Simple Seekers

A simple seeker tries to teach Spirit. It was time to teach her spirit guru something about life in the world of physical reality.

“There is no physical reality.”

“It looks pretty real to me.”

“It’s an illusion.”

“As in a dream?”

“Yes, and no.”

“Surely, it is or it isn’t.”

“What?”

“A dream.”

“It is, and it isn’t.”

“How can that be?”

“It is as a dream in that you are not directing it. But, the illusion of so-called reality allows you to pretend that you are directing it all.”

“But, I do make choices.”

“Yes, from available options that you are aware of.”

“How could I possible choose from options that I’m not aware of?”

“It’s too late.”

“For what?”

“It’s too late for you to choose options that you might have, if you had been aware of them, when and while they were options.”

“Then, how can there be any meaning to life?”

“There’s always meaning to life.”

“I mean, for me.”

“Why are you living?”

“I don’t know.”

“Yes.”

“What does that mean?”

“It means that you have yet to choose a purpose.”

“How does one choose a purpose?”

“Which one?”

“This one. Me.”

“Everyone chooses, every moment.”

“How?”

“By living.”

“Is living, itself, a purpose?”

“Yes.”

“Then, we all have the same purpose?”

“Who?”

“Everyone living.”

“Yes, and no.”

“It only begins with living?”

“No.”

“Please explain.”

“There was no beginning.”

…..

A simple seeker’s note to herself

Thinking back, I wonder why I was trying to teach Spirit anything. I should have known that I’d lose. What was I trying to teach him, anyway?”

“About life in the so-called world of physical reality.”

“If physical reality is an illusion, …”

“And it is.”

“Then, what purpose does it serve?”

“Does it serve a purpose?”

“Does it?”

“Yes.”

“Then, what?”

“Physical experience provides opportunities to develop skills, and practice our understanding of interrelatedness with all other life forms.”

“What purpose does understanding have?”

“It determines how we interact with each other; how we choose to interact with each other. But choosing is only a step toward understanding.”

“Understanding what?”

“Understanding that we are one.”

…..

A simple but sincere seeker of a higher level of spiritual development somehow came under the influence of a spiritual guru whose understanding of life seemed to be …

“What do you mean by seemed to be?”

“Perhaps I don’t yet know what the limits of my own understanding of life are.”

“How is it possible not to know your own limits?”

“Perhaps I’ve been socially conditioned to accept and expect less of myself and my capacity for thought than possibly exists.”

“Why would that have happened?”

“Not necessarily through the failure of anyone to teach me, unless ..”

“Unless what?”

“Parents and early educators likely seek to serve the best interests of the community when teaching children what to think and how to relate to their world.”

“Wouldn’t it be in the best interest of the community for children to be taught as much about life as they could understand?”

“Perhaps the natural, or conditioned, limits of parents and early educators restricts what they can pass on to the younger generation in their care.”

“Yes, but there is always conscious intent to limit awareness in the minds of young children.”

“If so, then that intentional limitation could have survival value.”

“For whom? Or what? How? And why?”

“Perhaps it’s as food.”

“In what way?”

“We feed babies with very soft foods that their bodies can digest, and only gradually introduce foods that require a more developed digestive system.”

“What has that to do with intentionally limiting a child’s intellectual development?”

“Teachers and parents can only teach what they know.”

“Or what they believe is safe for the children to know?”

“How could children be endangered by knowledge?”

“Perhaps not the children, themselves.”

“Then whom? Or what?”

“Every society that exists can only maintain its present way of life by gently, or otherwise, enforcing rules on everyone within that society, including children.”

“But, societies evolve and transcend over time, as new ideas and new ways of living become available.”

“Yes, but as eager as young people, and some others, may be to adapt and change, there’s always repression of adaptation and change, by those who might lose their positions of power within society.”

“That could be a healthy condition.”

“How so?”

“Survival needs of individual societies might depend upon at least some control by leaders, teachers, and parents, of the degree and type of change that seems to be happening.”

“Yes. Thee are always reasons for suppression.”

“Is it necessarily suppression?”

“What else?”

“Suppression sounds so deliberate and intentional.”

“It is.”

“Could it not just be resistance to change that might threaten the existing rules of order of the society in question?”

“Or the power of those who benefit from the existing rules?”

“That, of course, would be part of any dynamic between the past and the desired future.”

“Yes.”

“So, what’s the solution?”

“To what?”

“A peaceful transition from what was, to what might yet be.”

“Yes. There is no peaceful solution.”

“Winner takes all?”

“Yes.”

…..

A simple seeker’s note to herself

Thinking back on the concept of a ‘winner takes all’ solution to any differences between either individuals or groups, that idea is something that I’ve always resisted. I seem to need a level playing field kind of ending to any problems between people.

“Life doesn’t usually work that way.”

“Why?”

“Conflicting visions of an ideal society can create tension between the opposing views, unless both sides choose synthesis.”

“Can’t there be accomodation, cooperation, and harmony, as an alternative to synthesis?”

“Perhaps as a short-term solution, but it wouldn’t last.”

“Why?”

“It would still be duality.”

“So, what’s wrong with duality?”

“There’s no unity in duality.”

“Why do we need unity?”

“It’s the only reality.”

“What does that mean?”

“Either we’re all in this together, or we’re not. And, we are. Case closed.”

…..

Only desire can motivate us to cross the line, or enter the door, to our future.

The so-called Middle Way is a doorway. What made me think it was a path? Jesus claimed to be The Way. What were his words? “I am the way. He who would enter …” He didn’t say, “He who would follow …”

The many polarities of life; high/low, in/out, right/left, good/bad, soft/hard, gentle/harsh, young/old, weak/strong, …the list goes on, and with each and all pairs, or sets, of so-called opposites, there is a fine middle line that separates even graduations of one polarity with graduations of it’s so-called polar opposite.

We cross the line between lower and higher values, or we allow ourself to be pulled back. Back and not necessarily down, for who would admit to living by low personal values?

The life we live expresses our values, whatever our words may say. Perhaps psychoanalysts of the future will be required to undergo personal analysis of themselves, under the guidance of a more fully aware supervisor, to discover their own personal values, without using socially-conditioned labels or academic terminology to describe them.

All highs could be higher, and all lows could be lower. It depends on our personal perspective as to what is high or low, and how high. And, how low to us, as individuals, and why?

If the Middle Way is a doorway, then which side are we on, in our own mind? Are we standing in front of the door to our possible future, or are we moving through it? Are we brave enough to move through it, to a place that is more suited to our emotional and mental comfort zone, and to our present state of consciousness?

How we live, as well as what we say and do, expresses our inner values, and yet, we can change the way we live, and we can change what we say and do, to make us feel more comfortable with our inner self, that some call soul; our inner quality of heart and mind. It’s the only way to develop peace of mind.

In the beginning was The Word, and the word was One. From One came Two, and from Two came Three, and then, from Three came “the Ten Thousand Things.” But, first there had to be One, or at least the potential to become one.

The deepest thinkers of our past knew and understood, and so ancient systems of thought were built on, yes, the firm foundation of the Laws of Mathematics. Some things never change; one is always one, whether it be a singular one or a group of whatever.

And then, as a natural development, mathematics became the cornerstone of philosophical thought. “Know thyself” Plato told us, perhaps having learned to understand its meaning from his great teacher, Socrates.

And how can we learn to know and understand ourselves? Simply by meditating on the cornerstone of our individual life; that underlying philosophy of life that guides our every emotion, thought, and action, intentionally or otherwise. Deep within each of us is the cornerstone, or foundation, that we have built our way of life on. Does it need to be reshaped? Has it become out of line with …?

We seem to know, with a deep knowing, that our cornerstone, or foundation, is as it always was, but we may have forgotten to refer back to it, as we built our life. If so, then it’s our way of life that has to be brought back into line with the core of our being.

We each must, sooner or later, ask ourself, “Just what is the basic value that I express in the way I live my life?”

A simple seeker was meditating on the concept of ‘as above – so below’, and how it might express itself in human society.

“Is there a human society?”

“Perhaps the sum total of all human societies could be considered as an all-inclusive human society.”

“Would the same principle …”

“Is it a principle?”

“It’s more than a principle. It’s a law of Life.”

“How many laws of Life are there?”

“There’s no limit to their number.”

“Is there a hierarchy within these rules of order?”

“Are they rules of order?”

“Are they?”

“Yes.”

“Then, …”

“As above – so below.”

“A common bond?”

“Yes.”

“What is the common bond?”

“Everyone possesses the same emotional and intellectual attributes as anyone else, but in varying degrees.”

“Then why is there, or seems to be, an above and a below?”

“And a somewhere in-between?”

“Yes.”

“It’s necessarily so.”

“Why?”

“Birds of a feather flock together.”

“Sparrows and crows don’t associate with each other.”

“Exactly. They each form ther own societies, but are, at the same time, birds.”

“The same species of life?”

“Yes.”

“Then, what about the human species?”

“What about it?”

“Language groups?”

“Yes, and separate cultures and communities develop within each language group.”

“Is it possible to intetgrate all language groups, and then to assimilate them into one?”

“Why would you want to? And, how would you do it without eliminating individual cultures?”

“Then, co-existence is the answer?”

“To what?”

“Co-existence is its own solution?”

“How to co-exist with others who are, or seem to be, superior or lesser to us, in some respects?”

“Between groups, or within groups?”

“The same principles would apply. The same laws of Life apply.”

“Those above know they’re above, and those at the bottom …?”

“Yes.”

…..

A simple seeker’s note to herself

Thinking back on my discussion with Spirit about human and animal socieites, what lesson of life was Spirfit teaching me about similarities and correspondences betwween different species of life?

“What did you learn?”

“I learned that the same general laws, rules, or principles apply to all forms of life.”

“Wrong.”

“Wrong?”

“Yes.”

“Please explain.”

“As above – so below expresses some general correspondences between different levels of intelligence and/or life forms.”

“Is there any correspondence or common bond between you and me?”

“Both. We each share an interest in clear and simple spiritual philosophy. That’s the common bond.”

“And the correspondence is that we each understand it at a different level?”

“Yes.”

…..

I almost bought into it. In fact, I did, hook, line, and sinker, as they say. How gulible can a would-be gardener get? I’m so simple. But I can now accept that I wasn’t completely innocent or fully responsible for the results. Karma rules, and yet, it isn’t the only player in any game.

There it was, fresh from Figaro’s, a high quality garden shop. It was a massive spread of luxuriant foliage, with many high stalks of long strings of buds almost ready to open to a feathery mass of red bloom. And now, what a sad state it’s in.

How did it happen? What did I do wrong? Isn’t that what every gardener, and would-be, if she could could be gardener moan? What did the plant need that I didn’t, or couldn’t give? The astilbe seemed to sense my dissaproval of the quality of my care, and played into it for all it was worth.

Thinking back, I now realize that I had been so impressed with how massive the plant was, and how beautifully healthy it seemed to be, that I had temporarily forgotten; how could I forget? It’s a common rule when transplanting any plant overly abundant with foliage, to cut it back, perhaps even by one-third, to compensate for the shock of transplanting that the roots suffer from. Vanity at being able to claim such a precious plant as my own, had, I guess, closed my mind to the responsibility of providing ultimate care for it.

My precious little patio is in the shade, and yet, astilbes are noted for their ability to endure shade. Sure, but how much shade is too much for even shade tolerant plants to endure. My little patio seems designed to put them to the test. And yet, even on my shady patio, there are areas of more and/or less shade. I had set my new treasure into a large pot on the shadiest side of the patio. Why? Because that’s where the pot was.

Why was there an empty pot on the shadiest side of my shady patio. You guessed it. some previous occupant, a dearly beloved Yew, had seemingly suddenly to have developed an inability to survive. Did it leave negative energy behind? How can I know.

So, here I am, feeling so very guilty, and the plant playing it up for all it’s worth. Don’t kids do that to parents, at times. “See, Mom, it’s all your fault.” I tried to compensate for what I had done wrong, if I had done anything wrong. I was beginning to regain my self-composure. I moved a little table from the sunnier (?) side of the patio, to the inner, sliding glass door side, where the plant was, and I moved the pot out into the light, or at least to the most light that it would likely get on my shady patio.

Then, I fussied all over it, snipping out the little bits of drying foliage and taking care not to overwater it – had that been a factor? It’s pot did seem damp, even after several days.

How did the plant respond

to my tender loving care, albeit after the fact? It moaned and groaned and continued to display increasing amounts of drying leaves. Oh dear. And then, a sudden insight, or was it a message sent from the trees that shelter my little patio – not from the sun, for I’m on the North side of the building, but from the people, places, and things that might otherwise impinge on my need for privacy. I suddenly felt much more approving of myself. Thanks to whomever or whatever sent the message.

What was the message? Sure, we’re each and all responsible for everything that happens in our life, but only to the extent that we might have been responsible for it having happened. And, how can we ever know? I’ll continue to fussy over the now sickly-looking plant, and care for it as well as I can, and yet, I can’t give it what it most needs, and which it can only give to itself; the will to live.

Perhaps the day will come when psychologists will face their clients with this reality; “I can help you to help yourself, but, in the final analysis, only you can choose to develop a healthy lifestyle. What has happened in the past is, or can be, left behind, while we focus on the future. Or, we can follow the path of least resistance, and choose to pretend that the past has denied us of a future.”

My astilbe is now in the driver’s seat of responsibility.

“The quality of our relationship with anyone necessarily affects the quality of our relationship with everyone else. True or false? And why?”

Perhaps, the quality of our relationship with ourself may also affect the quality of our relationship with everyone else. I was deep into an afternoon nap when the above thoughts seemed to drift – no, it wasn’t a drift. It was pushed into my mind. How is that possible when one is asleep, or at least was asleep before being awakened with thoughts too deep to deal with in a groggy state of mind?

How can anyone, half asleep ponder the implicatons of personal relationships having global (more or less) consequences? And, what if they do? What can I do about it?

But, perhaps if they do, then we need to be careful about being pulled into potentially stressful situations. On the other hand, we can be overly careful, and fear commiting to more than surface relationships.

Perhaps the middle way is to develop both strength and flexibility in our capacity for emotional and intellectual communication.

A simple seeker was deeply engrossed in reading “The Shadow’s Gift” by Robin Robertson, in which the author shares and discusses his personal experiences with psychic mediums, while maintaining an open mind as to their authenticity.

“What exactly would an open mind look like, in this instance?”

“Neither absolutely believing, nor absolutely disbelieving, but keenly interested in understanding exactly what was happening.”

“Happening?”

“In terms of the subconscious activity of, or through, the channel or medium.”

“What’s the difference?”

“Between a channel and a medium?”

“Yes.”

“Perhaps, in essence, they’re the same.”

“Then, why did you mention both?”

“Are they not the same?”

“No.”

“Then, what’s the difference?”

“The difference is one of function.”

“Please explain.”

“A medium communicates between physical people and non-physical people.”

“And, a channel?”

“She serves a non-physical person, or purpose.”

“She?”

“Yes, you.”

“Are you my shadow?”

“In a way, yes.”

“What does that mean?”

“It means that we’re each incomplete without the other.”

“In what way?”

“I teach you, and you share my teaching with your blog readers.”

“There aren’t that many of them.”

“There will be.”

…..

A simple seeker’s note to herself

Looking back on what Spirit said, what did I learn about mediums and channels?

“Did you learn anything?”

“Yes.”

“Then, what?”

“I learned that I seem to channel some of your teaching.”

“How?”

“As a radio transceiver.”

“What about a newscaster?”

“No.”

“How do they differ?”

“I seem to share the essence of what you share with, or teach me, but only as clearly as I can understand it, and then I share it with my Facebook friends and the Facebook groups that I’m a member of.”

“Do you know how many people pay any attention to what you post or comment?”

“No, but I’m learning so very much about life from you, and I enjoy sharing what you teach me with my Facebook community. Also, I’m gaining experience and learning from some posts and comments of others.”

“Yes. It’s a win-win situation.”

…..

To share a Facebook post from six years ago

I must share with everyone, a new, for me, book on Zen, that I discovered near the back of a second-hand book store. “Zen Under the Gun” about four Zen Masters from turbulent times, translated by J.S. Cleary.

The introduction fascinated me. It began with “A moment in history – imagine a world at war, generation after generation. A heavily militarized empire rules supreme, planting its garrisons in country after country, plundering resources, subjugating populatons, killing and maiming at will, and ruthlessly destroying the cities and towns of everyone who dared to resist¨ This was China, more than 700 years ago, after the Mongul invasion, but it could be almost anywhere, today.

The author claims that ‘engaged Buddhism’ has always been an integral part of the true teaching. The Zen Masters covered in the book “achieved inner peace, but not by fleeing from the world the people around them were trapped in. They embodied the Bodhisattva approach to the world; empty but responsive, emotionally detached but actively involved, with the insight to see what really can help, and the courage to attempt it.”

We need dedicated people like that, today.

“Simple seeker, what is it that you claim to be seeking?”

“Why do you say, claim?”

“How sure are you of what you’re seeking, if you’re seeking anything that you don’t already possess?”

“In which case …”

“Yes.”

“Does it matter?”

“Yes. We should know what it is that we don’t now possess, and yet seem to need to.”

“Perhaps …”

“Yes. Anything we might wish to have can be categorized under one general heading ..”

“Peace of mind?”

“Yes. And, to the question that yo’re almost ready to ask, the answer is yes. It is possible to possess peace of mind. Would you like it?”

“No.”

“Yes. A restless spirit, after my own heart.”

…..

A simple seeker’s note to herself

Thinking back on what Spirit said, what did I learn about peace of mind?

“Perhaps you learned something about your own personality.”

“Such as?”

“Such as a seemingly predisposition toward conflict, or tension, as some might term disharmony.”

“I seem to resist peace of mind?”

“Yes.”

“Why would I resist peace of mind?”

“Yes. Why do you?”

“I do?”

“Yes.”

“Perhaps …”

“Yes. We are energy beings and energy flows.”

“And the comfort zone of each of us might be set at a unique level of motion?”

“Yes.”

………