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.

Desire as the root of consciousness/life/experience

Everything is dependent on desire.
Like you will work on relationships say, only if you desire relationship.
And only then does the whole structure of relationship etc. matter to you.
Else without that desire, the whole thing drops away and even falls out of consciousness/experience.
So desire drives consciousness.
Desire is the potential force that manifests consciousness.
It is this ‘desire’ that is called ‘love'(as I see it).
Total Non desire = No consciousness/No experience

And, there are infinite desires/desired possibilities, so this play of desire is what aligns you to structuring frameworks that shape you in their image (like being a body on earth bound by physical laws and body structure laws etc.), and consequently powers structures/investments/and their expansion into the larger structures with activities such like “aligning, harmonizing, changing” and so on.
If all I desire is source, then all other relationships/investments drop off.
The very consciousness of them drops off. Because consciousness needs desire.
The desires drop off not only from the investments, but from the structures themselves, and even from the larger structure creating mechanisms/matrixes themselves.
This can be seen as the moving away of desire from maya.
The relinquishing of desire from ALL of MAYA, draws all your desire back to its source, which ends desire, and also ends consciousness/experience itself.

This is the journey from: Jivaatma(Moon) —-to—– Paramatma(Sun)
To drop the accumulated-maya(karma) of the jivaatma and to get back its full merger into its source.
It may then emanate again as a fresh inspiration ray from the sun and once again participate in the grand maya matrix in a different role and different context.

Now a bit more about Maya:
Maya I see as multiple interlocking intertwined interdependent relational hierarchical heterarchical lattice matrix webs of patterning structures.
And these range all the way from the Grossest to the Subtlest.
Flouting those subtle energetic fields: brings instant resistance and pain – for e.g. in the social structure it is felt as being a misfit, awkwardness etc.
And in the physical world, you will injure your body if you flout the rules of the matrix of physical laws.
And fields inherently carry expectations(expectations first to BE and then the expectations to DO).
So say in the social world the individual people tuned into that field do not really exist, but are like bio-computers tuned to that field.
So the tyranny is from the field and the individual people tuned into that only execute it as its agents and appear as tangible feedback coming to you for the way you are and the way you act.
When something is loved, it is a blessing/treasure —else—– that very same thing is a oppression/prison/tyranny.

When one gets tired of ALL maya, the desire withdraws more and more from maya into subtler and subtler levels until the only desire is to return to the source. Then the desire is not for consciousness but for non-existence and a freedom from life itself. Because really you can have freedom from death only if you also have freedom from life also, because the 2 are simply dual pairs.

General masses vs. sociopaths vs. contemplators

GENERAL MASSES
In my experience, for most people, their emotions like desire, anger, liking, aversion etc. is all mapped to specific outer stuff.
There is a recognizable structure in their emotional mappings to the outer world.
But when you question them, they will always only point to the literal person, object, some situation happening, and attribute causation directly to the outer.
They cannot see their own structure, because they are seeing through that.
All their emotions are outward mapped onto a specific world image, projected from their structure, which is completely invisible and thereby absolutely true for them.
When you question them, they do not introspect, rather they might try to attack you/avoid you/ignore you/deny everything you say/attack the finger that points/ manipulate the finger etc.
This is because they cannot see what you are pointing at, at all.

SOCIOPATHS:
Sociopaths are on the far end of this spectrum.
They see the world through a hard integrated simplistic structure, that is opportunistic and looks to exploit everything for itself.
Their self structure is almost totally invulnerable to influence.
Nothing can change their reality orientation from outside since their eyes are always looking outward only.
So if you point to a structure they have, its as if you are pointing to something that does not exist. They would simply view that as an attack and try to attack your view.

Broadly the spectrum is:
Total self-reflection (total self-incrimination)—————– Total self-projection (total blame)
The spectrum could also be viewed as:
Sociopath ——————— Contemplator.
I would say, sociopaths are closer to animals, in the sense, their nature is unchangeable and immutable.
They cannot reflect on themselves and see ‘self’ as object.
So their whole world is their playground and they will demand everywhere and manipulate.
What are people on the other end of the spectrum called? – I would say, contemplators.
The following introspective functions are present in contemplators:
self-contemplation, self-examination, self-observation, self-questioning, self-reflection, self-scrutiny, self-searching, soul-searching, self-analysis, self-awareness, self-consciousness, self-recognition; introversion, self-absorption, self-centeredness, self-concern, self-involvement; self-actualization, self-discovery, self-exploration, self-fulfillment, self-realization; self-knowledge, self-revelation; self-concept, self-image, self-perception; contemplation, meditation, reflection, rumination

Contemplators cannot outrospect/project easily and operate from seeing all of reality as their responsibility including serving others.
Their self is likely prone to getting into ruminative thought loops, chaos, getting caught in logical paradoxes, conflicting desires, traffic jam energies…and so on.
The mindset of total self-projection, the state of the sociopath, is the state of mind one has when in a stage performance or when facing a big threat like a wild animal. One’s attention is then totally outward focused and that gives a taste of what a sociopath mind state is like to the contemplator folk.

Generally, when does inward focus happen then? – It happens in boredom, when there is 0 outer pressure, and when there is no threat OR if the threat is inescapable, then you retreat into total inward focus.
Another way to look at it is that sociopaths are like one-time programmable only chips, after that they function without being influenced. They are like clay that has hardened into rock.
The contemplators on the other hand are permanently programmable chips. They are ever malleable and changeable.
Contemplators stay permanently as clay.

I would think, sociopaths can comfortably roam around in the social world, because they are immune to all influences, and their total outward focus is the ideal state for survival and self-protection.
A contemplator on the other hand tends to avoid the social world, because he is very impressionable and malleable, and his outward focus is only when there are threats (i.e. he freezes into a structure temporarily only when there are threats), else he stays in his total malleable state.
So freezing into various forms and staying that way in social environments is ok if it is temporary, but to do that every day is burdensome for the contemplator.
That is why taking up one profession is difficult for a deep contemplator, because that is like forcing a malleable entity take up the same configuration/structure every single day for most of the day.
It is denying him the freedom he feels inside him everyday.
Contemplators are living in the meta-programming world itself.
Surviving in a world full of solid people is annoying for the contemplator, because he is exceptionally free and flexible but can never interact with others in that freedom.
The only way to interact with most people is to create quasi structures and interact with them within the acceptability zones intuited.
The contemplator is formless i.e. he has no intrinsic form and he is continuously aware of his freedom.
Whereas the sociopath is like a rock, a solid form, and he sees the entire world through this filter.

The process of creation and growth

The process of creation involves the following cycles:
Chaos -> Structure 1 -> Chaos -> Structure 2 -> Chaos….and so on
No essence(soul, monad) is retained between the structures, except the totality(God) itself.

The process of growth is similar, but it retains an essential quality which grows:
Chaos -> Structure 1 -> Structure1 + Chaos -> Structure2….and so on

It seems like by this model:
Creation is a cycle while Growth is a process.

Lets say, the Monad or individual soul only lasts one lifetime and does not span across lifetimes.
This model is in line with the teachings of ‘Nisargadatta Maharaj’ who experienced no persisting essence beyond the body whatsoever.
In that case, it would mean the spark of the essential monad appears in a primordial total chaos(before birth) and this spark initiates the whole birth-growth-death process.
Another possibility could be: The monad could last multiple lifetimes spanning multiple realms.

Another totally different model itself, would be:
Where we are endlessly growing from life to life.
Where there is an individual soul essence(monad), that grows forever.
But interesting, this model limits creativity.
Because TOTAL CREATIVITY -> REQUIRES TOTAL DISSOLUTION
Otherwise there is still the limitation of the original essence.
And the “Growth” concept can only apply until there is an enduring essence.