I intuitively feel that the only way to live the ideal way in any area of life, is once all desire from that area of life is completed/over/saturated/finished/outgrown.
True mastery and freedom in any domain often comes only when one is no longer seeking anything from it.
This is in every domain: love and relationships, creative work, spirituality, material wealth and success etc.
The highest ideal and freedom can be lived only after desire, not through it.
It’s almost like the difference between karma and dharma.
Dharma seems to be possible only when there is nothing left to extract from that domain.
In other words total dharma is possible only from total transcendence,
And total transcendence is possible only when all desires are consciously lived and thinned out to fade.
The connection between voltage, vision, meaningfulness, and depth
It takes desire to even open your eyes and see just about anything.
It takes desire to even subtly move any muscle at all.
This desire is actually the effect of [Voltage/Potential-difference(PD)] that exists,
Between: Where you are (state A) -> What you are pulled towards (state B),
Between: Where you are (state A) -> Future possibility (state B).
The destination may not even be a final point,
The destination may even just be a direction.
Your voltage level also determines your level of vision.
For instance, if I have a passing interest in a topic, there is low voltage,
So I just quickly skim a few articles to equalize the PD,
Causing the voltage to neutralize, and I move on to other things.
So my knowledge on that topic will be only from whatever I skimmed about it.
Whereas if I have very high voltage or super deep interest in that subject,
I’d read through multiple books like no tomorrow,
And in a short time, I’d know more about that subject that the person who just skimmed it even if he repeats that same routine for a 1000days.
High voltage also increases intensity, and that increase in intensity increases vision.
Many insights are simply not possible when there is low-voltage.
Insights are about seeing the pattern by connecting multiple dots.
If I take a spatial analogy, if you have a small torch light and stand at the fence of a football field in total darkness, you might scan a bit with the torch and conclude there is nobody there and leave.
But if you have one of those 100000 lumen mega flashlights, then you might instantly see that at the corners of the field there are a few homeless people sleeping, and also see a few dogs and cats roaming.
So that level of voltage is needed to see the larger patterns (Insight).
In the field of wonder/contemplation/devotion, the voltage/PD is so much, that no amount of your action will close the gap.
This is the realm of fundamental science say about mastering the subatomic space or the mystic who contemplates the universe or wonders about the ultimate nature of reality.
There is no end point in these desires, where the PD could be closed.
These are endless endeavours, but they are also the most profoundly moving.
A very high voltage can a self-transcending experience because it will pull all of you towards the other pole.
You become an instrument that all encompassing-ly serves something far larger than itself.
When we do daily survival tasks,
All of that is initiated by low voltage,
Because firstly there is a clear end point for every task,
And secondly those tasks need only fractional engagement from your side (very limited PD with low current flows that ebb when the tasks are done).
High Voltage, Love, Longing, Devotion, Wonder, Contemplation, Meaningfulness, Vision, Insight, Profundity, Incredible possibility, Depth, Transformation – all mean the same thing essentially.
True life only begins when you are fully drawn to die into something higher.
Until then you are living on low-voltage only, which manages only survival, but with no transformation possibility.
On Time, Identity, Desire, and Transformation
Time creates the identity,
Time maintains the identity,
Time exalts the identity,
Time destroys/changes/transforms the identity.
The desires we feel are a combination of 2 things:
1. The projection of the ‘current identity’ expansion/fortification.
2. The projections of past identities expansions/fortifications that stay as ghost images.
Now this current identity could be stable or in the process of transformation,
Or it could have reached a new stability post-transformation.
When identity is transformed by time,
The past-identity projected desires still stay as ghost images.
Even though the new transformed/transforming identity projects different images,
These ghost images stay on the screen too.
Everything thus gets mixed up.
So then there is a deep confusion whenever there is transformation,
As to which desire is from something real or unreal.
In fact by very definition, when in-between a transformation process,
All projections of what is happening are all fleeting and temporary like a dream,
Because a continuously shifting/changing/transforming thing completely veils even the appearance of any essence.
So an identity-transformation process instantly throws a person into emptiness.
He cannot know who/what he is, what he wants/desires, everything in his experience shifts into a unreal dream flow.
If this lasts for 2 decades of his life,
Those entire 2 decades will be like a night dream,
Constantly shifting empty experiences, sort of like being on a psychedelic trip throughout.
Because memory needs a structure to hang off.
But if the structures themselves are changing/morphing, then all the memories have no foothold.
That is why I think we do not remember much of anything before the age of 5.
Because there is too little structure in identity to hold any memories.
So in a way, a person going through a transformation process of identity,
Is in a similar state of consciousness, as someone who is only 2-3 years old.
Early childhood, night dreams, psychedelic trips are the closest analogue to how transformation of identity would feel.
Going through transformation essentially overwhelms the mind when it tries to make sense of it.
It is unable to make an identity/anchor out of all the experiences happening.
It reminds me of the scene in the movie Arrival, when the heptapod aliens just blast the entire screen with innumerable circles.
It becomes impossible to process it and create a coherent narrative.
The mechanics of fear, desire, love, and hate
The mechanics of fear and love,
Is such a massively deep topic to explore.
I often wonder:
Is it possible to really be indifferent?
Is it possible to be without relationship?
Is it possible to really stay separate?
Is it possible to be neutral?
Is it possible to neither love nor hate?
From my intuition, it seems like that is not possible.
Life being a dynamic verb, nothing it still.
So everything has to move towards expansion or contraction?
It feels like that force that maintains and forwards unconsciousness and ignorance,
Is in the hate (contraction) direction,
While the force that maintains and forwards consciousness and knowledge,
Is in the love (expansion) direction.
Since all things are in polarity,
Whatever we invest and expand into, will inevitably disinvest and shrink its opposite?
I see everything is a state of pulsation in nature,
Like the heart beat, expanding and contracting.
Birth is like the expansion influx (like the inbreath),
Death is like the contraction deflux (like the outbreath).
I see birth and death as the alternating pulse between sound and silence.
The sound of creation booms into the manifest as birth,
And at death there is the return to silence/uncreated?
I feel like the experience of life is like music.
With multiple overlayed pulses of all kinds of instrument and voice timbers.
A multidimensional flow of pulses.
So then, both fear and love are as natural as expansion and contraction?
I have noticed that,
I fear all that I have an antagonistic relationship towards.
So maybe the presence of fear itself…,
Is revealing the antagonistic relationship present?
I wonder,
Is fear the ‘anticipatory recreation’ of the experience,
Of the repercussions/reaction from the other,
To my own antagonistic attitude towards the other,
Being mirrored back to me?
So then are fear and love, direct experiences,
Of the mirrored attitudes/relationship we hold towards the other entities we encounter?
Another aspect is self-hatred.
That is a condition where there is a projection of value and worth on the other,
While the self is cast to the shadow of unconsciousness/hate/shame.
There is then a constant focus on the other or on transcending oneself.
So here there are some interesting relationships I see.
When there is self-hatred of one’s body and its strength,
There is fear of other bodies and their strength.
I think here, the fear comes from the war with the conscious and unconscious identifications.
Unconsciously there is identification with the body,
But that is not supported by the conscious identification which is caught up with the other,
So the unconscious identification generates fear as resistance,
When you pursue the other.
So somewhere I wonder,
If we take extreme cases,
Like fear of a ghost/monster,
Is that the dissociated unconscious fragment of us,
That we have disowned,
That is getting attracted to us,
Because of our deeper desire for integration and wholeness?
Isn’t our worst fear that we will become the ghost?
That total assimilation/transformation is the terror.
What will happen to us,
If we let everything in?
Also I used to wonder about the fear of falling.
I have that fear because somewhere I desire to fall like that.
So is my intensity of fear of falling proportional to the intensity of desire I have to fall?
Is the intensity of fear I feel for death proportional to my own desire for death?
Fear and Desire seem inseparable like 2 sides of the same coin.
It seems like each is a resistance to the other.
Desire is a resistance to Fear.
Fear is a resistance to Desire.
Another thing I am reminded of is the story of the beauty and the beast.
The beast gets converted into the prince out of love.
Would this be true for all that fear?
That all that is feared if consciously loved,
Will become flowers from filth?
The ground of filth when nurtured by nature,
Becomes flower and fruit right?
Are all that we love/hate/desire/fear,
Are they all nothing but our own Self?
Supposing we want total wholeness and totally open ourselves up,
To attracting all of the unconscious to us back into our consciousness,
Will it result in a total war and destruction of all of our identity?
Is that what happens in enlightenment?
Is that the ultimate transformation?
The self here is the subset of qualities owned vs. the superset of all qualities in existence.
That division is what created self-other and the concept of relationship itself.
Love-Hate are like Yin-Yang.
The black fish has a white eye,
And the white fish has a black eye.
So total love and total hate do not exist and cannot exist.
Just like no absolute quality can exist without its opposite.
Going into total-hate or total-love,
Will result in transcendence to a dimension beyond duality.
These are some of my contemplations.
I’ll stop here for now.
To be fully alive
Life is change.
All that does not change is dead.
So total change is total life.
To be fully alive,
Is to be like a fire,
That blazes, sparkles, and dazzles.
Everything you do must change everything,
So as to fall into endless transformation.
Whatever you do must be:
Towards what matters to you the most,
Towards what means the most to you,
Towards what you most deeply feel/desire/care about.
It must transform and change you fully from moment to moment.
Living in a way where the whole moves the whole.
Where all of you is free,
In full power, glory, and splendor.
Living every moment from the creativity,
Of ushering a whole new world at each moment.
Bringing/Gathering all of one at each moment,
Only to fire up and change it all up in the next.
Desire and Perception
Is desire/interest because of perception?
Or Does perception itself come because there is desire/interest?
Or Do they both go together (arise together and pass together)?
In other words,
Do you see because you want to see?
Or Do you want because you see?
Or Do the seeing and the wanting go together?
Is desire the cause of perception?
Or perception the cause of desire?
For instance, for a child who has never tasted sugar,
There is no perception (of that thing) yet, therefore no desire.
But once there is perception of sugar (the thing), the desire for it is awakened.
This would be the case of ‘perception causing desire for that thing’.
It is the case of: “I never knew I wanted this, but now that I see it, I want it more than ever”.
‘Desire causing perception’ is “You see what you want to see (those things)”.
For instance, you are walking on the road and you want to catch a cab.
What do you see, just cabs and cabs right.
Generally causation implies separation in time.
But here, I would say both are simultaneous.
Like the burning fire being desire,
And the light emanating from it being perception.
The burning fire and the light emitted from it are simultaneous.
However, in my examples, those were cases of:
Desire for specific things and perception of those specific things.
Now this is what happens/plays out in time.
And you could find the causal relations between the 2.
Another related aspect to this is ‘desire and memory’.
Memory creates desire (for that memory)
Desire (for that memory) then seeks for more such memories.
Which came first? The memory or desire?
There is a kind of cycling between the 2.
Like hunger/desire and food/memories to satiate it.
Delving deep into the ‘grapes are sour’ attitude
What is the deeper reason behind the ‘grapes are sour’ attitude?
What is the payoff of seeing something as desirable or undesirable?
What is possible to get and what is impossible to get?
Generally, we’d like to see what is ‘possible to get’ as desirable,
And what is ‘impossible to get’ as undesirable.
That way, the psyche remains stable, and its efforts bring continual fruits,
Without wasting effort on what is impossible.
I am going to look at the ‘grapes are sour’ attitude in the context of relationships.
Generally to bond with someone, you idealize them,
Which is the basis of the whole romantic fantasy.
That they are good for you, best for you, the perfect match, that they will raise you higher and so on.
Idealization is the process of desiring itself.
That is what motivates you to seek anyone i.e. to seek to include them as a part of yourself.
The whole life of the ego is the Kohut’s tension arc,
Driving between where you are now and the image of your ideal.
On the other hand,
Devaluation is the process of avoiding/fearing (vs. idealizing/desiring).
As an ego, one would idealize that which is in one’s interest, and devalue that which is not in one’s interest.
What serves one —-vs—- What does not serve one.
What is life positive —-vs—- What is life negative.
However this does not explain the ‘death drive’.
What causes a person to consume poisons? severely deprive themselves? self torture? and actively seek death and self-destruction?
The child idealizes the caregiver to bond with them.
Esp. the infant idealizes the mother,
Because the mother is the source of life and protection for its initial years.
So this is where the primary attachment is created.
A certain primary relational structure gets formed in those years.
If the mother herself is lost, and the birth was from unconscious compulsion,
And if the mother is severely misattuned to the child’s needs,
Then the child’s needs go severely unmet.
If its needs are met highly randomly and inconsistently,
Then it will develop disorganized attachment
(that includes anxious-preoccupied and fearful- avoidant attachment patterns).
If its needs are met consistently,
Then it will develop secure attachment.
If its needs are not met at all, even once,
Then it will become a dismissive-avoidant.
Basically for a dismissive-avoidant,
Opening up to an other fully is anathema to them.
It is as good as committing suicide,
It will de-structure the entire psyche they have built.
They live only relying on themselves for almost everything.
Now this naturally idealizes self-reliance,
While decrying dependence of any sort.
The world-view formed by a person with this attachment style,
Precisely mirrors his interaction with his caregivers.
The image could be something like:
“Everyone is selfish and serving their own interests.
So I too will do the same.
Nobody cares about me unless it benefits them.
I must avoid dependence at all costs.”
Something like that,
And there are many layers to this.
There is grief/sadness and great anger towards others.
Even ignoring something is a form of hostility.
The dismissive-avoidant may ignore others with such intensity.
In the deeper psyche, it is a form of punishing them for what they did.
Giving them a taste of their own medicine, what they did to him.
RULE: “We do onto others, what others did onto us.”
So their treatment of others is a reflection and it mirrors how they were treated in their formative years.
What matters here is “FORMATIVE” years.
Because that is the time the ‘Self structure’ is formed.
Thereafter the entire experience of the world is in relation to that structure.
So for the dismissive avoidant, there is no alternation between grapes are good and grapes are sour.
They don’t even talk about it, in fact they don’t talk about anything related to their needs for relationship. It stays preserved in their own unconscious darkness .
It is just stuck on “Grapes are sour”, the idealization part has been repressed and buried into their unconscious.
Because if that is brought out, it will dismantle their entire independence idealizing structures.
The irony is, it is traumatic for them to see the world as good.
It is much easier to see the world as terrible and keep finding more proof for that.
Because that would justify their position right, of being to themselves and independent like an island.
They believe they have separated themselves from the morass of an ugly uncaring hostile humanity.
Generally the ‘grapes are sour’ experience applies to people who go through its opposite too of ‘grapes are wonderful’.
It is the alternation between the 2 that gives the strong experience in either direction.
Since in their formative years, their needs were intermittently met, followed by long periods of the opposite, it is a torturous confusion.
It is like living in a place where a gale, hurricane, flood, earthquake and other natural calamities keep striking your house again and again, causing you to somehow survive that and build your house once again from scratch maybe in a different area, only for that to happen again, and only for you to once again build a new house, and so on.
It becomes like an eternal improvisation exercise,
Where all relations are nulled, and where you try all over again and again.
This is basically a situation of high insecurity.
Where all “basis, rooting, hinging, foundation” is lost on a dime again and again.
This can be quite maddening for them.
Why? Because the projections wildly alternate,
Swinging from one extreme to another extreme,
Canceling everything out as they move from extreme to extreme.
For instance, suppose someone does not like me,
Then I will tend to try to see them as undesirable/terrible,Â
Because only then can them not liking me, become a kind of ‘good riddance’, i.e. a good thing.
Else, if I see them as good/desirable,Â
Then that means I am not getting access to something good,
And that will entangle my energies where I keep making efforts to try to get them to like me.
So it is better to tune perception to see them as undesirable or poisonous,Â
Then them not liking me back will be good and alright,Â
Because that would only prove I am good and they are bad.
Else it would turn into, I am bad and they are good,Â
And that I have to be the sorry one to change and please them enough for them to accept me.
This is precisely the harrowing attachment struggle.
Preparing the body to bond OR to be alone.
Essentially, for the secure attachment people, the aloneness gets repressed in the unconscious.
For the dismissive-avoidant, the bonding part of them gets repressed in the unconscious.
They both appear to be stable, because of achieving successful repression from moving from chakra 2 to chakra 3.
Whereas, when repression cannot happen easily, because of conflicting caregiver’s attitude and behavior, then it results in the anxious-preoccupied or fearful avoidant,
Depending upon which side the scale veers to.
# If it comes closer to the secure side, then it has greater hope “If I can just try harder this time, I will make it to secure attachment”.
# If it comes closer to the avoidant side, then the hope is towards the opposite “If I can just become independent, then I can get rid of this painful need for others”.
So the scale is:
Dismissive avoidant —- Fearful avoidant –|– Anxious-Preoccupied —– Secure attachment.
This inner drama play between ‘he loves me’ and ‘he loves me not’, happens only with the middle 2. Because it is the middle 2 that are the realm of insecurity.
The dismissive avoidant is sure ‘he loves me not’.
The secure attachment person is sure ‘he loves me’.
So they both are somewhat settled in their lifestyles.
The deepest fear and the deepest desire
The deepest fear is the ‘fear of death’.
It is not ‘death’ itself that is feared (because it is unknown), but the ‘fear of death’.
The fear is of the ‘image of that possibility’.
Fear is not about the actuality but about the possibility (as imagined).
Fear is the projection of a negative possibility onto the unknown.
But it derives its substance from the past memories/known.
So the unknown is defended against, by fear.
All fears are illusions though, because:
“Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.”
So in a way, our greatest fear is of total disillusionment.
I feel the deepest desire/longing is the desire for:
Liberation, Mukti, Transcendence, Enlightenment, The highest possibility,
To merge with the deathless source,
The desire for God itself (omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence).
I think all other desires and fears are different mixtures of the above 2.
Like how sugar and salt is mixed in different proportions in different foods.
They all taste unique, but carry these 2 essences.
When the heart is fully cleansed,
It radiates deep devotion.
It feels like a boundless vacuum, or an infinite fall.
It is like falling in love, but with the fall never ending,
Because it is a state inspired and generated from within, not from outside conditions.
Devotion is the highest expression/potential/possibility of the heart.
Devotion is just you being really straight and committed to your own deepest desire/longing.
Allotments of desire to serve or take responsibility
Abstractly seen,
There are “quotas/allotments of desires” functioning through us.
I think this is exactly what they call “Prarabdha karma”.
I feel we gravitate and are attracted to the ‘genetic instruments’ and ‘conditions’ that will be best suited to serve those desires.
‘Genetic instruments’ here refers to our choice of which human body to occupy for this lifetime.
And of course, this genetic instrument will be a child of many other surrounding conditions that will be like the larger body surrounding it.
To give an analogy:
Supposing you wanted to do a lot of professional video editing work and are continuously on the move, you might choose to buy a high end Apple Macbook Laptop for that purpose.
But suppose, lets say you wanted to play the latest AAA pc games which require the most powerful GFX card, and are mostly at home, then you might choose to buy a much bigger Desktop PC.
If you live in the US, you would get it cheaper, compared to buying it from India.
Similarly, in US you might also get many more options for the hardware components.
So based off that analogy, here in this case:
We choose an instrument from the choices available in the market,
To fulfill our requirements/desire/purpose.
We are also limited by what is available in the market at that point of time.
Just like how when we desire/need something,
We check out the local market at that time,
And make a choice from what’s available.
I think similarly, when taking birth here we might probably have a similar set of constraints.
Then there is the concept of responsibility.
I think responsibility is something we take up from our own desires.
Generally we refer to the overheads as responsibility.
For example, take the statement:
“I enjoy my smartphone, but I am responsible to keep it safe and in good condition”.
# Here the desire is to enjoy the functions/features/abilities of the smartphone.
# But the responsibility is the overhead of maintaining it, keeping it safe, and so on.
Another example would be, say our desire is for a monthly salary, then we would take up a job (take on some responsibility) so that we are paid that salary (which is the desire).
So in short, all responsibilities serve our desires.
Responsibilities are necessary overheads we take on for fulfilling our desires.
It is desires that is primary.
Responsibilities are its supporting function.
Next let’s cover ‘disposition and attitudes’.
Our personality/dispositions/attitudes are also ways to serve our desires only.
They are like the background/backdrop conducive factors.
For instance: Say I have the desire to be liked by everyone and avoid conflict.
Then naturally, the disposition I would adopt would be: ‘polite, pleasant, diplomatic, highly adaptable’.
So your disposition definitely conveys your desire.
But even here, desire is primary.
The disposition and attitudes are like conducive fragrances to attract the bees that you desire.
Another reason for birth could be for balancing out the personality.
For instance, say someone was an insensitive bully in his former life.
He could then choose a birth of being an artistic, sensitive, and weaker person to experience those opposite qualities.
That would satisfy his desire for balance and neutrality.
After all, we can truly move to non-duality only when we transcend all dualities, right?!
This is a dictum I learned from Teal Swan: “To heal from anything is to experience its opposite”.
So figure out what your real desires are.
And the things that you have taken up in your life to fulfill them.
This is more a contemplation on ‘why’ by conscious observation, and the goal is for ‘revelation’.
Even looking at your mundane life and tiny decisions, will reveal a lot of deeper things about yourself.
Resonance, Attraction, the time-shaft dimension of a person
Every person we meet has a past, present, and future.
“…Past self —— Present self ——- Future self…”
People are like flowing rivers.
And when you meet them, you are meeting their river at that time and place.
All interaction is only possible only because of resonance.
Without resonance, the others would not even appear in your experience.
You mingle/jibe/sync with the person only through the resonance you both share.
In other words, you see them within you, through how they appear/form within your space and its filtering structures.
Understanding this resonance can be a very subtle job.
It could be a positive or negative kind of ‘energy investment’ resonance.
For example: Both liking or hating the same thing.
Another possibility is, it could be resonance with the thing but not with the relationship to that thing.
For instance: Say both are obsessed with the idea of beauty.
One of them trying to become beautiful with the other actively rebelling against the idea of beauty and doing the opposite.
The commonality here is, both are focused/fixated/locked onto, and have their cathexis/emotional investment set on the same theme/field/topic/idea, although with differing/opposing relationship.
So there is the resonance from:
# What idea you focus on
# Relationship towards that idea
The first bullet point creates the “shared reality/shared frame of reference”, which is the primary resonance.
The second bullet point, that is, the relationship towards that shared frame is the secondary resonance.
This is because if the 2 do not see/share the reality/frame as the first step, then no interaction is possible at all.
Another element of this is consciousness.
# 2 people could come from the same cultural background and share that deep resonance,
But they could be completely unconscious of it.
They both may not see that shared resonance as an object at all in their experience.
# On the other hand, if there is consciousness of the resonance, then there is also consciousness of the object that is resonated with. And this implies that the person is seeing from a point of view that is transcendent of the object.
This is actually a necessary precondition for all consciousness of any object.
All consciousness requires transcendence, that is to see something clearly as an object in your experience, requires ‘you’ to see from an ‘identity space’ that is transcendent of that object.
All consciousness needs contrast.
The ‘transcendent reality’ provides a contrast to everything we experience here.
Union-ing with that, allows for the greatest clarity and unifying vision of everything here.
Let’s now look into the time dimension:
What the other values/cherishes/desires/longs/strives for, represents their future self.
That is what they will become, or that is the direction of their movement.
They are drawn towards certain possibilities, and if you are also attracted towards a similar direction/possibility, then that also is a resonance shared.
In a way, seen from a 5-D perspective, every person is tracing a time mandala.
From the 5-D perspective, the entire mandala is already there, it is only a matter of time.
Like how a cassette or DVD already has the entire recording, but it is played out in time.
So there could be a 5-D resonance too. Some kind of complementary time mandalas in deep relationship with each other.
This is what is called soul connection I believe.
Basically a referent used to point to a much deeper higher dimensional resonance/relationship/attraction/complement-ality.
Sometimes the attraction to the other is because they represent a possibility/potential that we desire, but we are unable to be/become or own that due to various reasons.
This could be 5-D or even 6-D based.
# 5-D based attraction would be something you could potentially become, but you may be having many other preoccupations and constraints, it may involve too many sacrifices, compromises, guilts, fears, restructuring, and so on.
# 6-D based would be something that is impossible for you to become in this birth given your conditions. For instance, if I wanted to be a billionaire’s child, that is a 6-D possibility because it is impossible in this current birth no matter what choices/decisions/investments I make. It is then more like a parallel universe, that can only be lived in the imagination.
Imagination is the Ultimate Bridger of all worlds and possibilities.
Journey to the Abstract 