What I have observed is that,
There are 2 factors that determine a person’s actions:
# The situations/circumstance/surroundings/cultural-setups/environments (their adaption, fitting-in strategies, accommodation to all of that etc.)
# Their own interests/desires (which they pursue)
Generally, in the transmission from say parents to children (in the flow of genetic lineage),
Only the real essential desire of the parent is transferred to the child.
And whatever the parent did as adaptation, accommodation, and adjustment based on family/cultural/socio-political pressures of those times, does not pass over to the children.
This is because the children were brought up at a different world-time/age, with different family/socio-cultural/political/situational variables.
The world itself is at a different generation when the children are born,
And therefore the children adapt to those conditions,
And only the essential desires of the lineage continue through them.
For instance,
Say a father worked loyally in a single company all his life as a duty,
While the son decides to not work at all, and only work on his private passions.
On the surface, this looks like the father and son are entirely different.
But a more in-depth examination might reveal,
The father never had any real heart vested in the company affairs.
He may have done all of it from familial/moral/socio-cultural pressures,
While his real heart desire was in his personal interests.
So it is only the real heart desire that passes on to the son.
This can be taken much deeper than this,
But even now, with only this much penetration into the matter,
The son’s decisions do not look so outlandish in the light of this understanding, right?
Another instance would be,
If the mother dutifully married, had children, spent her whole life mixed up with them etc.,
Her daughter might take up a completely different meaning in life and become ultra career focused.
Again, on the surface, both look completely different.
But on deeper examination,
Maybe the mother, as an adaptation to her circumstances, went along with that wave,
But her real desire was to fuse her identity into something larger.
Her situation might have been such that the role of caretaker was what allowed her this larger experience and expansion.
So the daughter in alternate times, may seek to fulfill this same desire by absorbing herself into the corporate world and its goals (career).
It is the same desire expressing itself in 2 different situations and times.
This is actually still just slightly under the surface, but even this level of understanding reveals the continuity and similarity of desires passing through.
The whole idea of romantic relations may be a social construct
I had this wacky train of thought come to me.
Hope viewers of this post find it entertaining/interesting.
The whole idea of romantic relationship is a societal/cultural/civilizational/human-organization based construct.
If all humans just lived wild,
Males would randomly have sex with 100s of women, and probably have 30-40 children each or more.
The male would not know who his child is.
Also, there seems to be no easily observable causality linking the sexual act to the consequence of pregnancy, and the consequent children that come from that.
There is just a wild instinctual desire for the male.
Similarly women too feel this same wild desire, in certain time periods, and depending on their mood they may run away, resist, or allow the sex to happen.
The man in his prime years would probably be more motivated, since he can easily manage to do 1 or 2 every day without any time-off periods.
The things is, after the sex, the woman too may not be able to causally connect the act of sex to the pregnancy that happens after.
Could she not take it as something that just naturally happened from God?
So the causality is not known from either side, male or female.
The female would bond with the child from the oxytocin and breastfeeding period, and that bond may result in the child and mother recognizing each other.
But there is no way the child will know the father, and neither will the father know.
It could be anybody.
If the woman has had sex with 5 men in a day, and gets pregnant, how would she have any idea who caused the child OR if the 5 acts had anything to do with the child at all?
The first symptoms of pregnancy after all come much later, probably a fortnight later at least, right?
Another aspect is that, if the child grows up away from the mother from a young age, it is doubtful if the mother can recognize the child.
The child may recognize the mother, because her age may not change her appearance as much in the 15-45 zone, but even that may not be easy.
So it seems like the entire notion of civilization/society is to regulate birth and to ensure the spread of resources to everyone.
By putting the responsibility on the father, the father is deterred from following his raw instinct and seeking new mates.
Similarly, a responsibility is also put on the mother, to take care of the child for much longer than she might have otherwise done.
The socialization/enculturation/civilization process is to suppress the sex instinct’s wildness, and instead redirect it into the structures of society, that is, to gain status/position/rank and then seek out the opp-sex of similar status/position/rank etc.
This I guess spawns the whole matrix of mating/romantic fantasy and social status/rank/position/specialness.
The fantasy of being the elite and mating with other elite,
Like the notion of kings/queens, emperors/empresses, prince/princesses and so on.
Names are used in societal organization to TAG the person.
It is an identifier similar to your debit card number, social security number and so on.
Similarly even the roles of mother/father are tags society puts on folk.
Like XXX is the mother of XXXX —–OR—— XXXX is the father of XXXX.
Also the agreement of marriage itself, is really a contract/agreement that serves the children who will be born from the mating of the 2.
Marriage was essentially a system created for the bringing up of children.
Nowadays people use it for companionship, but that is a conscious contract of sort, and it does not have much binding, since both the parties are independent.
It is only the child that is born helpless, and needs a lot of nurture at least till the age of 10.
There seems to big rift in the way “natural biology drives/impulses/instincts” operate and in the way we view everything from the “societal/cultural/civilizational lens”.
The former is generally subsumed into the latter in the process of socialization.
I guess, based on seeing the consequences, ramifications, and aftermath, birth causation etc. – Wise people with vision created systems such as culture/society/civilization to organize and regulate the different drives so that the system could serve in the longer term as a win-win for everyone.
Society/Culture then seems like a long distance vision of how people can live together and mutually fulfill all their needs .
As more needs get satisfied, people may become conscious of finer and subtler needs, which would gradually make their way into modifying society’s formal or informal structures.
On Social dynamics
Let’s take 2 cases:
1. When you are in your own space.
2. When you are in a shared space with others.
When you are in your own space,
Various interests bubble up into your mind,
And the strongest one usually gets your attention/focus/investment/energy.
When you are in a shared group-space with others,
Then the different people are in a relationship with each other.
The following questions come up:
# Who is going to set the frame?
Will there be multiple smaller frames between the people?
Will the frame organically emerge or will it be a chaos?
# Who is naturally receiving? Who is naturally emitting?
# Who is open/malleable? Who is rigid/closed?
# What are the intentions/expectations of the various people around?
# Where are each of these people coming from?
# What is the common larger frame? What are the expectations? cultural structs? societal structs? governing that.
# What can I say, what can I not say?
# What are the set of possible topics I can speak about?
All this can be sensed.
All of these come under “social dynamics”.
This invariably happens when a group of people get together and create a group space.
1. When you are in your own space.
2. When you are in a shared space with others.
When you are in your own space,
Various interests bubble up into your mind,
And the strongest one usually gets your attention/focus/investment/energy.
When you are in a shared group-space with others,
Then the different people are in a relationship with each other.
The following questions come up:
# Who is going to set the frame?
Will there be multiple smaller frames between the people?
Will the frame organically emerge or will it be a chaos?
# Who is naturally receiving? Who is naturally emitting?
# Who is open/malleable? Who is rigid/closed?
# What are the intentions/expectations of the various people around?
# Where are each of these people coming from?
# What is the common larger frame? What are the expectations? cultural structs? societal structs? governing that.
# What can I say, what can I not say?
# What are the set of possible topics I can speak about?
All this can be sensed.
All of these come under “social dynamics”.
This invariably happens when a group of people get together and create a group space.
Individual and Society
I will be using some Jungian terms here.
Individual = Personal conscious = Individual light.
For this, there is a corresponding: Personal unconscious = Individual shadow.
Similarly,
There is:
Society = Collective conscious = Collective light.
And a corresponding: Collective unconscious = Collective shadow.
Another related aspect is – Collective karma and Personal karma.
Each culture/societal organization operates with a certain gravity.
Like how the gravity of the nucleus of the atom holds together the orbital electrons.
The actors, celebrities, stars, sportsmen, iconic figures, business magnates, politicians, etc. i.e. all of which that are considered, deemed, and celebrated as success, form the nucleus of society.
The regular consumers and citizens of society, go around this nucleus like electrons.
If there is no other powerful gravity center influencing them, then the society gravity controls their desires/emotions/actions, and pulls them towards its nucleus.
That is why, the driving force of most people is to rise the pyramid of status and popularity, to reach the nucleus of society, where instead of them revolving around society, society revolves around them, and they are in the power position.
Individual = Personal conscious = Individual light.
For this, there is a corresponding: Personal unconscious = Individual shadow.
Similarly,
There is:
Society = Collective conscious = Collective light.
And a corresponding: Collective unconscious = Collective shadow.
Another related aspect is – Collective karma and Personal karma.
Each culture/societal organization operates with a certain gravity.
Like how the gravity of the nucleus of the atom holds together the orbital electrons.
The actors, celebrities, stars, sportsmen, iconic figures, business magnates, politicians, etc. i.e. all of which that are considered, deemed, and celebrated as success, form the nucleus of society.
The regular consumers and citizens of society, go around this nucleus like electrons.
If there is no other powerful gravity center influencing them, then the society gravity controls their desires/emotions/actions, and pulls them towards its nucleus.
That is why, the driving force of most people is to rise the pyramid of status and popularity, to reach the nucleus of society, where instead of them revolving around society, society revolves around them, and they are in the power position.
A quick attempt to create a model of reality
A quick Model/Ontology of reality from my direct experience:
(I have added references to some kabbalah terms, physical universe analogues)
#### FORMLESS/SPIRIT/ABSOLUTE/EMANATION #### (World of: Atziluth)
1 – Unmanifest/ONE (Ain Sof) – 7D
#### FORM/MANIFEST/RELATIVE #### (yin yang, double helix dna)(universe)(Worlds of: Briah, Yetzirah, Malkuth)
2. SOUL REALM (Galaxy super cluster)(Kether/Platonic forms realm) – 6.3D
[Larger context = soul family/galaxy cluster] (6.2D specific family of souls)
Heart/Soul/Desire = Specified Soul DNA(galaxy) = Many lives as many beings context (6.1D specific)
Trans-human archetypes/symbology/mythology/hieroglyphs/motifs/artifacts/codes
3. STAR/SOLAR SYSTEM(5.3D) -> PLANET(5.2D) -> CREATURES REALM (5.1D)
Human Creature Biological DNA [larger context: creature family] = incarnation context – 5D specific
Human archetypes/symbology/mythology/hieroglyphs/motifs/artifacts/codes
4. CULTURE/CIVILIZATION/SOCIETY [Geburah/chesed]
Socio-cultural-civilizational-locational DNA – 4D
Specific cultural context where creature is born – 4D specific
5. EGO/SOCIAL IDENTITY [Yesod] – 3D
Specific internalization of family/enculturation/societal conditioning/civilization codes – 3D specific
6. PERSONAS [Masks/Presentations] – 2D
Chosen mask – 2d specific
7. The immediate chosen persona interaction possibility space – 1D
The actual interaction option chosen and happening = 1D specific
(I have added references to some kabbalah terms, physical universe analogues)
#### FORMLESS/SPIRIT/ABSOLUTE/EMANATION #### (World of: Atziluth)
1 – Unmanifest/ONE (Ain Sof) – 7D
#### FORM/MANIFEST/RELATIVE #### (yin yang, double helix dna)(universe)(Worlds of: Briah, Yetzirah, Malkuth)
2. SOUL REALM (Galaxy super cluster)(Kether/Platonic forms realm) – 6.3D
[Larger context = soul family/galaxy cluster] (6.2D specific family of souls)
Heart/Soul/Desire = Specified Soul DNA(galaxy) = Many lives as many beings context (6.1D specific)
Trans-human archetypes/symbology/mythology/hieroglyphs/motifs/artifacts/codes
3. STAR/SOLAR SYSTEM(5.3D) -> PLANET(5.2D) -> CREATURES REALM (5.1D)
Human Creature Biological DNA [larger context: creature family] = incarnation context – 5D specific
Human archetypes/symbology/mythology/hieroglyphs/motifs/artifacts/codes
4. CULTURE/CIVILIZATION/SOCIETY [Geburah/chesed]
Socio-cultural-civilizational-locational DNA – 4D
Specific cultural context where creature is born – 4D specific
5. EGO/SOCIAL IDENTITY [Yesod] – 3D
Specific internalization of family/enculturation/societal conditioning/civilization codes – 3D specific
6. PERSONAS [Masks/Presentations] – 2D
Chosen mask – 2d specific
7. The immediate chosen persona interaction possibility space – 1D
The actual interaction option chosen and happening = 1D specific
LIFE as a bell curve
I see LIFE as a bell curve where:
left half = life
right half = death
LIFE is the same as breath in principle.
With an inbreath half-curve, outbreath half-curve, and a peak.
The curve is basically [interest seeking fervor] and then [surrender relaxation letting go].
The cycle of life is like a game.
Initially there is so much interest to become more and more till a peak is reached.
And then from there on it is all about relaxing back just like the out-breath.
The mysterious question to ponder on is, what is it that benefits from the life and death cycle?
It is pondering on what is the “Subject” of this whole experience of LIFE.
The society/culture/beliefs/conditioning etc. are dead corpses from the past we carry and maintain.
How much ‘in line’ are these structures with life determines the degree of suffering.
Like the belief in perennial progress makes one suffer in the out-breath period, because that belief says, you must breath-in forever which becomes suffocating.
Similarly all anti-death beliefs, that we must survive and thrive and fight at all costs, creates a continuous fight in the entire out-breath period.
If you worship the night -> the day is scary/resisted.
If you worship the day -> the night is scary/resisted.
One must worship both the day and night, the in-breath and out-breath, it is their cycle that [fills and empties] OR [uses and renews].
Why do we oppose this natural desire/urge/force to let go? – because we believe we must not, because everyone else shames and fears that?
I see the only way out of this struggle is UNDERSTANDING.
To understand the nature of life from a sincere thorough fresh examination of one’s own experience.
This takes one closer and closer to the subject and frees one from this partial understanding and thereby ends all suffering caused by the wrong view/perspective.
As Buddha rightly said, “ignorance” is the cause of suffering.
left half = life
right half = death
LIFE is the same as breath in principle.
With an inbreath half-curve, outbreath half-curve, and a peak.
The curve is basically [interest seeking fervor] and then [surrender relaxation letting go].
The cycle of life is like a game.
Initially there is so much interest to become more and more till a peak is reached.
And then from there on it is all about relaxing back just like the out-breath.
The mysterious question to ponder on is, what is it that benefits from the life and death cycle?
It is pondering on what is the “Subject” of this whole experience of LIFE.
The society/culture/beliefs/conditioning etc. are dead corpses from the past we carry and maintain.
How much ‘in line’ are these structures with life determines the degree of suffering.
Like the belief in perennial progress makes one suffer in the out-breath period, because that belief says, you must breath-in forever which becomes suffocating.
Similarly all anti-death beliefs, that we must survive and thrive and fight at all costs, creates a continuous fight in the entire out-breath period.
If you worship the night -> the day is scary/resisted.
If you worship the day -> the night is scary/resisted.
One must worship both the day and night, the in-breath and out-breath, it is their cycle that [fills and empties] OR [uses and renews].
Why do we oppose this natural desire/urge/force to let go? – because we believe we must not, because everyone else shames and fears that?
I see the only way out of this struggle is UNDERSTANDING.
To understand the nature of life from a sincere thorough fresh examination of one’s own experience.
This takes one closer and closer to the subject and frees one from this partial understanding and thereby ends all suffering caused by the wrong view/perspective.
As Buddha rightly said, “ignorance” is the cause of suffering.
Journey to the Abstract 