a response to a reader's comment

Is there a cosmic struggle between Good and Evil?

Portraying a cosmic struggle between good and evil, the Harry Potter series does its small part to contribute to a dysfunctional group-mind here on planet Earth.

This cinematic fantasy is a warmed over, modernized version of the ancient religious error of a mythological Satan standing in opposition to God.

But evil has no ontological basis, has no substance, is not real, is merely the good turned inside out; there is only the good, and everything, from a larger perspective, that God does and allows is good; what appears to be evil inevitably works for good.

There is no cosmic contest as popularly conceived but only ego-insane individuals asserting themselves on a world stage.

READ MORE

When someone hurts or betrays us, how can we forgive in a deep sense, how can we regain an unblemished, pristine image of that person?

Allow me to draw our attention to an extremely important concept introduced in Krishnamurti's lecture of Jan 15, 1964.

He speaks of the unsullied mind, undefiled and unblemished mind. This is a mind, he says, spotless and unpolluted, that is not burdened by sordid images of the past.

And, of course, the most troublesome example here is how we view others. We see them, or might bring them to mind, and immediately recall some insult, a slighting, an infraction.

READ MORE

What is the ego? - it is the part of ourselves which believes itself to be, or has identified with, the body.

Dr. Federico Faggin, interview with Bernie Beitman:

What is the ego? The ego is what we think we are. The ego is a portion of myself, part of the vaster self which does not exist in spacetime, the portion of myself that believes itself to be the body [which does exist in spacetime]. This means that the ego pays attention only to those [electrical/chemical] signals produced by the body.

Scientism says, “That’s all there is, just physical matter,” but the body [with the brain] is a filter shielding us from a deeper reality, the higher self. The ego is conscious only of an infinitesimal amount of information, only a tiny fraction gets through the filter, that would be available from the deeper reality, the higher self. Enlightenment is breaking through this filter and accessing the deeper reality and higher self.

Why are we here on the Earth?

We're here “to eliminate the distortions of who we are and what reality is – in other words, to know ourselves,” to discover that we are much more than the physical body and connected to a vast unseen reality.

a computer has no interiority, no avenue to qualia, no concept of meaning or comprehension, but exists only as a collection of on-off switches and cannot rise higher than its programming

Dr. Federico Faggin, Silicon:

“Perception is the process that translates the electromagnetic and electrochemical activities of the brain and body into qualia.

Editor’s note: Qualia are the inner feelings one experiences, for example, when encountering the scent of a rose. A computer is able to recognize an image of a rose, but it has no interior sensations or qualia concerning the smell of a rose or the painful feeling of being stung by a rose thorn.

“We experience the world through qualia, but qualia are neither electrical signals not bits stored in memory… When we say we are conscious, we mean that we perceive qualia – that we have an inner experience based on sensations and feelings. A digital computer that has an image in its memory produced by a digital camera is not at all aware of that image as qualia, even though it has the data that inform our qualia. Qualia are the carriers of meaning. The process of obtaining meaning from qualia is called comprehension…

“At this point you could ask: ‘What is the difference between consciously acquired meaning and the unconscious learning acquired by a computer? If the results are the same, what difference does consciousness make?’ In fact, many researchers consider consciousness as unnecessary to achieve intelligent behavior. For them, a machine can be as intelligent or even smarter than any human being, with or without consciousness.

“This view is based on an inadequate definition of intelligence that does not consider the fundamental, creative aspects of comprehension, intuition, insights, and imagination.

"That same reductionist mindset neglects the fact that without consciousness we would be zombies and life would have no meaning or purpose.

Editor’s note: Qualia – meaning, comprehension -- cannot be reduced to electrical signals, computer bits, or mathematical algorithm. This is why Nobel Laureate Sir Roger Penrose, along with many others, has asserted, “Consciousness is not a computation,” which means that the higher, creative levels of intelligence will never be accessed by computers, which are, forever, mere machines. If AI becomes a threat in the future, it could occur not by an uprising of the machines - they could never have a concept of 'uprising' - but by totalitarian humans who would use the machines to enslave mankind.

“On the other hand, when the consciousness of a human being is completely identified with the body and with the logical mind [what we call the ego], the person’s creative potential remains largely unused, and his behavior may become just as mechanical as that of a computer.”

READ MORE  on the 'consciousness' page

How we think about God, how we mentally image Divinity, affects the entire subsequent flow of our theology. We will treat others, and ourselves, as we imagine God treating us - it is creating God in our own image.

There are various models of the nature and meaning of “God”.

#1. the top-down command-style model of authority

READ MORE

before one might credibly address the biology of evolution, one must begin with chemistry

Editor’s note: On the “evolution” page, I have offered 100+ articles discussing various errors of Darwinism and the merits of Intelligent Design. There are many excellent teachers and researchers from whom we can learn much. However, if pressed to choose a favorite, I might have to vote for Dr. James Tour.

Dr. James Tour is considered to be one of the top ten chemists in the world, and one of the top fifty scientists. The level of knowledge and insight he brings to the discussion of evolution is astonishing. He informs us that organic chemistry serves as basis of biology, and, therefore, before one might credibly address the biology of evolution, one must begin with chemistry.

It is a popular myth supporting Darwinism that "simple" cell life is nothing more than a glob of protoplasm. For a long time, however, we’ve known that there is no such thing as “simple” life, but this error continues to be repeated and promoted in textbooks.

The intricate processes of even the “simplest” cell – as there is no such thing as simple life – because even the simplest consists not just of mind-numbing complexity, plus a vast array of functions that must all work in concert, immediately, or not at all. This bewildering byzantine complexity grows yearly with new discoveries.

'more time' does not help Darwinism at the level of chemistry

Further, Darwinists’ salvation, that of “more time” eventually making pigs fly, will not offer benefit, for, as Dr. Tour points out, the processes of the cell, many of them, on the level of chemistry, are so fragile, and so short-lived, that the component chemicals quickly degrade and break down into different chemicals. More time actually works against evolution on the level of chemistry.

It is the biologists, typically, not understanding the inner-world details of organic chemistry, who make grand and unwarranted pronouncements concerning “life created in a test-tube” and similar. This is nonsense, says Professor Tour.

The media then takes these sensational statements and aggrandizes the error even more as fake-news. And now we have many millions of people who believe in the myths of an artificial synthesizing of life.

We today are actually much farther away from discovering the constituents of life than we were in 1952 with the Miller-Urey experiments. This is so because we are continually learning of greater and greater complexities within the cell, all of which pushes back any final understanding of origins in this area.

But, if all you knew were the brash statements from the popular press, you’d think that everything is already mapped out and all done. We are nowhere near that, and our horizon of ignorance ever recedes.

READ MORE

'the truth is not a fragile thing and will eventually rise to the top of a heap of competing ideas'

Physicist Tom Campbell, in clear language, explains the history and significance of the quantum mechanics revolution of 100 years ago, how its implications were denied by materialists, and why, as Tom sees it, its proper explication might lead to a better world, free from the power-control-force paradigm afflicting all of us today.

READ MORE

Krishnamurti lecture:

27.May.1965. Sanity means no contradiction within, a state in which thought and action correspond. Virtue is not a continuous, fixed phenomenon but order reborn from moment to moment. Most do not want freedom inwardly as it implies standing completely alone, without a guide, a system, without following any authority; and that requires enormous order within oneself. There is a beauty which is not the result of a stimulant, and cannot exist without great simplicity. Simplicity is not a matter of possessions but comes when there is clarity of self-knowing.

READ MORE

Emerson: Man is his own star [his own source of light and truth]. Trust thyself: every heart vibrates to that iron string. Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind.

These precepts of sacred individualism, offered by Emerson, are even more important in the next life.

READ MORE

'What is belief? - a state, not an act, of the mind.'  

Augustus De Morgan (1806-1871)

'It is not in the power of anyone to alter his state [of mind] by will. [There is] a tendency to suppose that [mere] profession [of mental position] might be taken for belief; the dishonest wanted only profession.'

READ MORE

beauty is not in the thing

Jiddu Krishnamurti, September 24, 1967, London: “Like love, beauty is not the cultivation of thought. A thing of beauty is not beauty. Beauty is not in the thing, in the building, in the person; but there is that beauty which is not the result of conditioning, in which thought in no way interferes.”

The sense of beauty is an opinion, a judgment, concerning the good and the true.

Beauty issues not from one's “hardware” but “software,” the “programming.”

READ MORE

the love sonnets of Elizabeth Barrett Browning

She didn’t want to publish them, felt these 44 love poems to be far too personal and invasively revealing. However, husband Robert strongly encouraged her to share them with the world; the very best produced, he judged, since Shakespeare.

See my "Editor's expanded paraphrase" of each love poem.

READ MORE

'know thyself'

"Know thyself" represents some of the most ancient wisdom of this world. It was inscribed upon the Greek temple of Apollo at Delphi.

And today, a leader in the new science of consciousness, Dr. Federico Faggin – also the inventor of the first microprocessor in 1971 – asserts that the most fundamental characteristic of Universal Consciousness is that of self-knowing. All of cosmic evolution, Faggin suggests, is driven by Consciousness desiring to know itself.

We ourselves are derivatives, "made in the image," of Universal Consciousness, possessing, in embryonic form, all of its major traits.

And isn’t it interesting that, if we self-obfuscate and refuse to “know thyself,” the very first thing that happens to us upon crossing over is to be “sent to remedial education”, dark detention, where we will remain, until we agree, agree with ourselves, to fulfill our primary mandate.

READ MORE

'my truth and your truth' is a cachet and fashionable prevarication  

We cannot credibly discuss the pursuit of truth – the queen of the Great Ideas – without first securing its crisp definition. The concept of truth, like almost every other good thing in our totalitarian-leaning world, has been politicized and massaged into irrelevance: “my truth and your truth” is a common fraudulent statement. We’ll get to the bottom of this fashionable prevarication.

READ MORE

One of the universe’s great paradoxes:

true spirituality, one’s higher sentience, a better level of consciousness, is not obtained by working very hard, by religious rituals, by prayer, fasting, vow, or pilgrimage - but simply by quietly observing the inner disorder

What is it like?

It is like planting an acorn; within, lies dormant a towering, mighty oak. But how is this bold expression of floral life brought to manifestation? - not by great effort or trying very hard, not by “seizing” for advantage...

READ MORE

A room filled with a battery of electronic sensing devices, monitoring every nuance of motion, heat, and sound, but the evidence is summarily rejected by radical skeptics.

Professor Eckhard Kruse reports of his investigations of physical mediumship. In an effort to preempt radical skeptics’ immediate charges of fraud, Professor Kruse employed an impenetrable array of high-tech electronic equipment.

READ MORE

Quantum Mechanics

“Those who are not shocked when they first come across quantum theory cannot possibly have understood it.” Niels Bohr, 1952

"Everything we call real is made of things that cannot be regarded as real." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate

Editor’s note: I've created a new link-icon on the homepage featuring "science's greatest mystery," quantum mechanics.

READ MORE

In the excellent movie “Mr. Holmes” we find the 92 year-old Sherlock walking with a young boy. The lad is worried that his mentor, preparing himself for death, might soon pass on, and encourages himself with the statement, “You’ll still live a long time. I had an uncle who lived past 100.” To which the aged logician counters, “There’s my point, precisely. What are the chances that you would know two old men who made it over the century mark?” Slightly miffed at this response, the 12 year-old lamely retorts, “Well, I didn’t exactly know him.” The ancient detective, wheezing and gasping, attempts to laugh. This is a small but spot-on example of shifting the argument to inconsequential element – as if knowing the two men under review were the dispositive factor in play. We smile at this well-intentioned youngster’s sleight-of verbal hand disingenuously misplacing the object of debate. But we commonly see this corruption of the truth-process everywhere, writ large, among egos grasping at hegemonic position. Look for it. It’s everywhere; we could almost say, there's little else.

READ MORE on the "clear thinking" page

consciousness is a quantum field containing all manner of possibility:

developing an internal guidance system for eternal life; a life which begins today 

The following is a paraphrase of Dr. Rupert Sheldrake’s lecture:

In the 1920s, when quantum physics was getting started, Alfred North Whitehead was one of the first to understand it. Other philosophers didn’t have the math background, but Whitehead was also a mathematician and so he grasped the significance immediately...

READ MORE on the 'consciousness' page

09.July.1968. As we look at the chaos, misery, confusion in the world, what is the central issue as remedy? The central issue is attaining the complete, absolute freedom of man, inwardly, then outwardly.

We might say, ‘I agree with that intellectually’ but no action follows. Why do we not accept the truth instantly?

It is like the rich person who hears the word 'generosity', and feels vaguely the beauty of it, yet goes back to miserliness. We do not accept, or even see, the truth when we have a vested interest in not seeing it.

A man is unwilling to look at the truth because he is afraid. He believes that by looking he will lose his family, his money, position, his job, will fail to get the girl, all the rest of it, which means, he will lose his security and hope for pleasure and happiness.

He is frightened to lose his security and therefore he will say he cannot understand the truth, and will refuse to even look at it.

READ MORE

The Gospel Of John was written as polemic against the Gospel Of Thomas. The ‘John Christians’ were threatened by the teachings of the ‘Thomas Christians’ and attempted to marginalize this earliest view of the nature and mission of Jesus of Nazareth.

READ MORE

READ MORE

Why do family members, old friends, and romantic mates drift apart or even abruptly split?

When my daughter was in high school, she had a girlfriend; the two seemed inseparable. Later, the friend chose an alternate lifestyle, assumed that she’d be judged, then abruptly, and permanently, broke off friendship ties.

An example of my own: In the “Evolution” article I recounted that in senior-high English class I’d delivered a speech on the subject of “Creationism versus Darwinism.” Almost all of it, as I now perceive, was error. However, a good friend since childhood disagreed, summarily rejected me, and put me away with no reconciliation.

the hidden cause of all conflict

Each of us, likely, could offer scores of such examples. Krishnamurti’s teachings on the ego – concerning dualism, fragmentation, separation, division – are not of mere academic interest only to professional philosophers. This information holds the sacred key to understanding why planet Earth is the stage for war and conflict, not just on the international level, nor solely with religious or political groups, but also among family members, friends, and lovers.

Why do people drift apart or become immediate enemies? The short answer is that they become an offense to each other. People identify with, make themselves equal to, belief systems which, they assume, will "make me happy." They say "this is who I am," and "this is what I need to be safe and happy," and if you represent something different, their self-image will be threatened, their prospects of safety and happiness will seem to fold - and then you'll be rejected, no matter the strength of former bonds of amity. You'll be rejected because, don't you see, it's a matter of life-and-death to the ego.

the carefully crafted self-image

In his 17.December.1969 lecture, Jiddu Krishnamurti offers one of the most clear and insightful explanations concerning the inner workings of this dark dynamic. When we feel offended by someone, he said, “there is an image about yourself,” one that we ourselves build. This ego-image reflects one's cultural “conditioning.” Why do we build this image? We do so “as a means of security ... of protection ... of being somebody.”

fear is behind the curtain

And what do we find if we draw back the curtain of this ego-image? “Now, if you go behind that," Krishnamurti says, "you will see there is fear.” What is the composition of this fear? It is the existential fear of "I don't have enough" because "I am not enough."

Let’s analyze this ego-image more closely. Why do we build it? What are we protecting? If we allow ourselves to become very still, if we taste and sample the nature of this hidden fear, we will find that we’re protecting a self-image, a mental projection of what the ego would like to be and have:

“I am the person who needs to be seen as virtuous, respected, worthy of honor. And it goes without saying that I know what’s best for you.”

“I am the person who needs to be seen as right and correct. As such, I need you to believe as I do, to agree with all of my religious superstitions, and my self-serving political views. I need you to accept all of my inflexible opinions because your assent makes me feel, not just safe and secure but, that I’m worth something.”

“I am the person who needs to be seen as successful, 'in the know,' and winning. I want you to be impressed with what I am and what I have so that I’ll be counted as a somebody. I need these merit badges so that I can face my peer group, family, and community and be considered important."

“I am the person who craves to be viewed as a wise person, an in-demand friend, a counselor with ‘the answers.’ I count on you to offer me this prestige so that I can feel good about myself.”

"I am the person who grew up on the 'wrong side of the tracks.' My family culture held great disdain for education and knowledge. This disrespect for anything truly progressive has always held me back, creating for me a self-image of 'I’m not smart enough to succeed. I can't get a high-paying job, that's for other people.' And so if you come to me and suggest that, in fact, I do possess talents and strengths, then I will feel very uncomfortable, begin to panic, as you attempt to lead me out of my dysfunctional comfort-zone. At the first sign, with your help, that I I could actually advance myself, I’ll fall apart, swoon in terror, and then begin to blame you, and hate you, before I retreat and crawl back under the safety of my rock."

"I am the person who is comfortable with present ideas. They've gotten me this far (sort of). And they may be half-baked, a straw-house of illogicality, but, even so, these irrationalities offer a certain veneer of meaning to my life. In support of this charade, I surround myself with so-called friends with whom I share a tacit agreement, an unspoken pact: 'You must agree never to point out the non sequiturs of my beggarly superstitions, and I will agree to act as if I accept yours.' That’s the conspiratorial deal. However, if you come along with hard empirical evidence, well-reasoned positions, and suggest that I might want to take a more honest approach to what I believe to be true, well then, I will have to hate you for upsetting the applecart of my entrenched and time-honored unreasonableness."

"I am the person who carries on the traditions of my family. Unfortunately, these are more like peculiar shibboleths, marks of tribal distinction, but not of honor and dignity. I feel duty bound to ask, “What would mother do?” or “This isn’t the way dad did it.” I don’t have enough self-respect to live my own life, follow my own insights, quest for my own meaning and destiny. And if you come along and encourage me to think for myself, to break the apron strings (years after mom passed on), I will feel frightened, disoriented. And then I will blame and hate you for pushing me toward autonomy, full personhood, and self-realization."

“I am the person who needs you to make me happy. You can be my friend/lover/relative if you do exactly what I say and think just as I think. Anything less than this will be threatening to 'who I am.' I need you to love me -- just as I am, with all of my soft-underbelly beliefs -- to compliment me, to defer to me, so that I can judge myself as ok. Don't let me down, I warn you.”

“I am the person associated with you, and if you disappoint me, if you fall short of my expectations - especially after all I've done for you - if you fail to make me happy, if you begin to take on contrary opinions, then you will become an opposing force to what I want and to the image I’ve created for myself. If any of this happens, then, of course, I’ll have to get rid of you, even though we’ve meant much to each other over long years. I'll have no choice but to shun you.”

And so if anyone – sibling, friend, lover, child, parent -- stands as opposition to any of these ego-images, then the offending person will immediately be counted as an enemy, no matter a long history of cordial relation.

a closer look at the hidden fear

We find there’s more than one curtain to open. The ego’s need to be seen as right, virtuous, properly religious or political, is not the only hidden agenda. As one pierces the levels of self-obfuscation we discover the core terror which vivifies all of the ego’s activities. It’s the fear of death. This is the central terror, as we learn from the great psychologists.

This means that when one is attacked, there may be purported surface issues, but the real reason people rage and become apoplectic is the ego fighting for its life. It's identified with, made itself equal to, being right, virtuous, and all the rest, and if it fails to promote itself with these "images," then it will face a kind of psychological death. “Who will I be?” it asks, if these false-security images are minimized or taken away?

the high cost of following the truth wherever it leads

All this is most dire. The reality is, if you assiduously pursue the truth, no matter the cost or where it might lead, then you will lose (for a time) almost every last person who was once close to you. Why must it be so? - because you will become a living, walking threat to another’s carefully crafted self-image.

narrow gate, without fellowship

Editor's note: In his writings, Andrew Jackson Davis warns of the "narrow gate" that leads to life; few be that enter it. Those who live courageously by following the truth wherever it leads, as Davis points out, “will walk a pathway without fellowship of thy earthly brethren.” The cults have long employed the weapon of excommunication, shunning, and ostracization - a forced separation from friends, workmates, and family - toward anyone who disagrees with the hive mentality. This putting away occurs not just in religion but in dysfunctional families, corporations, academia, politics, and other power-seeking groups. They’re afraid of contrary opinion which might disembowel and expose shallow teachings. And so they’ll get rid of you for spreading "misinformation"; and you, as a truth seeker, will be censored and required to make your way through this world “without fellowship of thy earthly brethren.” But, be assured, a day of reckoning is but one missed heartbeat away.

We, ourselves - not some mythical Satan - are the focal point of all evil in the universe. It’s the pathological ego within; it’s the false self, the ego-images, ever attempting to find safety and security for itself, to bolster an inner neediness, the existential emptiness deep within.

We cannot become truly educated, nor reach a good level of wisdom and maturity, in the highest and best sense - or meaningfully prepare ourselves for Summerland or to be with one’s Twin Soul - without understanding the wiles and machinations of our own personal “heart of darkness.”

please, it’s very impolite of you to notice that I lack a self

Soren Kierkegaard: “But in spite of the fact that man has become fantastic in this fashion [i.e., lives unrealistically by denying his own mortality and impending death, the terror of which is covered up by palliatives such as ritualistic, form-based but empty, religion], he may nevertheless … be perfectly well able to live on, to be a man, as it seems, to occupy himself with temporal things, get married, beget children, win honor and esteem – and perhaps no one notices that, in a deeper sense, he lacks [an authentic] self.”

you can have it all laid out in front of you, but it won't make you think 

Concert for George
Royal Albert Hall
November 29, 2002 

Horse To Water

The Dazzling Darkness is a concept representing a frame of mind untrammeled by the dysfunctional ego. Therein, freed from base-alloy lower-nature inclinations, one might apprehend not only the identity of one’s true mate but also a realization of the living presence of God in one’s life. READ MORE

downloading the entire Word Gems site, securing your own personal copy

READ MORE