Category Archives: Ontology

Daily language deals with separations, divisions, and distinctions

To some extent our language organizes our feelings and emotions. The language of the psyche, however, has at its command many more symbols that can be combined in many more ways, say, than mere letters of an alphabet.

lljhgf

In daily language, objects have certain names. Obviously the names are not the objects, but symbols for them. Even these symbols, however, divide us as the perceiver from the rest of the world, which becomes objectified. We can ourselves understand far more about the nature of the psyche, for example, than we think we can. To do this, however, we must leave our daily language behind at least momentarily, and pay attention to our own feelings and imagination. Our language tells us that certain things are true, or facts, and that certain things are not. Many of our most vivid and moving feelings do not fit the facts of our language, so we disregard them.

laghth

These emotional experiences, however, often express the language of the psyche. It is not that an understanding of our psyche is beyond us: It is usually that we try to understand or experience it in one of the most difficult ways — Through the use of daily language.

The imagination belongs to the language of the psyche. For this reason it often gives experiences that conflict with the basic assumptions upon which daily language is based. Therefore the imagination is often considered suspect.

langyy

We might stand alone in our doorway, or in a field — or even on a street, surrounded by many people in a large city — look upward, suddenly struck by the great sweeping clouds above, and feel oneself a part of them. We might momentarily experience a great yearning or feel our own emotions suddenly filled with that same moving majesty, so that for an instant we and the sky seem to be one.

Mundane language tells us, as we think with its patterns, that our imagination is running away with us, for obviously we are one thing and the sky is another. Us and the sky do not equate — or as friend Spock would say: “It is not logical.” The feeling swiftly fades after bemusing us briefly. We might be spiritually refreshed, yet as a rule we would not consider the feeling to be a statement of any legitimate reality, or a representation of our psyche’s existence.

llagg

The emotions and the imagination, however, give us our closest contact with other portions of our own reality. They also liberate our intellect so that its powers are not limited by concepts it has been taught are true. Instead, such concepts are relatively true — operationally true. For example, the example, the physical laws that we are familiar with operate where we are. They are true, relatively speaking. In those terms we are one person physically objectified, staring upward in the scene just mentioned at an objectified sky. We weigh so many pounds, tilt our head at such-and-such an angle to peer upward at the skyscape, and physically speaking, we can be categorized.

In those terms the clouds could be physically measured, and shown to be so far above us — composed of, say, winds of a certain velocity, ready to pour down a precise amount of rain or whatever. Physically speaking then, obviously, we are separate from the clouds, and so in those terms our momentary experience of uniting with them would seem to be a lie — at least not factual, or “the product of our imagination.”

languuu

Instead, such an event is a direct expression of the psyche’s knowledge. It senses its quite legitimate identification with nature, exercises its mobility, and feel its own emotional power leap. Our emotions in such a case would be momentarily magnified — raised, say, to a higher power. There are multitudinous such examples that could be given, as in each day our psyche presents evidence of its own greater being — evidence that we are taught to overlook, or to dismiss because it is factual.

What is imaginary is not true: We are taught this as children. The imagination, however, brings us into connection with a different kind of truth, or a different framework in which experience can be legitimately perceived. The larger truths of the psyche exist in that dimension.

tuou7

From it we choose physical facts. Thoughts are real. Only some thoughts turn into physical actions, of course. Despite distorted versions of that last statement, however, there is still obviously a distant difference, say, between the though of adultery and its physical expression.

thoujt

We cannot treat thoughts and imagination in such a literal manner, nor in a large respect should we try to “guard our thoughts” as if they were herds of animals that we wanted to keep purely bred. Our thoughts do form our reality. If we do not fear them, however, they create their own balances. The psyche dwells in a reality so different from the world we usually recognize that there good and evil, as we think of them, are also seen to be as operationally or relatively true as the difference between the perceiver and the object perceived.

The physical world implies the existence of God

God’s existence also implies the existence of a physical world.

This statement implies the unstated, and the reverse also applies.

To deny the validity or importance of the individual is, therefore also to deny the importance or validity of God, for the two exist one within the other, and we cannot separate them.

From one end of reality we shout: “Where is God?” and from the other end the answer comes: “I am Me.” From the other end of reality, God goes shouting: “Who am I?” and finds himself in us. We are therefore a part of the source, and so is everything else manifest. Because God is, we are. Because we are, God is.

On a conscious level certainly we are not all that God is, for that is the unstated, un-manifest portion of oneself. Our being rides upon that unstated reality, as a letter of the alphabet rides upon the inner organizations that are implied by its existence. In those terms our unstated portions “reach backwards to Source called God,” as various languages can be traced back to their source. Master language can be compared to the historic gods. Each person alive is a part of the living God, supported in life by the magnificent power of nature, which is God, translated into the elements of the earth and the universe.

Almost any question that we can ask of God, can be asked of the Psyche as well.

It seems to us that we know ourselves, but that we take the existence of our psyche on faith. At best, it often seems that we are all that we know of our psyche, and we will complain that we do not know oneself to begin with. When we say: “I want to find myself,” we usually take it for granted that there is a completed, done, finished version of oneself that we have mislaid somewhere. When we think of finding God, we often think in the same terms.

We are “around ourselves” all the time. We are ever becoming oneself. In a manner of speaking we are “composed” of those patterns of oneself that are everywhere coming together. We cannot help but be oneself. Biologically, mentally, and spiritually we are marked as apart from all others, and no cloak of conventionally can ever hide that unutterable uniqueness. We cannot help but be ourselves.

ffffffm

In a way, physically we are a molecular language that communicates to others, but a language with its own peculiarities, as if speaking an accepted tongue we spoke with a biological accent that carried its own flavor and meaning.

When we ask: “What is my psyche, or my soul, or who am I?” we are seeking of course for our own meaning as apart from what we already know about oneself. In that context, God and the psyche are constantly expanding– unutterable, and always becoming.

ffwf

We will question, most likely, “Becoming what?” for to us it usually seems that all motion tends toward a stat of completion of one kind or another. We think, therefore, in terms of becoming perfect, or becoming free. The word “becoming” by itself seems to leave us up in the air, so to speak, suspended without definitions. If I say: “You are becoming what you already are,” then my remark sounds meaningless, for if you already are, how can you become what is already accomplished? In larger terms, however, what we are is always vaster than our knowledge of oneself, for in physical life we cannot keep up with our own psychological and psychic activity.

In a way our bodies speak a biological language, but in those terms we are bilingual, to say the least. We deal with certain kinds of organizations. They can be equated with biological verbs, adjectives and nouns. These result in certain time sequences that can be compared to sentences, written and read from one side, say, to the other.

sfgwe

Pretend that our life’s experience is a page of a book that we write, read, and experience from top to bottom, left to right, sentence by sentence, paragraph by paragraph. That is the you that you know– the wold view that we understand. But other quite as legitimate “yous” may write, read, and experience the same page backwards, or read each letter downward and back up again, as we would a column of figures. Or others might mix and match the letters in entirely different fashions altogether, forming entirely different sentences. Still another, vaster you might be aware of all the different methods of experiencing that particular page, which is our life as we understand it.

We think that our own consciousness is the only logical culmination of our body’s reality. We read oneself in a certain accepted fashion. In the “entire book of life,” however, just physically speaking, there are interrelationships on adjacent levels that we do not perceive, as other portions of our own biological consciousness or biological language relate to the entire living fabric of the world. In physical terms we are alive because of substructures — psychic, spiritual, and biological — of which we have hardly any comprehension at all.

TEGERGB

These are implied, however, in the nature of our own consciousness, which could not exist otherwise as we know it. As language gains and attains its meaning not only by what is included in it, but also by what is excluded, so our consciousness attains its stability also by exclusions.

What we are is implied in the nature of what we are not. By the same token, we are what we are because of the existence of what we are not.

trgggg3

We read ourselves from the top of the page to the bottom, or from what we think of as the beginning to the end. Our greater reality, however, is read in terms of intensities, so that the psyche puts us together in a different way. The psyche does not mark time. To it the intense experiences of our life exist simultaneously. In our terms they would be the psyche’s present. The psyche deals with probable events, however, so some events– perhaps some that we dreamed of but did not materialize — are quite real to the psyche. They are far more real to it than most innocuous but definite physical events, as for example yesterday morning’s breakfast.

God and psyche

The inner events of the psyche compose the greater experience from which physical events arrive. They cast an aura that almost magically make our life our own. Even as two people encountered precisely the same events in their lives at precisely the same time, their experiences of reality would still hardly be approximately connected.

Awake While Asleep

Suggest that instead as we falling to asleep, we will come into another kind of wakefulness. Try to imagine that you are awake when you sleep. On other occasions when we go to bed, lie down and settle yourself, but as you fall asleep imagine that you are awakening the next morning. I will not tell you what to look for. The doing of this exercise is important– not the results in usual terms.

a6th

There are different kinds of knowledge; so will this exercise bring us in contact with knowledge in another way. Done over a period of time, they will open up alternate modes of perception, so that we can view our experience from more than one standpoint. This means that our experience will itself change in quality. Sometimes when you are awake, and it is convenient, imagine that your present experience of the moment is a dream, and is highly symbolic. Then try to interpret it as such.

d8l8l

Who are the people? What do they represent? If that experience were a dream, what would it mean? And into what kind of waking life would you rise in the morning?

yjyj

The qualities of consciousness cannot be elucidated. This exercise will bring us in contact with other kinds of knowing, and acquaint us with different feelings of consciousness that are not familiar. Our consciousness itself will then have a different feel as the exercise is done. Certain questions that we may have asked may be answered in such a state, but not in ways that we can anticipate, nor can we necessarily translate the answers into known terms. The different modes of consciousness with which I hope to acquaint you are not alien, however. They are quite native, again, in dream states, and are always present as alternatives beneath usual awareness.

asw4554545

Long sound

The moment point, the present, is the point of intersection between all existences and reality. All probabilities flow through it, though one of our moments may be experienced as centuries, or as a breath, in other probable realities of which we are part. There are systems in which a moment, from our standpoint, is made to endure for the life of a universe.
These are “side pools” of consciousness.
All consciousness has as-pects that are act-i-va-ted and ex-pressed in all idi-oms or real-i-ties.

As long as we think in terms off [subatomic] particles, and WAVES we are basically of track .

The idea of interrelated fields comes closer, of course, yet even here we are simply changing one kind of term for one like it, only slightly different. In all of these cases we are ignoring the reality of consciousness, and its gestalt formation and materialization. Until we perceive the innate consciousness behind any ‘visible’ or ‘invisible’ manifestations, then, we put a definite barrier to our own knowledge.

There is now real different between the concepts of fields and wave/particles.

Dolphins and whales are geniuses, possessing the ability of abstract thought to a high degree.

Dolphins deal with an entirely different dimension of reality. There is as yet no method of communication that can allow us to perceive their concepts of selfhood, or their [collective] vision of existence. They are sensitive, self-aware individuals. They are altruistic. They understand the nature of relativity, and they are not higher or lower than our own species. They simply represent a different kind of selfhood.

dddggb

There is some relationship, at least in terms of our discussion, between the reality of the dolphins and the reality of the fetus. In our terms the fetus lives in primeval conditions, reminiscent of periods in the species’ past. It relates in its own way to its environment. Now for some consciousnesses this is sufficient. In our terms, for each of us, it was sufficient.

Dolphins and Whales are not only similar to certain species that lived on our own planet in the past, but representing bleed-throughs from probable realities in which water-dwelling mammals predominate.

The soul is not a unit that is definable.

sou

It is instead an undefinable quality. It cannot be broken down or built up, destroyed or expanded, yet it can change affiliation and organization, and its characteristics, while ever remaining itself.

ee44

The soul within the fetus cannot be destroyed by any kind of abortion, for instance. It’s progress cannot be charted, for it will always escape such calculations. It’s history is in future, which always creates the past.

Reality!

Walking down the street, we expect the trees to stay in their places, and not transform themselves into buildings. All of these assumptions are taken for granted in our physical journeys. We may find different customs and languages, yet even these will be accepted in the vast, overall, basic assumptions within whose boundaries physical life occurs. We are most certainly traveling through the private and mass psyche when we so much as walk down the street. The physical world seems objective and outside of oneself, however. The idea of such outsideness is one of the assumptions upon which we build that existence. Interior traveling is no more subjective, than a journey from New York to San Francisco. We are used to projecting all destinations outside of oneself. The idea of varied inward destinations, involving motion through time and space, therefore appears strange.
    Generally speaking, we have explored the physical planet enough so that we have a good idea of what to expect as we travel from country to country.
    Before a trip, we can produce travel folders that outline the attractions and characteristics of a certain locale. We are not traveling blind folded,therefore, and while any given journey may be new to us, we are not really a pioneer: The land has been mapped and there are few basic surprises.
    The inner lands have not been as well explored. To say the least, they lie in virgin territory as far as our conscious mind is concerned. Others have journeyed to some of these interior locales, but since they were indeed explorers they had to learn as they went along. Some, returning, provided guidebooks or travel folders, telling us what could be expected. We make our own reality. If we were from a foreign land and asked one person to give us a description for reality. The person might say “New York City is a frightful place in which crime is rampant, gangs roam the streets, murders and rapes are the norm, and people are not only impolite but ready to attack us at a moment’s notice. There are no trees. The air is polluted, and we can expect only violence. ” If we asked someone else, this individual might say instead: “New York City has the finest of museums, open-air concerts in some of the parks, fine sculpture, theater, and probably the greatest collection of books outside the Vatican. It has a good overall climate, a great mixture of cultures. In it, millions of people go their way daily in freedom. ” Both people would be speaking of their private beliefs, and would be colored by the individual focus from which each of them viewed that City.
    One person might be able to give us the city’s precise location in terms of latitude and longitude. The other might have no such knowledge, and say instead: “I take a plane at such-an-such a place, at such-and-such a time, giving New York City as my destination, and if I take the proper plane I always arrive there.
    Explorers traveling into inner reality, do not have the same kind of landmarks to begin with. Many have been so excited with their discoveries that they wrote guidebooks long before they even began to explore the inner landscape They did not understand that they found what they wanted to find, or that the seemingly objective phenomena originated in the reflections of the psyche.
   We may, for example, have read books numbering the “inner realms,” and telling us what we can expect to encounter in each. Many of these speak of lords or gods of the realm, or of demons. In a strange way these books do provide a service, for at certain levels we will find our own ideas materialized: and if we believe in demons then in those terms we will encounter them. The authors, however, suppose that the devils have a reality outside of our belief in them, and such is not the case. The demons simply represent a state of our own mind that is seemingly out there, objectified. Therefore, whatever methods the authors used to triumph over these demons is often given as proof not only of the demons’ reality but of each method’s effectiveness.
    Now if we read such books we may often program our activity along those lines, in the same way that a visitor to New York City might program experience of the city in terms of what he of she had been told existed there.
    That kind of structuring also does a disservice, however, for it prevents us from coming in contact with our own original concepts. there is no reason, for example, to encounter any demons or devils in any trance or out-of-body condition. In such cases our own hallucinations blind us to the environment within which they are projected. All of its dimensions are faithfully and instantly produced as experience when we learn to take our “normally alert” conscious mind with us; and when we are free of such limiting ideas, then at those levels we can glimpse the inner powers of our own psyche, and watch the interplay of beliefs and symbols as they are manifested before our eyes. Until we learn to do this we will most certainly have difficulty, for we will not be able to tell the difference between our projections and what is happening in the inner environment.
    Any exploration of inner reality must necessarily involve a journey through the psyche, and these effects can be thought of as atmospheric conditions, natural, at a certain stage, through which we pass as we continue.
    Our world, is the result of a certain focus of consciousness, without which that world cannot be perceived. The range of consciousness involved is obviously physically oriented, yet within it there are great varieties of consciousness, each experiencing that seemingly objective world from a private perspective. The physical environment is real in different terms to an animal, a fish, a man, or a rock, for example, and different portions of those forms. This is highly important.
    If an inhabitant from another reality outside of our own physical system entirely were to visit it, and if “his” or “her” intelligence was roughly of the same degree as our own, he or she would still have to learn to focus his or her consciousness into the same way that we do, more or less, in order to perceive our world. He or she would have to alter his or her native focus and turn it in a direction that was foreign to him or her. In this way he or she could “pick up our station.” There would be distortions, because even though he or she managed such manipulations he or she might not have the same kind of native physical structure as our own, or course, through which to receive and interpret those data his altered consciousness perceived.
    Our visitor would then be forced to translate that information as best he or she could through his or her own native structure, if it were to make any sense to his or her consciousness in its usual orientation. All realities are the result of certain unique focuses taken by consciousness. In those terms, there is no outside. The effect of objectivity are caused as the psyche projects its experience into inner dimensions that it has itself created
    Within, those frameworks are ever expanding, so that in our terms at least it seems that greater and greater distances are involved. Travel to any other land of physical reality must then involve alterations of consciousness.
   While all of our thoughts and feelings are “somewhat” materialized, only some of them become physical in our terms. They are then accepted as physical reality. They provide the basis for the physical events, objects, and phenomena upon which we all agree. Therefore our world has a stability that works well enough for daily concerns. At that point we are tuned in precisely on our “home station.” We ignore the ghost symbols or voices, the probable actions that also occur, but that are muffled in the clear tones of our accepted reality. When we begin to travel away from that home station, we become more aware of the other frequencies that are buried within it. We move through other frequencies, but to do this we must alter our own consciousness. The probable realities connected with our own system are like the suburbs, say, surrounding a main city. If for simplicity’s sake we think of other realities as different cities, then after we leave our own we would pass through the suburbs, then into he country, then after a time into other suburbs until we reached another metro-city. Each metropolis would represent a conglomeration of consciousnesses operating within an overall general frequency of clearest focus, a high point of psychic communication and exquisite focus in the given kind of reality unless we are tunes in to those particular frequencies, however, we could not pick up that reality. We might instead perceive the equivalent of jumbled sound or meaningless static, or jigsaw images. We might simply realize that some kind of activity was there, nut without being able to pinpoint it.