On Rejection

rejection-suzanne-marie-leclair

‘Rejection’ is the withdrawal of the ‘power supply/investment’ itself.
[‘Reality objects’ dependently arise from relationship]
So every-time there is hope and effort, and if rejection follows, then that:
{hope/investment -causing-> Efforts} = everything is wasted.
If this happens 1000s of times, you will get total drained from being unable to plug into the larger circuits, you have to withdraw your actions/efforts and go back to the philosophical drawing-board/introspection/remapping/reexamination.

Interestingly, very often, negative relationships are preferred to rejection.
Because when you are attacked, you are still validated as SOMETHING – a foe/a hateable person/a punishable person.
There is some identity that is being upheld and sustained by the attacker of you.
That is why when a void of neglect is created in a child’s life, it generally fills the void with a negative relationship, of, “I must be bad/defective in some way and that is why as a punishment I am neglected and if I do right I can earn back the love/involvement/relationship/inclusion into life”.
This could result in that child pursuing self-improvement/self-flagellation for the rest of his/her life to earn the missing affection/relationship.

Let’s take the case of a negative abusive relationship.
The person is allowing you to [be something] by virtue of his/her relationship to you -> and stirring up some [stimulation/some emotion/some drama/some engagement].
But in rejection -> it is like pulling the plug off.
The other gives you no sustenance whatsoever, and since reality is ‘dependent- arising’, when any one side withdraws, it comes to an end.
And your social-identity/ego is made up of nothing but the [conglomeration of all the projected images of others on you as relationships].
Relationships with others make -> ‘YOU’/your social identity/your ego.
Relationships with your internal imagination world objects keep those objects alive.

Say you are looking for a soul-soul relationship or individual-individual relationship, but everyone you know is plugged into a social system/circuit/frame.
In that case, you participating in their FRAMES is to only give strength to the already large-network they are invested in.
It is like investing the little money you have into a [large multinational corporation].
Firstly your [peanuts investment] means very little to the multinational.
Secondly, the person you are giving that too, who is inside the [power-grid web of that multinational] is only one of its agents and he could care less if he loses one supporter, even if you walk away.
But you know what, you would have lost a LOT of investment energy in that transaction.
For a person not invested, the social entities are just [larger impersonal uncaring alien organisms] that expand and take as many [life energies/souls] into their structure.
People are plugged into these systems/reality power-grids, and the life of these systems COMES FROM the PEOPLE who are PLUGGED INTO THEM -> creating a circulating circuit that gives power to the system.
The entire definition/structure/sustenance of these systems comes from the common investment of a LARGE number of people.
That is why people who have a ravenous desire for power will always go after the most popular well accepted things, because those circuits carry the most power from carrying the investment the highest number of people.

This is digressing from the original topic, but what I wanted to communicate here was that, if you desire an [individual-individual relationship] but find that 99% of the people you know are plugged into various social games and the only windows of relationship they provide you are for you to participate in those impersonal frames, it will eventually drain you.

Society is ‘descent’ while transcendence is ‘ascent’

There is nothing wrong with descending or ascending.
I am just looking at these 2 aspects of existence scientifically.

What does society expect from you?
To grow up?
What does growing up entail?
A series of decisions/commitments/sacrifices?
A series of specializations and an ever deepening identity structure?
Isn’t specialization the most celebrated thing and the sought after thing in society?
To become an expert/master in your chosen discipline?
And then work to either maintain/uphold one of its existing structures or to forward it to new improvements(addendums or reconstructions).
Society expects you to come down and descend from the clouds and ground youself, i.e. become something solid like the earth.

To transcend on the other hand is the opposite movement.
You move upwards like the eagle flying towards the sun.
Away from the ground, away from the solid world,
You move away from specialization/analysis into generalization/synthesis.
You are flying upwards from the earth to the sky.
Rather than entering multiplicity and diving deeper into it into ever furthering differentiation, you are now seeking singularity and union.
You leave behind familiar structures of comfort and security and venture into the unknown to find the philosopher’s stone/the lost plenum.
It is a project of reclamation rather than sacrifice.

So if I were to draw a spectrum:
Specialization/analysis/differentiation ———— Generalization/synthesis/unification
Society is to the left while transcendence is to the right.
They are 2 opposite directions.
This is summed up, in the duality of:
Samsara ———————- Nirvana

Society and the chakras

spiral-dynamics

In a society run primarily in 1C, 2C, & 3C, life revolves more or less around these 3 chakra values with some fringe activity in the 4C,5C, 6C, & 7C.
Generally societies have a center of gravity which forms its nucleus and all the other chakras orient around the center, which is the organizing principle.

Societal levels:
1C(physical) = The physical power/fitness/looks/health marketplace.
Here the rule would be ‘might is right’.

2C(informal/group/relationship status) = The socio-sexual marketplace. Dealing with personality and seduction. Here the rule is ‘seduction and influence wins’.

3C(formal/political/societal status) = The socio-political marketplace of power/authority/influence/certifications/proven-worth. Here the rule is ‘formal positions of power/control/possession win’

So the 3 levels are of increasing scope from – individual -> group -> society.
And there is status and value attributed to each of these levels.

If society was run with the center of gravity in the 4C, 5C and 6C, here are some possibilities of what that might look like:
4C society = altruism, cooperation, willingness to see/understand, willingness to include(love), culture-centric pov, DEEP and TRUE interests (not vested interest) for the thing in and of itself and for its own sake.

5C society = ecological understanding, truth/wisdom seeking, planet-centric pov, symbolic level depth understandings (motifs, hieroglyphs, mythologies), gestalt vision, harmony, pure fundamental science.

6C society = seeking the philosophers stone, true vision, understanding various worlds/povs and altered states of consciousness, grounding in the pov of ‘all is consciousness’ as the foundation, intuitive depths, instant knowing, psychic potentials, formless in-sight, w-holistic, law of ONE etc.

7C society = non-local, non-dual, quantum, non-linear, formless, transcendence of time-space, powers beyond imagination etc.

Postmodernist vs. Traditionalist

PricklesAndGoo

* The postmodernist is in denial of limitations…….The traditionalist is in denial of potential
* The postmodernist is in love with the idea of all is nurture…..The traditionalist is in love with the idea that all is nature
* The postmodernist sees truth as entirely subjective…..The traditionalist sees truth as entirely objective
* The postmodernist is mystical/abstract…..The traditionalist is literal/practical
* The postmodernist thinks in metaphysical terms……The traditionalist thinks in physical terms
* The postmodernist is coming from top -> bottom…….The traditionalist is coming from bottom -> top
* The postmodernist believes lower instincts come from the higher…..The traditionalist believes the higher functions are only to serve lower instincts
* The postmodernist is coming from the heaven standpoint…..The traditionalist is coming from the earth standpoint
* The postmodernist is a rebel/renegade/systems-transformer…..The traditionalist is a systems-maintainer/protector/supporter
* The postmodernist ego is tilted to superego service…..The traditionalist ego is tilted to id service
* The postmodernist is relativist…..The traditionalist is absolutist

I could also call these poles by other names such as:
Liberals vs. Conservatives
It reminds me of Alan Watts and his classification of people into 2 broad types:
Prickly(Traditionalist) and Goo(Postmodernist).
Now how do we marry these 2 poles :)?

On being an outsider

Outsider

Since my earliest memory, I have always been an outsider.
When you are an outsider, you have a fringe and ambivalent-investment in society’s structures.
So you step in and out of its matrix like visiting a place and coming back.
Whereas people who are totally enrolled into society are absorbed/fully-engaged in its dream/matrix/structure.
Since I step in and out to varying degrees, I am more like a traveler/explorer.

The outsider point of view, also clearly delineates and illuminates the boundaries of society.
Because one cannot see the inside from the inside.
One has to be outside to understand the inside clearly.
The other illuminates the self, the self illuminates the other.
The contrast is what gives transcendent clarity regarding BOTH.

Concrete works of art come out when the abstract structure is locked/fixed/solidified and thereby out of awareness.
Else without a firm abstract base (so firm that I can treat it as a ground and forget about it), a person gets entirely absorbed into the abstract and steps out of the concrete dimension.
Just like how when one suffers a sudden huge loss, death of a loved one, one is instantly transported to the metaphysical thought process – what is life? what is death? what are we here for? etc.
The person would have never thought along those lines, if not for this event, that swept away his concrete orientation and stable abstract.

The abstract is the territory of the spiritual/metaphysical.
Abstract (returning to God) ———- (returning to common living) Concrete
In deep spiritual contemplation one lives and moves along towards more and more abstract territories, until the final abstraction (the ONE) is reached.