I was once Tom. Although I’m trying to go down a different path, the family I brought along, requires me to step back into Tom quite regularly. Other than my 40 year partner, they are seemingly oblivious to the fact that I’m not Tom now. But I return with a refined sense of grace, for they are the ones that made me who I am today.
I've been Tom. It was agonizing. Every new panicked painful possibility. I held the spiritual in mild disdain, and frequently said, "Reality isn't for sissies." I know when the ship started to turn, but I don't know why.
It didn't occur to me that, in the compassion I showed for Tom, I would find people seeing their former selves. That phrase, 'Reality isn't for sissies' sounds about right.
I've changed from this time too. I no longer think philanthropy can save us. But I'm still determined to see what's going on, with open eyes.
My ex is also a Tom. Funny that. (He is a self-proclaimed agnostic, but as I used to tell him, he's really just lacking curiosity and happy to accept the world as presented Which is sadly still true, as I heard he recently took his 6th covid booster.)
Of course there are upsides to accepting the world as presented too.
I've always resonated with the Gnostics and the idea we are each directly connected to Source so no mediator is needed. I know this is true, (and don't care I can't 'prove' it).
We are always free to choose and experiment and 'know' for ourselves. And we're free to throw it all out and choose again and again. Ultimately, there's nothing serious going on here - in the deepest sense.
Fun post - and loved hearing about your lavender VW bug with the leopard sun-roof phase. Yeah, that tracks. :-)
A pale blue bug was my first car btw. More parallels tracks.
I have this whole new impression of you learning about our parallel, although quite different, paths! Thanks for appreciating this post, it was fun to revisit it.
Beautifully written and so moving. Had tears in my eyes as I read this. You must be reading my mind (One Mind!) as just this morning I wrote a whole conversation trying to untangle something in my brain (I’ll share with you soon), and here you are also working through possibilities via conversation!
From the little I know of my own culture (and there’s a lot to know!), Indian psychology doesn’t see the individual as an isolated self encased in flesh but the universe-as-self and self-as-universe. In Ayurveda, “Purusha-loka” is a concept of the self as deeply ontological, relational, radically ex-centric, and em-bodied in time, space, context. (I suppose you could say “purusha” means individual and “loka” means world but that’s defeating the purpose a bit lol)
Indian psychology - as I’m sure you know - is also philosophical and spiritual and doesn’t claim its legitimacy based on materialism or physicalism alone, unlike western science, so has a similar idea to what you share here.
It’s really moving to be connected to my own culture and read these heartwarming words of yours 🙏🏾❤️
There is so much richness in Indian wisdom texts. (Ken Wilber said India was the mothership of spiritual wisdom.) My favorites include Aurobindo, Tagore & Rumi (of course).
I think of Indian philosophy as zoom-out big picture connective and although they mapped many higher-levels of spiritual practices, in rigorous detail, there was - to me - an element of creative-fun and humility weaved in. (Though perhaps it also knee-capped potential social justice movements; the big picture allowed passivity, (ex: for the caste system to continue) since injustice it could be understood and tolerated within a reincarnation model and part of karma.) IDK.
Whereas western sciences were highly zoom-in, (that's changing) took itself very seriously and even though it hasn't held up, a whole lot of people still act as if it reflects reality. Somehow believing everything can be broken down to parts and particles. Including us!
In this model the divine is gutted and with it deeper meaning found in divine orchestration.
Gritologists (as Clif High call them) Vs an ontological perspective where consciousness is the driver and mystery is a given.
Is Hafiz from India or was he Persian? Another favorite of mine.
I'm so glad you two are having this deep conversation while I've been otherwise occupied. Speaking of which, I just had my root canal. The good news is the pain should now be going away, the bad news that my bridge will have to be replaced after another root treatment. My Course lesson says this is a day of trust, that is a turning point in my learning. I'm trying that on.
Thanks for the good links, I was looking for something to watch while I assemble some patio furniture.
Yowch! I’m also pottering around with tooth/gum pain and thanking all goddesss on the planet for inventing clove oil and peppermint oil. I apply these both from inside and outside my mouth (only one oil at a time as it’s sharp!) and pain vanishes. Previously have taken hi dose Vitamin C as a natural anaesthetic too - can attest to it working as I had had quite a lot one day (12000mg +) and happened to be training for a dance show i did an assisted back flip type of move with my dance partner…he didn’t realise there was a wooden chair too close and I ended up smashing the chair with my foot in the way down. I broke it! But my foot was fine - no pain…everyone was stunned 😳
Oh that’s a very interesting way to look at it! You know, I see it as the exact opposite quite often but I also 100% agree with you…let me think aloud here:
I see western science as purporting to be very objective, neutral, general and explaining the “big picture” of reality, leaving just some minor details to be filled in (see Rupert Sheldrake’s banned TED talk opening lines if this doesn’t make sense - it’s a very funny talk!)…while it simultaneously dismisses non-western perspectives as subjective, biased, partial and specific.
When the reality is - as you say - the reverse! Western science is super zoomed in and reductionist while Indian and many other spiritualities (including probably western paganism!) are more holistic and big picture…
*But* at the same time, many indigenous ontologies are often highly contextual, place-based, grounded in ancestral wisdom passed down from specific lineages, and intimately interwoven with the space and time they pertain to. Which makes them often feel more real and relatable than abstract “science”. But there is also simultaneously holism in the microcosm of the specific. And you can’t apply the holism of one tribe to the neighbouring tribe as a cookie-cutter approach either…they are both holistic and partial simultaneously. Almost like a wave-particle duality one might say…(!)
I appreciate Sheldrake and have seen that TED talk, as well as read a couple of his books. Subscribe to his stack - though haven't gotten to his talk on panentheism yet which def resonates for me.
'...intimately interwoven with the space and time they pertain to. Which makes them often feel more real and relatable than abstract “science”. But there is also simultaneously holism in the microcosm of the specific. And you can’t apply the holism of one tribe to the neighbouring tribe as a cookie-cutter approach either…they are both holistic and partial simultaneously. Almost like a wave-particle duality one might say…(!)'
Love your reference to the time and space settings. Such an essential piece. And (to me) supports simulation theory, along with the Double-Split wave/particle Experiment. (Not that I actually grasp that. Talk about feeling abstract.)
I've watched enough Thomas Campbell to know he sees the DSE as evidence of Reality as a Simulation. (short vid of him discussing it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsEjW_Lz-tc )
And one of my favorites - Cynthia Sue Larson - who incorporates the Mandala effect which also suggests there is no single, objective, consensus reality out-there. I think after the last 5 years, we have all registered how we can live in very different realities while standing in the same room.
I was once Tom. Although I’m trying to go down a different path, the family I brought along, requires me to step back into Tom quite regularly. Other than my 40 year partner, they are seemingly oblivious to the fact that I’m not Tom now. But I return with a refined sense of grace, for they are the ones that made me who I am today.
I've been Tom. It was agonizing. Every new panicked painful possibility. I held the spiritual in mild disdain, and frequently said, "Reality isn't for sissies." I know when the ship started to turn, but I don't know why.
It didn't occur to me that, in the compassion I showed for Tom, I would find people seeing their former selves. That phrase, 'Reality isn't for sissies' sounds about right.
I've changed from this time too. I no longer think philanthropy can save us. But I'm still determined to see what's going on, with open eyes.
I see myself in Tom, too, though I am now open to the possibility that I might be wrong about just everything I think I know.
My ex is also a Tom. Funny that. (He is a self-proclaimed agnostic, but as I used to tell him, he's really just lacking curiosity and happy to accept the world as presented Which is sadly still true, as I heard he recently took his 6th covid booster.)
Of course there are upsides to accepting the world as presented too.
I've always resonated with the Gnostics and the idea we are each directly connected to Source so no mediator is needed. I know this is true, (and don't care I can't 'prove' it).
We are always free to choose and experiment and 'know' for ourselves. And we're free to throw it all out and choose again and again. Ultimately, there's nothing serious going on here - in the deepest sense.
Fun post - and loved hearing about your lavender VW bug with the leopard sun-roof phase. Yeah, that tracks. :-)
A pale blue bug was my first car btw. More parallels tracks.
Thanks.
I have this whole new impression of you learning about our parallel, although quite different, paths! Thanks for appreciating this post, it was fun to revisit it.
Beautifully written and so moving. Had tears in my eyes as I read this. You must be reading my mind (One Mind!) as just this morning I wrote a whole conversation trying to untangle something in my brain (I’ll share with you soon), and here you are also working through possibilities via conversation!
From the little I know of my own culture (and there’s a lot to know!), Indian psychology doesn’t see the individual as an isolated self encased in flesh but the universe-as-self and self-as-universe. In Ayurveda, “Purusha-loka” is a concept of the self as deeply ontological, relational, radically ex-centric, and em-bodied in time, space, context. (I suppose you could say “purusha” means individual and “loka” means world but that’s defeating the purpose a bit lol)
Indian psychology - as I’m sure you know - is also philosophical and spiritual and doesn’t claim its legitimacy based on materialism or physicalism alone, unlike western science, so has a similar idea to what you share here.
It’s really moving to be connected to my own culture and read these heartwarming words of yours 🙏🏾❤️
I appreciated this comment, LoWa.
There is so much richness in Indian wisdom texts. (Ken Wilber said India was the mothership of spiritual wisdom.) My favorites include Aurobindo, Tagore & Rumi (of course).
I think of Indian philosophy as zoom-out big picture connective and although they mapped many higher-levels of spiritual practices, in rigorous detail, there was - to me - an element of creative-fun and humility weaved in. (Though perhaps it also knee-capped potential social justice movements; the big picture allowed passivity, (ex: for the caste system to continue) since injustice it could be understood and tolerated within a reincarnation model and part of karma.) IDK.
Whereas western sciences were highly zoom-in, (that's changing) took itself very seriously and even though it hasn't held up, a whole lot of people still act as if it reflects reality. Somehow believing everything can be broken down to parts and particles. Including us!
In this model the divine is gutted and with it deeper meaning found in divine orchestration.
Gritologists (as Clif High call them) Vs an ontological perspective where consciousness is the driver and mystery is a given.
Best.
Is Hafiz from India or was he Persian? Another favorite of mine.
I'm so glad you two are having this deep conversation while I've been otherwise occupied. Speaking of which, I just had my root canal. The good news is the pain should now be going away, the bad news that my bridge will have to be replaced after another root treatment. My Course lesson says this is a day of trust, that is a turning point in my learning. I'm trying that on.
Thanks for the good links, I was looking for something to watch while I assemble some patio furniture.
Yowch! I’m also pottering around with tooth/gum pain and thanking all goddesss on the planet for inventing clove oil and peppermint oil. I apply these both from inside and outside my mouth (only one oil at a time as it’s sharp!) and pain vanishes. Previously have taken hi dose Vitamin C as a natural anaesthetic too - can attest to it working as I had had quite a lot one day (12000mg +) and happened to be training for a dance show i did an assisted back flip type of move with my dance partner…he didn’t realise there was a wooden chair too close and I ended up smashing the chair with my foot in the way down. I broke it! But my foot was fine - no pain…everyone was stunned 😳
You are a woman of many surprises, LoWa!
Oh that’s a very interesting way to look at it! You know, I see it as the exact opposite quite often but I also 100% agree with you…let me think aloud here:
I see western science as purporting to be very objective, neutral, general and explaining the “big picture” of reality, leaving just some minor details to be filled in (see Rupert Sheldrake’s banned TED talk opening lines if this doesn’t make sense - it’s a very funny talk!)…while it simultaneously dismisses non-western perspectives as subjective, biased, partial and specific.
When the reality is - as you say - the reverse! Western science is super zoomed in and reductionist while Indian and many other spiritualities (including probably western paganism!) are more holistic and big picture…
*But* at the same time, many indigenous ontologies are often highly contextual, place-based, grounded in ancestral wisdom passed down from specific lineages, and intimately interwoven with the space and time they pertain to. Which makes them often feel more real and relatable than abstract “science”. But there is also simultaneously holism in the microcosm of the specific. And you can’t apply the holism of one tribe to the neighbouring tribe as a cookie-cutter approach either…they are both holistic and partial simultaneously. Almost like a wave-particle duality one might say…(!)
I appreciate Sheldrake and have seen that TED talk, as well as read a couple of his books. Subscribe to his stack - though haven't gotten to his talk on panentheism yet which def resonates for me.
'...intimately interwoven with the space and time they pertain to. Which makes them often feel more real and relatable than abstract “science”. But there is also simultaneously holism in the microcosm of the specific. And you can’t apply the holism of one tribe to the neighbouring tribe as a cookie-cutter approach either…they are both holistic and partial simultaneously. Almost like a wave-particle duality one might say…(!)'
Love your reference to the time and space settings. Such an essential piece. And (to me) supports simulation theory, along with the Double-Split wave/particle Experiment. (Not that I actually grasp that. Talk about feeling abstract.)
I've watched enough Thomas Campbell to know he sees the DSE as evidence of Reality as a Simulation. (short vid of him discussing it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsEjW_Lz-tc )
And one of my favorites - Cynthia Sue Larson - who incorporates the Mandala effect which also suggests there is no single, objective, consensus reality out-there. I think after the last 5 years, we have all registered how we can live in very different realities while standing in the same room.
Thanks for the reply!
Just watched both of these--VERY interesting. Rupert and I have much in common on our views but he's a little more moderate ;-)
Oh nice, I will have to check out those other folks you mentioned!
It sounds like you were a good partner.
It's interesting how sometimes that isn't enough.
The differences between us all are astounding