Learning from Time Obsession-Free

This is the first post of the Q&A category. Namely, a reader asked the following interesting question:

“How do we learn from possible futures without becoming obsessed with the future?”

Those who seek to awaken their potentials of awareness, are often challenged to confront their relationship with time. They are challenged to experience permanent residence in the present moment. In parallel, they are challenged to understand the past, and to navigate the future. This may sound counterintuitive, but from the perspective of grounded and applicable esoteric wisdom, the future is the least important of the three standard temporal references.

In some of the more marketed versions of metaphysical thought there is the notion that the higher dimensions of time refer to everything occurring at once. There is, in other words, only the present and future and past coexist in it. Another perspective associated with the previous is the notion that everything has already occurred in all its variations, and we are just running a thread through one version or probability of happenings.

Our common reason gets to stretch beyond comfort zones with these notions, and especially where their logical implications or conclusions are concerned. Yet all too often we are prone to paint ourselves into a corner and end up arguing against our free will, all in the name of objective reason. So let me say that I will only pursue models of reality that don’t turn me into an automaton of fate, or even some stale form of Divine Will.

This is not my own wishful thinking talking. We obsess because we stress, and we stress because we’re trapped and insecure by the way our mind interprets things. It is not the fault of our response. That is to say, trying to simply not be stressed, or not be obsessed, is not the solution. It isn’t even healthy. I would instead suggest altering the model of perception and evaluation toward a form that allows natural response to lead to empowerment.

Even so the more ‘realistic objectivists’ among us might call this approach wishful thinking. I disagree. Choosing unhealthy world-views in the name of Murphy’s Law (basically the “Life Sucks” model) posing as realism is the less rational attitude in my opinion. It isn’t only dysfunctional, but it happens to help those who would want us weakened by despair and confused in the labyrinth of our own callous reasoning so they could manipulate us against our own interests.

My point is that trafficking in the future is like drinking a good wine with one’s meal. It helps digestion and makes for a good mood when imbibed in moderation. But it can make you sick if you indulge in large doses. You certainly cannot live on it for very long.

Instead of looking at the future as something set, let’s look at it as a void of potential, a field of any-thing and no-thing. Any-thing is possible, but no-thing is what the future is. In addition, the more probable or likely to occur outcomes can be traced to the past via our here and now.

Our positioning in the present moment- our presence- with respect to this void determines how the past looks to us. How the past looks to us determines how we can best use our experience to chart our course. This, in turn, alters what is more and less probable to unfold out of the field of no-thing that is the future.

The most important consideration in this is that the present moment is our position of empowerment. The present is the only real temporal frame. It is where we always are. Orientation in this frame, however, is still a choice. We can face the future or face the past. In modern western culture “living in the past” is discouraged, while looking ahead is praised.

On the contrary most every source of wisdom from our collective past advices to remain in the present. Where do we look? What is more real, the past or the future? I say it’s the past because we have experienced it. We don’t have to live in it, because it is already in us. We can look and evaluate all it has taught us.

The future cannot teach us anything. It doesn’t exist until it becomes the present. If we look for it all we do is project our preconceptions onto a blank screen. Because there will always be uncertainty with the future, our preconceptions will most likely be weaved with fear, or at the very least with degrees of insecurity. We will be challenged to compensate with faith or calculations of the most ‘objectified’ reasoning ‘just to be sure’.

Intuition might be delusional because we are not in the present moment where it naturally operates. Anxiety is the prime sign of disconnecting with the present in our temporal assessments. Anxiety begets obsession. We gnaw at something to make sure we leave no stone unturned. We hold on in fear it will bite us or worse if we let go; or we fear we will lose it somehow and cause things to derail out of control.

My recommendation, in a nutshell, is to practice being present first. The simplest way is to feel one’s own body in space. Time is connected to space and the body is always in the present. The mind then grounds, and in a relaxed state one can open to intuition via the great record banks of experience, one’s own and via all the information at one’s disposal. It is that which then calculates the probabilities that appear to be the “possible futures” facing us.

Let me confess that I practice methods of divination. I use Tarot cards, a pendulum and sometimes the I Ching to help assess the flow of probability. It is easy to obsess and even get somewhat addicted when using divination. Experience and determination, however, are great teachers in inhibiting projection beyond the present moment.

Whether using a method of divination or one’s intuition and inner guidance, one can see, sense, feel and/or cogitate the patterns of probability that flow through the present. The past teaches, the future is acceptable when we associate the lessons with the probabilities extending from them and work to making them happen. How that can happen is beyond the scope of this presentation, and any single answer. Just turn your back on the future, remain in the present and learn from the past. Then obsession should be kept at bay.

 

Thinking the US Election

There is much ado about the US election process, mostly among Americans (citizens of the United States, in other words). As usual the citizens are tasked by the establishment to pick the lesser of two evils. One individual likened this to one of those games I remember some of my friends liked to play when I was a child living in the US (and even when I was a University student much to my chagrin).

This is the distasteful to me challenge of being given two and only two options, amounting to being forced to opt between a rock and a hard place, or even more accurately, between the frying pan and the fire. In this particular instance the choice given was: put the kitty in the microwave or the blender. And if the cat-loving victim of the “challenge” opts out and says “neither”, then the promoter claims they are guaranteeing the poor kitty a gruesome death.

All this, of course, is compared with the argument that if you don’t vote for what you think is the lesser of two evils, one of two evils will be elected. If you do vote, one of two evils will still be elected, but at least you’re participating in the system.

Let’s take a step back and think for a moment. The friend who shared this actually did so in the context of being amazed at how little thinking is being done…anywhere. So let me prove that at least some thinking is being done. Nothing to write home about, but at least it won’t involve thought experiments with cooked kitties.

First consideration: being pressured to choose between two and only two options is hopefully about participating in a game. Even then, the game is considered to be rigged. When such conditions are imposed in real life it is called coercion. If the choices amount to the hang man’s noose or the electric chair the result is still death. If they involve electing a powerful political figure then we are talking of pseudo-democracy, effectively amounting to dictatorship that escalates to tyranny and from there enslavement. Not that there is much difference between the three terms in my book.

But imagine someone telling you that unless you choose the noose or the chair, you are contributing to your own demise. Imagine someone telling you that in a democracy you have no choice that matters. Imagine them getting angry if you reject their conditions and seek a third option. Who are these people?

Second consideration: It is assumed that if you are not instrumental actively in your own enslavement then you must be passively instrumental in it. But if you are told you only have the options dictated to you (it’s what dictators do), then rightfully you will do whatever anyone against their enslavement does: seek to create an alternative option.

If you are not free, then you are challenged to create or establish your freedom. It is not by magic, and it doesn’t occur in an instant. It isn’t even guaranteed success. But unless you reject the options given, where will you find the space and the time and the energy to proceed?

Third consideration: These days we can barely think. Thinking hurts when the brain is saturated with toxins, Wi-Fi, and let’s not forget the mindless cultural stimuli shoved in every mental orifice like so much fetish overkill. As if that weren’t enough, we have increasing trends of bullying where stupid people have fun hunting down anyone showing signs of sporting a brain cell or two more than them.

Spice the mix with a media engineered to lobotomize as they saturate the info-stream with so much sewage that it’s infected the so-called “alternative” forms.

Unless brain cell inflammation has atrophied the thinking process, the lucid individual in my book cannot help but conclude that so many converging factors are by design. And if that is so then there are those who think and think and think and pay those loyal to them to think even more all to keep us from thinking and worse.

Then there is the question of doing. Thinking and doing appear to be divorced and at each other’s throats these days. When the otherwise well matched couple get together and find harmony, they inspire people toward making a difference. But those who rock the boat of someone’s master plan tend to “disappear” if the waves they make are more pervasive than think-tanks predict they “should” be.

Given all the above, it is a miracle we don’t just shuffle into our graves like good little lemmings. That’s why I say one should nod in approval to any thinker. Should you, however, find an individual who both thinks and acts accordingly then it is cause for celebration. You should organize a holiday in their honor, throw them a party, with a parade and awards and accolades, ice cream (organic) and cake (homemade with the finest ingredients). That is how rare it is.

And one should hurry because the thinking/doing person, if they are heard and make a difference and fire up the grass roots of society for real, may have an accident sooner than later. But none of the above need lead us to despair. Even though thinking is rare and acting on it even rarer, we are challenged to a counterintuitive path if we want to make it through the think tank obstacle course.

This is how I see it:

We are challenged to think together, to think beyond our apparent places in this world, to think according to what is not obvious and to act in ways that think tanks cannot chart even if we are all butt-bare for them to data mine at their leisure.

Thinking may be short-circuited in most today. But as people and their antics appear- or are made to appear- to get dumber and dumber we are faced with an opportunity to think differently. Consider that we have more than just the brain in our heads. There are functioning neural nets around the heart and in the gut, that only the anti-thinking types would want to ignore.

Our body/mind (note it is ‘both/and’, not ‘either/or’) is more than a mass of programmable genetic wetware. It is one of Nature’s greater miracles as far as I’m concerned, and we are blessed with it; or rather we are it. Thinking need not be the thinking we have thought- as we have been taught- to think it is.

And that is the kind of thinking that will give social engineering psychopathic tyrants a run for their homicidal machinations. Or so I think. 😉

Reality Sculpting 101: II. Facing The Challenge

Reality sculpting is not the same as creating reality from nothing. It does not mean we say “behold”, wave a wand and the Hollywood effects take over. Nature expresses with a certain economy for a reason. Bypassing, defying or even transforming that economy are possible in my view, but also in my view, not readily, nor easily done. I do not think it is wise to consider reality sculpting in terms of a simple technique one can apply in the matter of mental, spiritual or life-force gymnastics.

At the same time reality sculpting is natural. It is potentially an art for those who would engage thoughtfully and creatively in its possibilities. I want to approach the issue of reality sculpting because we live at a time in history when it seems that our reality is being literally forced toward ends that would very likely horrify us if we had the full picture of that situation.

In this state of affairs we are challenged to learn to breath and live and see and think outside the box. Much of the time, however, outside the box means being incoherent in the face of conditioned reasoning. It, therefore, takes time to acclimate and gain a sense of being ok with “different” thinking, feeling etc.

The enthusiast in alternative thinking soon realizes they cannot drag everyone else outside the box with them. Social programming enforces a reality context that is like a maze of confusion. In this maze, there is low visibility with no straight lines, and no clear outcomes. Simply pushing to visualize, affirm and will one’s chosen reality frame, because of the rigged status of that maze, will get us nowhere but believing in nothing but the futility of hope.

Anything that appears more rational and direct is likely out of a menu of memes we have been taught to respect and designed to get us in one of many chess game extensions of chasing our tails and wasting what meager resources we have left. The way things stand, it appears people cannot be forced out of denial. They cannot be talked into waking up. They cannot be un-brainwashed by another’s intellectual arguments, nor by emotional plea.

Going out and organizing revolution followed by counter-revolution is well and good, but it has been factored into the “game plan”. I would say that if we want a possibility to be globally fruitful it is best to consider those the establishment doesn’t credit or understand, or better yet, cannot even perceive.

Those are the issues I feel we are challenged to address before any semblance of tangible and lasting reality correction ensues via the power of our direct intentions. In this state of affairs it appears to me that there are many who want nothing more than to be told where the off switch to their problems is. I’m relieved things don’t work that way. It would be a very bland universe if they did. It is not, and I don’t see workable simple answers in this tangled web of ours. The challenge we are called to face here is rather to think beyond how we are conditioned to think.

Somehow we know we need to think for ourselves. We are encouraged in western culture to do so, in fact, but that does not mean the practice is genuine. Instead we are mostly told by authority figures and experts what and how to think, and even threatened with reprisals that sound reasonable (like incarceration and drugging) to those most programmed.

I can understand how so many are fed up with being told what to do these days. Yet they probably don’t question authority much, since anyone who is not an expert and authority is just an asshole venting hot air most of the time. At most they only have an opinion, which is pretty close to an asshole in most people’s regard, I would say.

The internet seems to be full of blow holes these days. It is hard to tell them apart from those who know what they are talking about. Hell, I can’t come up with good arguments for myself in that regard. I just hope readers can grasp the notion of an outside the box perspective beyond the cliché. I hope paradox is not equated with bullshit, but can be seen as reason beyond social programming.

Where reality sculpting is concerned there are those who discourage themselves and others with an all or nothing attitude. Anyone attempting to support psychic means of changing reality for the better- if I am not wealthy, healthy and happy- is not credible. If reality sculpting hasn’t solved everything or even one single important thing in the life of its advocate (mostly concerned with monetary stability) then it isn’t worth a glance, let alone the actual commitment required to make it work.

At face value it’s a reasonable condition. Someone who assumes they can wish their way to desired outcomes, when disappointed, can resort to either fatalism or the standard rout of applying themselves in mundane ways, legally or illegally, with or without moral integrity. If they are disappointed further their consolation is that at least they’re being realistic.  

Reasonable as the sentiment may be, it is not a product of deep and thoughtful analysis nor even intuitive insight. I want to address the topic, being aware that I am not the first nor will I be the last to do so. I want to address it because the critique is to be expected in any promotion of reality sculpting, and because I trust in the intrinsic value of this view to shed some light on an easily misunderstood topic. 

There are reasons why the situation is not so simple as a “law of attraction” would have it. There are reasons why it only appears to work for a minority, and it is not because they are doing things right. There are measures we can take as well, but it means expanding our view toward a bigger picture than just material or spiritual gain. I want to continue this series because it interests me, but I think it can be useful to those who have not thrown the baby out with the bathwater in their disappointment in reality sculpting.

At the same time, I won’t hesitate in critiquing the oversimplified perspectives that for whatever reason are made popular, and which have done more damage to the possibilities of positive reality sculpting maturing in our culture than any form of ridicule or modern day witch-hunt could do. So let me roll up my sleeves and stay tuned.  

Reality Sculpting 101: I. Changing Beliefs

The idea of creating one’s own reality is not new, neither philosophically nor esoterically. No matter what one’s opinion on the matter is, and regardless of how much has been said and done about it, I would say it still pays to examine it in depth.

It appears to me that the ideology of creating one’s reality has been misunderstood; marketed in a superficial manner, oversimplified and exaggerated in unrealistic ways. Some claim it works, many have been disappointed by it, and most don’t seem to give it the time of day. Whether reality is created by beliefs or not, altering one’s own deeply rooted notions is not that easy.

To add insult to injury, we live in a world where we are under constant belief programming. Some have named this state of affairs “the matrix”. It propagates in all our relation and is amplified via the latest technologies promoted for that purpose. We may alter beliefs within the context of the matrix of reality indoctrination, but beyond it there are obstacles not easy to overcome.

I would say the first step would be to ensure we can alter belief before worrying about changing the reality it represents. I view this notion to be largely misunderstood. A few affirmations are not going to do it. Faking it isn’t either, because the very notion contradicts that you actually believe in what you are doing.

In any case, I want to present basics of practice as I understand it. Such practice is not a cure-all for all the ills reality may be shoving down our throats. It is a start. I will, therefore, return to the topic to develop it further and work with it myself. It may actually be educational.

At this stage I think it is safe to say that positive effects are more likely when practice is consistent. It also helps when negative and positive emotional feedback experienced without condemnation. The mental feedback or backtalk is best set aside as just words. Thus a playful attitude is adopted instead of one that is critical, desperate or involves faking.

It is important to be rooted in the understanding that beliefs are not the same as reality attributes. They are especially not attributes of self. I am not what I believe. I may believe I am ugly, and that may cause a shift in my form in that direction, but that shift can easily shift back. It is not indicative of me, per se.

The challenge of this playful attitude is to assume self is inviolate, where beliefs are concerned. The latter may alter the shape and course of things, but not their essence. In this understanding form follows the expression of psyche, and it pays for it to change into what more naturally represents our deeper sense of meaning.

That deeper sense may be unrealized because our energy is invested belief-wise elsewhere. We want to remove that investing energy and place it where it matters more, all the while being aware that physical reality has a powerful momentum and staying power, something that goes without saying. Thus patience is another challenging quality in which to invest.

It is also important to observant so as to notice how things develop without condemnation or imposing optimism in the situation. Critical evaluation involves coming to conclusions, which is another form of imposing beliefs, or rather reinforcing the old ones more often than not. This is an art of sorts that comes naturally to children, at least prior to the aggressive social indoctrination hoisted upon them.

Children play, but the notion of faking doesn’t realty come in. The felt quality is different in play than it is in deliberate hypocrisy. That felt quality is a must for both belief change and the reality conditions to follow it. Children also take their games very seriously, but without losing playfulness. They do not much think about the end of their imaginary game because they are having too much fun playing it. Their passion is in the process.

It may be useful to view beliefs as scripts in which one has invested. Change the script via playful imagination. Transfer the invested energy- emotion, passion sense of life- to the new script and play it in imagination. That part of the process can be challenging when one’s emotions represent an investment of self in the old script. Investment is of one’s life force and expressive potentials, not one’s sense of being. Self is what benefits from the belief, not what feeds it, not in a healthy scenario.

All our beliefs are tied together forming a web or matrix of reality scripting. Some are rigidly tied and some loosely. Forcing change of beliefs that amounts to beating oneself up is counterproductive to say the least. But to keep ourselves from engaging in counterproductive activity, obvious or not, it helps to be mindful of what goes on when we examine and playfully alter our scripts.

It also helps to engage in inner dialogue from a second person perspective. Beliefs are not us. So using the first person can fall on deaf ears. However, when young and impressionable our beliefs were often forged by statements stated in the second person- “you are”, “you do” etc. I suggest trying that instead of the often used “I am this” or “I do this” approach.

In conclusion, forging a new script or reality frame may involve revelations of beliefs being in conflict, or even causing conflict as old beliefs come into contact with newly scripted ones. Thus the process may not be as straightforward as popularized formats would have us “believe”.

As this is an involved topic, I will continue with it. There are questions here. Are will and imagination always aligned? Is willpower the guide for imagination or is it the other way around? How do I remove my investment from the collective belief bank when the bankers impose capital controls? In other words, what if I feel threatened every time I seek to liberate my life force, emotional will and sense of being from being entrapped by imposed belief structures. That is for the next installment.

For now I would say this: it is far worse to not notice that investment in beliefs is a rigged system than be discomforted by the dissonance of the situation. Dissonance may well be the first sign of success.

The Demonizing of our Inner Resources

I’ve been doing videos with an online friend of mine, Ron Van Dyke since 2013 if memory serves. It was kind of fun, sitting there just talking about things that interested me. A few times there would even be dialog, but mostly it was just me releasing the hounds of personal viewpoint, as it were.

Ron and I share a certain common mindset, one that I have seen attacked and even touted as a sign one is a ‘shill’. It goes something like this: addressing the issues of humanity from a purely mundane framework of conventional or even unconventional reasoning- including religious and philosophical reasoning- is not going to resolve the situation, nor even make a dent in it. To me it is a conclusion akin to one definition of insanity: approaching a problem in the same impotent manner, always hoping for a different outcome.

In effect most who realize all is not right with the world appear to think that applying this or that system, philosophy, financial or social/psychological approach can make a difference. In comparison, anyone suggesting a different and paradoxical way is marginalized, and can be bullied and ridiculed. Even worse they might become a cultural icon and hence a caricature and joke of all they claim meaningful.

The aforementioned state of affairs- the demonization of the real inner alternative approaches- is more than a little bothersome to me. When definitions of what is ‘good’ vs. what is ‘bad’ thinking are ironed out people can cease to think. Instead they tend to refer to the menu of definitions and feel very intelligent in the process. Call it the frugality of mental function or its delusional tendencies.

In any case, I too am oversimplifying for the sake of making a point. Ron and I understand that the way things are, we need more than a physical revolution or a new system to redeem our species, and all other life on this planet, from the suffering it endures at the hands of human psychopathy/sociopathy. Where Ron believes only a transcendent Divine Creator (or rather the Creator) can make a difference, I ascribe to the view that human beings have it in them to awaken alternative resources of heart, mind, body and spirit to engage at a depth of meaning with the conditions of existence necessary for results to be satisfactory for all. In fact, I would say that kind of cultivation has been part of the ‘Divine Plan’ all along.

Unfortunately, the depths of which I speak have been simplified, conceptually packaged and reworked by the deluded and opportunistic. The possibilities have certainly been corrupted by malicious individuals working for the pro-global enslaving establishment known colloquially as ‘shills’. The umbrella label used to demonize our inner resources as been known by many names, and over the last several decades as “New Age Thought”. Indeed the meme has so many facets I find myself singing its praises one minute and criticizing the shit out of it the next.

Finding one’s self on the schizoid seesaw of love/hate with a contrived meme is not flattering when you come down to it. It is damn humbling, and to me underlines the need for a discerning filter to make sure babies don’t end up down the drain with dirty bath waters. And therein lies the challenge.

We don’t like racial, religious or gender labels, especially when it is our race, religion or gender that is labelled. But we still apply them wherever we are not put on the spot by this or that ‘correctness’ mindset. New Age is a label. It does not reflect reality except in the sense that a minority of promoters of pseudo-spiritual crap have run with it. The rest is often the result of ignorant human nature, one of the greatest resources of tyranny throughout the ages.

Interestingly, many of those who keep claiming that we have to research and investigate seem to do nothing of the sort where this label is concerned. They (to use the pronoun common among the paranoid and deluded) mix ascension with awakening, Satanism with occultism, magic with trickery (although it can be, but not always), connecting with non-corporeal existence (which can be anything from the essence of other life forms to something beyond our comprehension of space-time) with the religiously demonic.

They associate psychopathic and sadistic practices with the reverence of nature, and religion with mysticism- rarely compatible. As a result of the labelling there is division among those who think rationally, and even between those who explore the trans-rational but in different ways. Yet it is common for individuals (as ‘normal’ and nonviolent as anyone) who are into ritual magic to make fun of ‘new agers’, and individuals with strong pro-ascension beliefs being wary of black magic wherever an occult ritual is involved.  Christians on the other hand consider ‘new agers’ and occultists as peas in a ‘Satanic’ pod when they clearly mix as well as oil and water.

Instead of falling into the traps of the labels, lets consider the following: Esoteric potentials (expressed in ways mystical, occult, alchemical, shamanic, psychic etc.), known to humanity since time immemorial and monopolized by those who would control others from well before the dawn of known history, are a potential resource we need to examine as we would any promising application. We- always meaning those who naturally feel inclined in this direction- need to explore it privately and in creatively minded groups in healthy ways, free of new age, religious or pseudo-occult trappings, after first identifying what those trappings are. It is always important to save the babies and let the bathwater drain away.

There are, and have always been, interests against this kind  of thing. We have enough history of persecution and disinformation regarding esoteric potentials under our collective belt so that the ones benefiting from our weakness need not do much to get us pointing fingers and derailing any possibility of taking something that is our birthright seriously. But if those of us who are so inclined dare to move forward, there is the promise- albeit not the guarantee- of learning to create our reality, and maybe really help make things right for once. In any case,  as it stands it appears either nobody is doing it deliberately or only those who have little regard for life. Or perhaps we are in the humble beginnings of something truly wonderful. I, for one, like to think so.