Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Do you ever sense the communion between all? Do you ever walk through the city, the village, the forest or wherever and sense the universality between all?
It is difficult to put words on such an experience because it is a perceptual experience, but too see the world in front of you without the divisions that the mind creates allows one to sense what they are actually seeing. Sensing here is key. For the sensing experience has nothing to with thoughts. It is being with your observation. Just simply being there. In this moment...EVERYTHING IS NEW AND AWE-INSPIRING.
Thoughts and words refine our experience through the filter of conceptual understanding. Words and concepts are inherently limited in comparison to the awesome experience of seeing the world without a filter, without a thought. You can then sense the timelessness, the communion, and the awe of the Now...Do not let these words that I share with you become a trap (or those who have shared there words with me). Use a guidepost to take a step and then let it all go....
So what do I mean by divisions? Well, if we label anything we create a divide between what we witness and what we are. The label is a thought. The division between the thinker and the "thing" being thought about objectifies the entity being observed and in that objectification duality is created. Duality being the divide between the thinker and the object being thought about. The thought, which is the label, and the thinker, which is the entity which created the thought, become objects divided from each other. But, is the division purely illusionary?
If our perception of something becomes altered because of the thought we have about it: For example, if we look at a "tree" and sense the idea, concept, or word, "tree," do we not stay within the realm of the duality? Do we not filter our experience this way? Can we instead sense to see instead of think to see? Does what we perceive than become an object from which we are divided from? Do we then actually not "see" what we are looking at? Because is a "tree" really a tree? Is a "tree" really a divisible and a separate entity within the environment? Because physically speaking, the tree cannot exist without the sun, the soil, its roots, the clouds, the ocean, the stars, the galaxy, the movement of gravity etc...This is the conceptual understanding again, but it only illuminates the fact that words divide actual observation into categories that are far from what they really are...Because nothing can essentially be identified in this sense without losing sense of the communion that is inherently woven into our being.
Now, this is not to say throw away thought. Because thoughts help us navigate, but if we are too truly commune with whatever it is that we witness, does it not seem obvious that a thought would get in the way of this communion? Are we to always be navigating through life? Why not once in a while stop and BE. Stop and SENSE. Stop moving for a moment, take a breathe, and sense the communion...If you have a thought, allow it to be, but do we need to let it automatically become what we see?
Now what about lovers? What happens in that amazing experience where two people unite and just sense each other. Ponder this? Have you ever looked at someone you love and just let all thoughts fall by the way side? Have you ever witnessed you lover without attributing a name to them, without contributing an expectation to them, without holding them to a conventional rule? When all the conversations loose their luster, when the lust has simmered, and when the routine of keeping our selves entertained have lost there appeal, what then are we left with? - Is it possible that these things are born of thoughts, expectations, and distractions - all of which stem in the mind from a place of self lack (because the ego is always lacking and always wants more) - are our relationship dramas not born from the inherent lack of the ego (which is born through mind identification with your reality)?
Do we see that thoughts are restless and limited? Do we see that the ego always wants? But why would the ego want? I believe the answer lies here: If we are disconnected from source and not in "communion," because there is a divide between the thinker and the "thing" being observed, is there not an existential void that is created? Is this why the ego always wants? Because we are inherently "without" when we are divided from the reality in which we find ourselves? Is communion with the world, with our friends, with our lovers, with the all that is, our birthright! We have the ability to step away from the ego that prescribes lack, unrelenting desire, and division, so that we may again sense what it is that we are...Sense that we are inherently whole, inherently in communion, alive and ONE. Communion is the end of the ego's existential lack. Communion is what brings us back into balance. Yes, thoughts help us navigate, but where are we going if we cannot sense what we are or where we are going?
Posted by Christopher Renzo at 9:38 PM