This Is Where Things Get Really Disconcerting

If you read my previous blog, “Why We’re Not in Kansas Anymore”, you will have some understanding of where I’m going next. The five-part format for our consensus reality that I laid out for you gives you five “scientific” reasons why it is completely bogus. We are used to considering anything supported by “scientific” evidence to be reliable and trustworthy. However, as the evidence I presented is based on principles of quantum physics, you might not be so willing to go along with it. After all, the discoveries of quantum physics are only about one hundred years old, and it may take longer than that to persuade you to change your outlook and belief system. At any rate, the revision of your mindset about reality is on its way, so you might as well start adapting to it.

Taking what I explained to you about the non-existence of physical reality as a foundation for proceeding further, let’s consider that what you are doing every day is taking place as essentially a mime performance. Remember that you are creating a seemingly physical reality out of your observation of it by collapsing wave function into the appearance of physical stuff. So, for example, if you are driving into town to do some shopping, you are simply miming the action of going out to your car (which you are just making up), opening one of its doors, getting into it, inserting a key into its ignition, starting its engine, and proceeding to drive it somewhere (also completely made up), viewing the passing landscape as you proceed (which also depends upon your observation of it to make it appear) as if it is really passing by (an amazing trick since space itself is an illusion).

Your ability as a mime is incredible. When you get hungry, you mime going to a restaurant, sitting at a table, ordering a meal, and then miming the action of eating with a non-existent fork and drinking out of a non-existent glass. You do this as skillfully as either Marcel Marceau or Charlie Chaplin could do it,

images-9unknown

yet you fail to appreciate your extraordinary ability.

Think of the holodeck on the Starship Enterprise. Your life is being acted out as a mimed performance in a holographic reality. There is no set. There are no props. Your power of visualization is so good, however, that you believe that you can see and feel the props that you pretend you are using. Actually, there is no holodeck either unless you consider your own consciousness to be one–which, most disturbingly, is the truth. And all this time you’ve been thinking that you’re dealing with a solid reality existing independently outside of yourself. Silly prat.

The implications of this situation would be grave if they weren’t so damned funny. No matter how important a mover and shaker you consider yourself to be on the world stage (an apt comparison wonderfully elaborated by Shakespeare), nothing happens. You mimed a lot of what you thought was important, even earth-shaking stuff, but it has no substance at all. You were enclosed in your own perception of reality the whole time (which isn’t real either) that you believed you were rearranging the deck chairs on a semblance of the Titanic so as to keep it afloat.

What matters is not where you stood on the stage or what you did with the props in front of the painted scenery, but how good a performance you gave of being who you are. Playing that part takes rare talent because it depends upon not taking the set, the props, or the scenery as being anything more than an occasion to be yourself, which requires that you love the part you are playing. When you’re done, you can take a very flamboyant bow.

Our Enduring Attraction to Nonsense

It’s not that I’m “blogged-out”, it’s just that I’m not getting any “blog-back” to stimulate conversation. Nonetheless, I will press on.

I’ve been watching with intermittent interest the hysterical drama of the recent presidential election here in the U.S. For a while, I was entertaining the illusion that people were beginning to get some dim intuitions of an expanding awareness based upon key principles of quantum mechanics. I seem to be wrong in that assessment. People aren’t just as dumb as ever; they are dumber than ever. They are pouring enormous amounts of attention and emotion into the maintenance of colossal morphic fields that appear to validate their fear and anger. This is postponing any semblance of an expanding awareness that would elevate (as in attaining a higher frequency) their collective consciousness to a larger perspective. They are imagining monsters under their beds and reacting with terror and despair at the prospect of their imminent doom.

None of this is real, of course. They are still reacting to what they perceive as a solid reality under the disposition of cause and effect. This is “the sky is falling” syndrome. In effect, they are claiming that if they are scared, what is scaring them must be real. There doesn’t seem to be any way around this dynamic. I had been hoping for some encouraging signs of dawning realization before I pass on to the next world. Apparently, what I hope for has nothing to do with what other people think or do. We are all inevitably locked into our personal experiences of the reality we think is “out there”.

Do I really care? I guess that it is pointless to do so. Our culture urges us to enter this approximation of reality with the intention to “make the world a better place”. The assumptions implicit in this noble mission are that, first, the world has an objective existence separate from our own consciousness of it, and, second, that we can exert some kind of force or influence over the world that will produce an effect on it that we want. Both assumptions are illusions. The relative “reality” of the situation is that we are tasked with being who we are no matter what the circumstances in which we find ourselves. People who have had OBEs and NDEs assure us of this existential requirement. Yet this is practically the last thing that most people consider important.

What most people do is find a surrogate for who they have been led to believe they are, and try to become it in any way possible. Here’s the scenario: while still young, they are subjected to a storm of causes that they can embrace so as to “make things better”. They are encouraged to make the personal sacrifices necessary to further their cause of choice. This shows that they are not selfish and are committed to a “higher” purpose that will assure “the greater good”. They have chosen to be “selfless” and to further a noble purpose attuned to ensuring the welfare of others. It’s amazing how attractive this sort of nonsense can be. Granted, both the culture and the educational system promote it with a vengeance, so it takes some intransigence to resist its collective power.

Just “being who you are” is popularly considered a low and secondary aspiration that is of no benefit to anyone else and thus is to be actively discouraged. So what do we have? A society of drones, members of a Borg collective who are working in concert to assimilate all who retain some robust individual identity. Being who you are simply doesn’t make sense to the collective because its members can’t figure out what the cause/effect benefit could be.

It’s a matter of physics. We have been brought up to accept macro or classical principles of reality and although a new micro, quantum physics has emerged as the most successful scientific interpretation to date, most people are still kept in ignorance of its existence. The classical interpretation is the basis for a dualistic view of reality, which employs lines of force and cause and effect interactions to explain why everything is the way it appears to be. Even though quantum physics principles are employed to support one-third of our economy, they are never considered to have any relation to how we think or what it means to be alive.

Patterns have not replaced lines of force as agents of change or the impetus of processes. Nothing is ever considered capable of being in two places at the same time. “Reality” is still considered to be self-existent, independent of what our consciousness may interpret it to be. In fact, “reality” is considered to be an objective, solid entity that should determine how we ideally think and behave as in the expression, “get real”. Hardly anyone is aware that nothing exists until it is observed.

Quantum reality tells us to be who we are first and foremost because who we are determines the reality of what we will experience. You would think that this would be a very honest, obvious, and simple principle to accept, but it remains beyond most people’s capacity to integrate. We keep looking outside ourselves for the answers, for what will make everybody else happy so that we can be safe and secure and happy ourselves, but somehow we keep missing the trigger mechanism. It is ourselves, the necessity to be foremost who we are, trusting that that accomplishment will guarantee the well-being of the entire universe.

 

Evading Spiritual Antiquarianism

Well, here’s another blog for posterity. Back in the 70s and 80s of the last millennium, Asian martial arts was a huge craze. Bruce Lee and Chuck Norris were the trend-setters. Thousands practiced in dojos and kwoons to develop their fighting skills. I was one of them who did not lose interest and move on to some other hobby. I’m still doing it and wonder at the precipitous decline of such an enormously popular pastime.

The same thing, it seems to me, is happening with Asian spiritual studies and practice. Like The Monster Mash, Hindu, Buddhist, and Taoist spirituality caught on in a flash during the 60s and 70s. I could argue that it wasn’t particularly authentic because it was watered down by various gurus and abbots for easier public consumption. Still, the melody lingers on. Hinduism and Buddhism are still enormously popular with the spiritually-minded. Tibetan Buddhism and Zen have kept a strong hold on peoples’ imaginations as esoteric variants on the major traditions. You still hear references to the Dharma and Karma in lunch-time conversations about designer enlightenment. Yoga is more popular than ever. On the Western side of things, P. D. Ouspensky and Madam Blavatsky still attract adherents. Apparently, if it ain’t that old-time rock and roll, it just ain’t got the same soul.

Despite the emergence into popular thought of quantum mechanics, many spiritual seekers still prefer the old traditions because of their arcane terminology and laborious and time-consuming practices. In addition, adherents get to wear very cool uniforms that signify their commitment to strange, but superior knowledge and its application to lives patterned on universal truths. Turbans are fashionable as well as dhotis, saris, and asana suits. The yoga mat is essential for progressive, spiritually-minded suburbanites. “To hell with modern innovations,” they proclaim. “We carry water and chop wood because that is the only officially-sanctioned way to progress in spiritual development.”

images-5

I wonder if the Buddha would have developed his characteristic line of thought had he been aware of the Observer Effect and collapse of the wave function? The point is that spiritual development and realization have moved on. The heady mix of neurobiology and quantum mechanics has outstripped the laborious practices of traditional spiritual systems. A seeker can now experience the levels of spiritual insight in seconds that took the traditionalists decades of meditation in solitude to achieve. Of course, you don’t get the same bragging rights about mastering a spiritual discipline that was a big part of practicing an established form of spirituality. If you can have enlightenment at the snap of a finger, you can’t earn the awe and respect of lesser mortals who are not inclined to devote their lives to struggle and self-denial in the name of something they can’t even imagine. That’s why the archaic traditions keep hanging on.

It’s time to get on with it, to adopt instantaneous change rather than enter a never-ending program of self-imposed inner conflict, which might lead to an Aha moment somewhere along the line. The issue here is really whether or not you want to be who you are. Becoming a surrogate Buddha or an imitation Lao-tze is not accepting and loving who you truly are. You don’t live in the fifth century B.C., and you don’t wear robes and sandals. You don’t fawn over enlightened gurus and pledge your life to “service” of those less fortunate than you. There is nothing wrong with you to begin with, so why beat yourself up in a vain attempt to become perfect? Be who you are; love who you are, and don’t be afraid to get in someone else’s face about it.

Onion Is as Onion Does

I don’t know if anyone is reading this stuff or even if there is anyone else “out there”, but what else is there to do with spacetime than move it around into different patterns?

I was thinking about onions. The onion itself, of course, is a made-up object that has form, mass, and weight. Everything “physical” that we make up is like that. It’s like time, space, and matter. They always go together, and you can’t have one without the other two. It’s like an eternal menage a trois. You pays your money and you take what you get. The onion, however, has always made useful analogies whenever you need to explain layers. As soon as you start to peel an onion you run into concentric layers that get smaller and smaller as you near the core of the onion. The onion represents a complete exterior that can be reduced layer by layer, showing what is inside, which is a series of identical layers that get smaller and smaller.

Now, if the onion is itself an illusion, a collapsed wave function that represents an onion and that we have named so that it can always appear that way to our consciousness, the discovery of its inner layers must have been a similar process, but experienced as a sequence. As you begin to remove the outermost layer of the onion for the first time, you don’t know what you are going to find beneath it. But your observation collapses the wave function of the onion into a slightly smaller onion that is very like the whole onion you first observed.

Where is your observational creativity? Why, when you removed the outermost layer of the onion, did you not discover an alternate reality that was like another world in your hand? Why did you observe just another surface almost exactly like the surface you just peeled away? It’s kind of like experiencing the same/old, same/old that is typical of our general experience of life–you wake up in the morning, and all you experience is another layer of the onion you observed before you went to bed the night before. No matter how many layers of the onion you peel away, all you get is more onion. Remember, a layer covers something, that is, hides it from view until the layer is removed, but why is there only more onion found under layer after layer of onion skin?

I think that the dilemma is caused by our observation of the onion in the first place. What might we find if we didn’t already know what an onion is? What if we called it a “gazonk” and had no expectation at all of what it was made of? Imagine what you might find under the layers of skin. Every newly-exposed layer could be a new universe of meaning. Every time you peeled a gazonk, you would boldly go where no one has gone before. Every layer would be a new dimension of experience, a new realization of infinite possibilities. Think of it as a cosmic onion that contains limitless worlds. Why not?

guide_to_7_chakras

Simply, because once you know what an onion is, it is always an onion. See the hidden equation there? You always find what you have already been taught to find when you observe an onion. An onion always equals an onion. There are no variables to change a known onion into a model of multiple universes. Without the variables, an onion cannot become a singularity. We overlook variables all the time. Because they don’t exist for us, we never experience a singularity. Variables are unknown factors that influence the outcome of an equation. Let’s stop running the same old equations that do not contain variables. Let’s allow for singularities. This means, everything that we experience happens on a case-by-case basis. There are no generalities, no statistical averages, and no common sense. Let’s stop living life as a fait accompli. Be curious, be playful, be open. You never know what you’ll find under the next layer of the onion.

When We Go with the Flow, Does the Flow Know?

I’m blogging today just for the sake of blogging. I have recently decided to stop promoting Jean’s and my book, Disobliging Reality, on social media. Generally, I found the participants to be quite young, inexperienced, and full of themselves. I could almost hear the giggles and titters surrounding the comments made on Twitter and Facebook about the most inane subjects and the storm of outrage and hostility aroused by predictably stereotypical scenarios showing various forms of victimization and injustice. It was like witnessing young children first learning that fire can be hot. If this sounds patronizing, it is. We are not all perfect equals in every respect, and respect itself is something that we must earn for ourselves.

Thus, I am not feeling sanguine about the future prospects of Disobliging Reality. It’s time has not yet arrived, and perhaps will never arrive. It is a quirky book, to be sure. It’s all about the illusory nature of the reality most of us take for granted, and what to do with that knowledge in our everyday lives. Sounds useful on the face of it, but I guess its utility is overshadowed by the inescapable persistence of the reality that is misleading everyone so dramatically. We are taught that reactive involvement in whatever the sensation of the day happens to be is a mark of community concern and good citizenship. It shows that we are sensitive, caring, and compassionate. It also shows how easily we can be led around by the nose.

Picture a mob of people gathered before an attraction at a carnival. Now imagine a carny barker holding a megaphone and shouting through it the location of an even more sensational attraction across the midway. As though one, the mob obediently runs to the next announced attraction and rapturously views it. Another barker makes his announcement of another attraction and the mob runs there. This continues uninterruptedly day after day. Every new illusory attraction has just as much appeal as the last one, so nobody gets bored. This, to me, is the nature of “the flow” that we are encouraged to “go with”. If there is an even greater flow of which the aforementioned flow is a part, everyone is too dazzled by the next attraction to perceive it.

Disobliging Reality is that innocent voice that points at the emperor and says, “But he doesn’t have any clothes on.” It points at an immensely popular illusion of reality and says, “But there really isn’t anything there.” It says that the flow you are experiencing is not the actual flow that is taking place. It also says that the flow knows when you are going with it and when you are not. The flow is consciousness itself so it is of necessity self-aware. You are an aspect of the flow when it knows itself. Otherwise, you are an aspect of a flow that is not self-aware and doesn’t know what the process of flowing is about. You are part of a mob running toward the next attraction.

images-2

So the flow knows, and when you know the flow, you are part of it. Most people are unacquainted with the flow and don’t even like the prospect of knowing it. It means letting go of whatever attraction you are holding onto that is keeping you out of the flow. Most people think that the endless series of attractions to which they are drawn is the flow because it appears to be a flow of attractions. Nah. Like the Shadow, who knows what distractions lurk in the hearts of men (in the generic sense), the flow knows. Let go and flow.

 

 

 

Inter-Spatial Flux

I can tell by the old solar calendar that it’s time for another blog. I have been trying to diagnose my current psycho-spiritual malaise, which keeps me from completely accepting my participation in a reality I no longer trust. I wrote about this condition in my (and Jean’s) book, Disobliging Reality. The nexus of this condition is my ongoing connection with Jean even though she no longer inhabits this spacetime. Quite simply, my heart is riven. I am obliged to continue participating in “this” while Jean proceeds with her development in “that”. Of course, “this” is just a spacetime physical version of “that” since both interpenetrate one another. Yet once one’s experience of “this” interacts with an experience of “that”, things are never the same. As I say in our book, “We walk between the worlds.”

I now have a little clearer understanding of what “walking between the worlds” involves. I got my clarification from an episode of Star Trek Enterprise. The episode is called “Twilight” in which Captain Archer’s brain is infected by parasites that exist outside of spacetime. This makes them almost impossible to destroy within a spacetime context. They are in a state of “inter-spatial flux”. I have concluded that my own consciousness has entered a state of inter-spatial flux wherein I participate in physical spacetime, yet on other levels inhabit that other reality that is beyond physical spacetime where my dearest beloved now exists.

images-3

Anyone who has endured the “loss” (only seemingly) of a beloved partner knows intuitively what I am talking about. Both emotionally and psychologically and, I suspect, even existentially, we live between the worlds, neither fully in this one, nor finally in that one. There are parts of us that are outside of ordinary spacetime while, concurrently, other parts of us are embedded in the dense physicality with which we are too familiar. We are in a state of inter-spatial flux. In one sense, it is a kind of hell, but in another it is a preview of wonders to come, especially if one is in contact with his or her partner from time to time.

It’s a matter of “how ya gonna keep ’em down on the farm after they’ve seen Paree?” Life in this spacetime reality is farm life compared with what awaits us in the Paree beyond. So we yearn for what is not yet and cannot fully enjoy what is. This state of indeterminacy, this experience of frisson, of unrelieved disquiet, is the flux that dominates our days in this spacetime reality. It is by definition inter-spatial as it spans two very different loci for our consciousness and the focus of our love.

As with any diagnosis, there is some relief or reassurance once our condition is given a name. The name is not the condition, of course, and it confers on the condition a reality that it may not in fact have. But inter-spatial flux is just enough “out there”, just enough not-of-this-world, and just enough indeterminate to serve as a temporary anchor for our confused state of grief and dislocation. I believe that Captain Archer’s condition was removed by a proton beam implosion, which, by destroying the parasite’s physical presence in Archer’s brain, also destroyed the timeline of its development, erasing its historical development and restoring Archer’s spacetime existence before the parasites ever appeared.

I feel certain that something like that will occur once I join my dearest partner outside of spacetime. We will be restored to a shared state of being that preexists before our perceived separation ever seemed to “happen”.

Helping the Disgruntled

The majority of people are disgruntled in one way or another by “the world around them”. When it is suggested that there is no world around them, they become even more disgruntled. How can they become “engruntled” when every action they take to de-disgruntle themselves is futile? The answer, of course, is to stop being disgruntled in the first place, thus obviating the need for the de-disgruntling process. But they assume that being disgruntled is a sign that they have diagnosed a real problem. It is taken as a sign that they have transcended the world around them by becoming able to recognize its faults and limitations. It’s the faults and limitations that create the disgruntled state. Note how this equation creates a never-ending loop of disgruntling. The first error is to take the world around you as a given. Now you have cause for disgruntling to occur. Being disgruntled is being irritated and annoyed by something. The feeling of irritation and annoyance confirms the fact that there is something triggering the irritation and annoyance. The feeling feeds the cause, not the other way around. So, being told that there is no cause and therefore no reason to become irritated and annoyed only irritates and annoys the disgruntled even more. The hidden pay-off here is the quality of righteousness associated with being irritated and annoyed.

The irritated and annoyed, that is, the disgruntled, have standards. It’s the failure of the world around them to live up to these standards that is so irritating and annoying. To tell these sensitive souls that there is no world around them takes away the basis for their righteousness. They no longer have any way of confirming that they are right about the world around them and that its performance is dismal. Further, they no longer have a basis for evaluating themselves as arbiters of what is right. The whole me-and-the-world-around-me dynamic simply crumbles. There is no longer a me and an it, or a me and them because there is no longer a way to distinguish one from the other. With no world around me, there is just me, and who am I? What do I have to be irritated and annoyed about? What is there to make me disgruntled?

But then I no longer have anything to be right about and no standards to hold the world around me to. Is this chaos? Is this anarchy? Well, determining chaos uses standards and so does anarchy. You have to have something that precedes both in order to recognize them when they appear. Both imply disorder. So, you need to have order before you can get chaos and anarchy. But what precedes order? Apparently, chaos and anarchy. This little conundrum could prove to be irritating and annoying. Is it some sort of mobius strip?

wave

Here’s a thought. When we become disgruntled with the world around us, we are simply pretending that everything is purely linear and sequential. We can’t see ourselves looping and twisting back on ourselves. We can’t see the world around us as the world within us closing a loop that we ourselves are shaping. We believe that there are scissors that cut the loop and straighten it into a linear path from us to the world around us. That is, if we can conceive of a twisted loop to begin with. We see things go out, and we see things come in. We can’t see the loop because we are inside of it. That’s not the same thing as having “the world around us”. It’s more a matter of having ourselves around us and mistaking ourselves for the world. After all, what can we confirm outside of ourselves when we are unconscious? Can we gather evidence? Can we apply deductive reasoning? Can we interrogate witnesses? Not while we are unconscious. We have to be consciously ourselves before we can verify that there is a world around us. Again, what comes first, order or chaos?