivated toward this or that thing, activity, or whatever? Is it an accident? It is certainly not a matter of our choosing to become interested and motivated toward something. Have you ever attempted to become really interested in something which you are not really interested in; or perhaps told that you ought to be interested in? It does not work. It is not effective. People say that they are going to try this and that when they retire from work—we never retire from work; and we never tire of the things which we are motivated toward or by. However, trying different things is good and constructive activity, for we often do not consciously realise until we try this or that thing. Experience is the food of life. And variety is the spice.
Likewise also do children come into this world with their own package of where they are at and what they need for the next step of the journey. It is self-evident that we are not consciously aware of that at the time. Creation does not do everything all at once, it takes and makes time. There comes times when our inner self knows (without knowing how or why)… ‘Oh yes—this is for me, and I am for that’! What is empathising and agreeing with what? One level of our reality is in harmony and accord with another and deeper level—a level that has been around more than the new incarnate emanation and personality. To fly counter to that level is the then felt as an immoral act—it does not feel right. And that is wise, for it is not right for that person at that time. There are some aspects of food which have to be eaten in an ordered sequence. There are events which have to take place before other events can then come about. We cannot put our shoes on until the damn things have been made. We cannot judge as to what is right and wrong unless we have something to judge by. Initially that stuff is all there—and well below consciousness. Only when the bits emerge into conscious awareness can we then grapple with them, argue with them, fight them, and this is the process of interaction and synthesis—and becoming more. We cannot eat from a tree which does not exist. We cannot experience a thing which does not exist to be experienced. We cannot know something which does not exist to be known. We cannot be attracted toward something which does not exist and have attractive potential. We cannot feel what ain’t there to be felt.
Is it right or wrong to kill somebody? I can only talk from where I am at, and that ain’t far one must add. Sometimes yes, more often no. I would certainly end somebody’s life on earth if it were a case that they were suffering something awful and with no possibility of recovery. Likewise in a war which threatened the stability of that society and the lives of one’s family and friends. “Would the power that be like that”? Who gives a damn?—I have freedom of choice and I use it. I make a choice of action dependent on where I am at. And I judge it would be better for that extremely sick person to go home to from whence they came than to stay here suffering with no hope of a recovery. Yes indeed, I judge it to be OK, and I take full responsibility for any actions which I perpetrate. If I turn out to be wrong, then so be it. But that act would be done out of both love and compassion—so be it; and let is be so. Likewise in war it is a matter of survival. Genuine mystics are not pacifists—even though they would love to see a world with no strife of that nature.
The thing is also you see, that it is not so much a case of what we do in life, but rather as to why we do it. Yes of course things which we actually do are important and effect not only ourselves but other people and indeed the world itself. But you and I cannot see into the future (only sometimes not always). We do not always know for an absolute fact which course of action is preferable in the long term. So by what can we judge in the meantime? Only that which you now are, where you are at, and what feels right, and true, and correct. Following that, then no matter what the outcome may be—we have done our best as we see it, and deeply feel it to be right. Such activity creates no inner remorse to be lived with and synthesised. If it is proved later that we have made a mistake—then so be it, and we learn and move on. In this way humankind on earth is divine. Just imagine how easy it would be if we knew all the answers in advance and did thus not have to make hard decisions and thence live with them. Only in humankind is ought sought by thought—and deep inner feeling for what is right. One does not need a Neanderthal religion and belief system to tell us what is axiomatic on the inside. No human being needs to be told that they will feel and search within them in regard to what they ought to do. For it is innate.
One of the great problems with some aspects of society (specifically religionists) is that they seem to assume that we all ought to be at the same place at the same time. It takes virtually no imagination at all (and it does not need transcendent experience) to fully realise that life could not work that way and does not work that way. They try to imagine a world in which a transcendent wisdom has created it all perfect. Well, it seems to me that it has done just that. But their idea of perfection is very different to mine. Perfection does not mean that I am going to be happy and smiling all my incarnate life and for eternity. Perfection to me, means that it works perfectly well—the tears, the fears, the pains, the joys, the growing, the beauty, all of it—it works perfectly well. We cannot judge perfection by our own limited degree of what perfection is independent of arriving and aiming toward it. I too can well envisage a level of reality, somewhere, some time, where beings are together, sharing in a reality far more advanced than this one; oh yes indeed. And I want to be with them now—why cannot I be with them now? No, you cannot be with us now. Why not? Well, I no longer need them to tell me as to why not, for I have learned as to why not—I am not ready. Neither did they have to tell me why not, for they knew that I had to learn for myself—the hard way—the only way—by living it, and then arriving there myself. Kids fall over and hurt themselves. But they get up again, brush themselves off, and move on. We can all learn from children—for they know—without knowing.
I stand on a bridge and watch a train go by below, and that is my existential view of reality at that moment. A person in the train is watching that beautiful scenery flash past them, and that is their existing existential view of reality. The views are different, but the reality itself is not. Assuming that in the transcendent paradise we could remember the outside world (which we cannot) then it would be seen that our personality which exists out there, and all its memories, likes and dislikes, existential views et all, are all objective, and not its real enduing self. Neither views are wrong, for they are all a part of reality and depending where one is viewing it from. And this of course is why we have to differentiate between a persons existential view and that of the nature of reality as a whole. Life is a very personal affair and communication between each individual observer and that of life and existence itself. But this neither means nor implies that the communication ultimately differs, for we all eventually get the same message and come to understand the same things, and by the same process. We live at a time when everything has to be proved so it seems; well, in the strict cosmological sense that is indeed true, for things are proved to us by life itself on the inside of our being. But they are not proved to us by other people, books, dictates, doctrines, symbolisms or even direct communication of truths. They are proved only by living it and learning it.
Imagine a scenario in which the life force itself constructed an image of itself in the form of a human being. Imagine it then said that everything it told you was the absolute truth, and that it itself was the only knowledge of that truth. How would that grab you? Would you accept what this critter was telling you? Would you implicitly understand everything it was saying? Would you agree with it all? What would be your reaction? How would you know if it were telling you the truth or simply setting itself up as some kind of guru? By what would you judge? Suppose then, because of your doubt, it pulled a stunt, a seemingly magic trick to show you how powerful it was; would that influence your reactions? A magic trick does not prove to you that this entity is what it is claiming to be. We can pull a few magic tricks which would boggle the mind of cave dwellers.
Life knows well enough that you and I have to live it in order to know the truths which it contains, nothing can tell us what it is, no book, no man, no woman, no advanced being, no god, nothing. There is only one way to know what life is about, and that is by living it. You may learn the theory of swimming without getting in the water; but you will never swim until you are in it. And only when you are in it and are doing it, can you then say… Oh yes, I know. And you need no living entity to tell you as to what it is and what it is like – for you know. I try to imagine a scenario in which I was young and had heard all these things about exceptional experiences, mysticism and transcendence, personal growth etc. How would I have reacted at that time? I cannot be sure for I was never in that position, for I had never heard of them, nor read anything about it. But knowing what I was indeed like, then I would have been highly sceptical. And which is a wise thing on this world.
However, if so many people had also been telling me the same identical things, then that would have made me wonder as to what was going on, really going on. Times have changed and there is now so much to hear and read, hence there can be few people who have not heard about these things, to some degree at least, prior to living them and actually knowing them. It is no different with the affirmation of morality, as to what we each can and cannot do. And this aspect of being is also strongly related to one’s own integrity and dignity. Along with that of course we also have the assertions of science to cope with, and the symbolic stories of all the world’s religions. There is also all the literature of so called philosophy and academia; psychology and sociology. The young of today are bombarded by so much data and from all directions. And yet they will all still grow up, evolve, and learn for themselves in due course. When I was young I was sure of virtually nothing, and I knew it. Now, I am absolutely sure of No Created Thing, and I know it. And a few things also in between everything created and no created thing. Life never fails to achieve its goal on anyone—for it works perfectly well.
With regard to morality then life itself, as with anything else, will teach us what we have to know; and we will become what we have to become. In the meantime so much of it is already written within our own system and experienced by way of feeling it and deep intuitions; you cannot feel within you that which is not there to be felt. Consciousness returns to its ground of being and the slate of conscious awareness is wiped clean of all but the cosmological operating program itself, but somewhere, some how, and by some method, there is a record of all our own individual past learning—hence I call it the soul. This is not to be thought of as a living entity as is the spirit, but rather as a library of data, written onto the sands of time and space, and which, whilst we are alive on earth, is also connected to our incarnate system and actively engaged in its own program. The soul is not the operating system of creation writ large or small, it is but our own individual program and info—but one wherein the goal of which is to get the program running in harmony and accord with all the other programs involved in existence. Indeed it truly is mysterious, but such trinity of being is both known and experienced—and understood in rational terms eventually.
From hindsight it is crystal clear that so many people on having some form of manifestation of ‘unusual little experience’ which cannot be addressed by science, is the working and emanations of their own soul, their own inner depth program working as it should. But at that time, as is so often the case, they hang the experience on the coat hook of the nearest and most available sociological mythology, and hence they have become a Buddha, or they have existed in the Tao, or they are in direct communication either with creations only son, or its mum, (or its dad) or the holy virgin woman floating around over the mountain tops, and what knows else. If they had never heard of these stories what would happen? They would have to think for themselves and begin asking questions. And questions beget answers, and answers beget knowledge, and knowledge is what understanding is based upon, and understanding is what forward movement is driven by. Something out here is in need. If it were not in deed of something then the nature of reality would not open itself up for people to see and experience its inner mysteries and workings. Mysticism is creation revealing itself—and for a purpose. From Eternity for this purpose.
* * *
Good and Evil are
one road—
experience of the
mind.
Good
is that which lies ahead
and evil that behind.
The
road is relative to each one
at any point in time,
as so too are the passing
points
which consciousness must
climb.
Such
road is thus a one way street
along which souls must tread
to modulate its spirits glow,
and learn the way ahead.
The
lessons learned are Essences
which dwell beyond the forms;
and Virtue is a recognition
of when an essence dawns.
Evil
cannot rise in mind
until a lesson’s learned
by each soul having trod that
path,
and its knowledge thus has
earned.
Hence
good can look both forward
and also where it’s been;
but evil knows no journey
or what there is to glean.
Good
alone knows evil,
for it’s passed along those
ways,
and learned the lesson that it
brings
and the dividend it pays.
Thus
good is where you’re going,
and evil’s where you’ve been,
and nought there is
experienced
which by the inner eye goes
unseen.
part two
The
principle of good and bad
is that of AFFECTATION,
and exists for things we have
to learn;
its effect is MODULATION.
There
is no choice in learning,
it simply IS THE WAY;
and the greatest evil that
there is,
is REMORSE for yesterday.
Thus
good is but ATTRACTION
while REPULSION is evil’s
mode;
but the journey is a one way
street
with no turning on that road.
Evil
pushes where good pulls
like gravity of the mind;
but they are the selfsame
movement;
(though pulling’s much more kind).
‘Tis like a row of Taverns
through which we all must go
to sup the goods that in them
lie,
so we can say “I KNOW”!
For
that which tasted vile
we will not drink again;
and not a thing created
cares to drink of pain.
But
do not judge another
by actions that you see,
for he may be supping at a
house
a few doors off from thee.
But
it’s safe to judge the actions,
for you know of where you’ve
been;
but do not judge the doer,
for their soul you’ve never
seen.
part three
A
soul is measured by its GLOW,
(and not by you and me);
‘tis assessment of how much it’s grown
and where it’s come to be.
‘Tis measured in the DOME OF WHITE,
which lies before the gate,
where ANNIHILATION takes you
home,
to rest in your orbit of
state.
And
when the two become as one
in the field of white that
day;
then all the pains of learning
will thus THEN pass away.
Beyond
the gate of Paradise
there is nothing you will know
of attraction and repulsion
which took place in the
temporal show.
And
neither is there knowledge
of things judged good or bad;
for you could not sup in
Paradise
if memory you had.
The
one which lies beyond all things,
needs not of good or bad,
nor ugliness or beauty,
for all knowledge it’s long
since had.
But
minds that come like you and I,
such lessons for to see;
must learn of all the
principles
that exist in creations sea.
part four
Some
learning is a joy to know,
and some is pain untold;
and there is no exit from the
flow
where lessons of mind unfold.
For
all the principles, at their best,
just as they are below,
cannot rest until they come
to FORM, in the temporal show.
The
greatest gift there is, by far,
is that we come to know,
that you and I do play our
part
in creations mighty flow.
We
have not come here just to taste,
or watch in passive awe,
for delegated unto us
is part of creations chore.
And
hence we must learn what is right,
and what is best to do;
a task among the living forms
where so much depends
on YOU.
If
they ask you for a sign
within you.... to expose,
then tell them that the sign
they seek
is MOVEMENT and REPOSE.
And
RECOGNITION of the MIND
which in PARADISE doth dwell,
and knows the song the singer
sings,
and reflects it oh so well.
So
talk not then of Evil
or pain you have to bear;
but only that of LEARNING,
and the Love we all must
SHARE.
* * *