Stillness is relative, Analogies from astronomy

Stillness is relative.
You achieve stillness when you move at the same speed as the object you wish to have still in your vision.
To attain stillness with life, you have to move at the same speed as life.
This is done by ‘allowing’ all motion to happen.
In totally allowing yourself to be moved, your experience becomes still.
Since everything is moving, there is no absolute still point to observe from.
When you move in total alignment with the movement of god’s will(the will of the WHOLE}, creation appears STILL.

Lets take some general examples to fire up our wonder and imagination.
star-trails

When you stand on earth, you are moving along with the earth(i.e. moving along with the frame of reference of the earth), therefore the earth(ground/scenery) appears to be still while the sky contents seem to be moving (stars moving, sun moving, moon moving, planets moving etc.).
Therefore to see the contents of the earth from a still point of view, you need to move with the earth.

space-station-view

Whereas if you stood still in the sky (i.e. a fixed point in the space, like say you were looking from a non-orbiting fixed space station close to the earth), the earth under you would be whirling at 28km/sec, while the sky contents would remain relatively still.

Generally the concept of objectivity refers to precisely this, to observe a system from a point of view that is outside of the system itself.
Because from a point of view outside of the system, the whole system can be observed as an “Object”. That is why the term “Objective”.

solarsytem

Similarly when observing the solar system, you have to move along with the whole solar system itself(i.e. move at the same speed as the entire solar system as it goes around the milky way) to have the solar system appear still in your vision.

There are profound implications to the metaphors/analogies presented above.
For instance, say you are perfectly indoctrinated into a religion.
Then that religion would become fixed for you, would appear still and eternal, as eternal truth, while everything else, such as the world, other people, other systems of belief etc. would seem to all revolve/change around this central frame of reference and appear empty.
This is similar to being on Earth (seeing Earth as real/ever-present) and viewing Venus in the sky as a passing possibility that comes up as a bright dot and goes back under the horizon. While the residents in Venus(would see Venus as real/ever-present) would see earth like a dot that moves in a certain way in the sky and vanish.
Each one would see their reality as real/truth/eternal/ever-present, and the other’s reality as a changing/empty arising-passing phenomena.

So if each one sees the changing outer world through the structure of his fixed eyes, then who is seeing the truth?
Again here, truth is relative.

earthvenussun

For instance, an entity on Earth can see Venus from its point of view.
An entity on Venus can see Earth from its point of view.
But an entity that is outside of the solar system can see the entire solar system from its point of view. Which means this entity sees the patterns of both Earth and Venus, and the dance between them, and the interactions of other planets with them, and this is something that the ones on Earth or Venus cannot see OBJECTIVELY because they themselves are moving.
So is the entity outside of the solar system seeing greater and vaster truth compared to the ones on Earth or Venus? Yes!
Similarly an entity outside of the Milky Way can see the entire Galaxy and all its patterns, and this would be an even greater point of view than the entity that was outside the solar system.

milky-way

Interestingly all the entities see an INFINITE PICTURE of INFINITE COMPLEXITY.
So there is a sort of fractal/holographic nature to this whole thing.

Creation and Destruction are not proportionate in this realm

Indulgence is not a good strategy because the rate of expending and regeneration is not the same.
The rates of regeneration and exhaustion are entirely different.
It is possible to break everything in one second but it takes a long process to create anything.
Creating harmony takes time, while creating disharmony is so easy.
It is so easy to make something ugly and chaotic, but so difficult to make something structured and beautiful.
It is so easy to waste energy and expend all of it very quickly but regeneration of that is not easy.
It is so easy to start a huge forest fire but it is so difficult for the forest to regenerate.
[Destruction] is so easy and takes no time at all while [Creation] is such a difficult/long/vulnerable process.
That seems to be the nature of this place.
The physical realm is esp. slow in its processes.
The next is the mental realm where destruction and generation can be much faster relatively.

How long does it take to create a stone sculpture, and how long would it take to break it?
It takes so many years to build trust, but it is so easy to entirely break it.
It takes so much effort to create an elaborate cultural system, but so easy to totally reject it and cast it aside.
To build a relationship takes so much of artfulness and effort, and it takes no time to just break everything.
How long did it take for the earth to flourish with all its creation/life/forms. Lets say it took 1 billion years.
It would take 1/billionth of the time to destroy the whole world with nuclear bombs.

How long does it take to create a complex machine? like your laptop. Think about all the labor that has gone into making every piece you see. And how long does it take to shatter it?
How long will it take for you to make a beautiful painting. You would have to learn the art over years, and develop your skills and then create a really beautiful one from all of that coming together. How long will it take me to destroy the painting? And if I kill you, I would have instantly killed all the intricate psychic structure you have created in your body-mind? (who knows how much we lose in death, whether we retain any of our specific learning/knowledge/memory at all).

Why this enormous difference between the power of creation and power of destruction.
Why can’t I be in a world where creation and destruction have the same power? That is true freedom isn’t it?
The only realm where that is true is in your pure imagination.
That is why I so prefer to stay there and not step down much into the world of becoming where destruction is disproportionately more powerful.
How is this place freedom?
The threat of destruction always looms and it relies on the restraint of all free agents. Everything is so hyper vulnerable here as a result.
How much can I control? 99% is out of my control?
The chances of my heart getting broken are 99% in this place.
It is so easy to destroy, but so difficult to create.
And 90% of stuff or more is driven by natural processes where only time and nurture can regenerate.
I cannot afford to be attached to anything here, because everything is so vulnerable to getting destroyed and even if I work day and night to protect my works I cannot truly secure anything.
The forces of creation are so so slow.

How long does it take to grow a baby? but it can be simply aborted in a few seconds.
This is not just for inanimate objects, but life itself that is so vulnerable here.
Life can be ended in a millisecond, but it takes so many years and decades to develop.
I can cut a tree with a chainsaw in less than a minute but how long it would take to grow that tree? 15 years?
I can raze a whole forest to the ground in a few hours, but it might take a whole century to grow that again – our whole lifetime and more.
Why is destruction literally a [Million] or [Billion] times more powerful here? – is the question I want to contemplate.