Tagged: non-dualism

Alan Watts on liberation from political stalking

The ‘left’ and the ‘right’ are being stalked and herded by masterful forces.

Frightened into choosing between a lesser-evil (false) dichotomy by those who govern on behalf of the hidden elite.

Alan Watts saw the answer to this societal manipulation – as he did for so many of our modern socio-political entrapments – rooted in the most ancient of iconographies.

yin_yang

It is by far one of Watts’ most subversive. Just take in the first sentence.

Obviously no society can tolerate within its own borders the existence of a way of liberation, a way of seeing through its institutions without feeling that such a way constitutes a threat to law and order.

I mean really take it in.

And then read the whole brilliant thing:

Obviously no society can tolerate within its own borders the existence of a way of liberation, a way of seeing through its institutions without feeling that such a way constitutes a threat to law and order.

Anybody who sees through the institutions of society and sees them for, as it were: created fictions in the same way as a novel or a work of art is a creative fiction.

Anybody who sees that, of course, could be regarded by the society is a potential menace.

In other words, you may put it in another way: one of the basic things which all social rules of convention conceal is what I would call the fundamental fellowship between ‘yes’ and ‘no’. As in the Chinese symbolism of the positive and the negative, the yang and the yin.

You know, you’ve seen that symbol of them together like two interlocked fishes.

760462_1

Well, the great game – I mean the whole pretense of most societies – is that these two fishes are involved in a battle. As the ‘up’ fish and the ‘down’ fish, the ‘good’ fish and the ‘bad’ fish.

And they’re out for killing.

And the white fish, one of these days, is going to slay the black fish.

But when you see into it clearly, you realize that the white fish and the black fish go together. They’re twins, they’re really not fighting each other, they’re dancing with each other.

That, you see though, is a difficult thing to realize in a set of rules in which ‘yes’ and ‘no’ are the basic and formally opposed terms. When it is explicit in a set of rules that ‘yes’ and ‘no’, ‘positive’ and ‘negative’, are the fundamental principles, it is implicit but not explicit that there is this fundamental bondage or fellowship between the two.

But the theory is, you see, that if people find that out, they won’t play the game anymore.

I mean supposing a certain social group finds out that its enemy group which is supposed to fight is really symbiotic to them. That is to say the enemy group fosters the survival of the group by pruning its population.

Would never do to admit that.

Would never never do to admit – just as George Orwell pointed out in his fantasy of the future 1984 – that a dictatorial government has to have an enemy. And if there isn’t one, it has to invent one. And by this means …by having something to fight, you see… having something to compete against… the energy of society, to go on doing its job…

Is stirred up.

And what the Buddha or bodhisattva type of person fundamentally is, is one who has seen through that, who doesn’t have to be stirred up by hatred and fear and competition to go on with the game of life.

Does that resonate?

If it does, would it be possible to stave off the shrieking voices all around demanding you to consider the stakes and the necessity to choose and do what’s right, to consider:

What voting and candidates and parties actually mean

When they are facilitated by the order itself.

And, maybe, even further:

If you authentically want to be part of changing this country and this world in a way that fundamentally transforms the machinations of social control and creates the opportunity to birth something entirely new and evolutionary…

Then, to question in a non-reactionary way: whether your place belongs within or without that superstructure.

And if without, then what that would actually look like.

And who you would be in that new paradigm.

 

Read: Alan Watts: ‘you are the whole system’

the mystical guide to Donald Trump (1)

donald-trump-1708433_1920

when we look at current news and historical events, the frame we use to interpret them shapes their meaning and symbolism.

there are a lot of different frames, but when we look at the world through the mystical lens it requires a disciplined approach to observing – and not reacting – to events. for a global population that increasingly defines itself by its judgment of news, this is a very difficult position to hold.

this is why you will see very ‘spiritual’ people abandon the principles of ‘awareness’ – in favor of ‘realism’ and ‘practicality’ – when they engage with the drama factory that is Donald Trump.

i know a lot of people who adhere to the practice of non-dualism – not believing in a binary system of ‘good’ or ‘bad’ – who completely lost their shit when Trump took the Presidency.  instead of seeing his victory as a critical phase in the movement towards a new human paradigm, they took it as a signal of retrograde momentum.

and a good reason to drop all the spiritual novelty.

i want to take that phenomena up here. as a way in, let’s take a look at a current news story as a way of seeing the multiple perspectives that can be applied to current events.

the New York Times recently published this headline:

U.S. War Footprint Grows in Middle East, With No Endgame in Sight

the piece centers on this bit of reporting:

The United States launched more airstrikes in Yemen this month than during all of last year. In Syria, it has airlifted local forces to front-line positions and has been accused of killing civilians in airstrikes. In Iraq, American troops and aircraft are central in supporting an urban offensive in Mosul, where airstrikes killed scores of people on March 17.

Two months after the inauguration of President Trump, indications are mounting that the United States military is deepening its involvement in a string of complex wars in the Middle East that lack clear endgames.

those endgames may well be actually quite clear to the strategic leaders in Trump’s administration.  among them, the desire to fortify the American global manifest destiny by embroiling themselves further in a Middle Eastern quagmire.

as the Times notes:

Others fear that greater military involvement could drag the United States into murky wars and that increased civilian deaths could feed anti-Americanism and jihadist propaganda.

Some insist that this has already happened.
“Daesh is happy about the American attacks against civilians to prove its slogans that the Americans want to kill Muslims everywhere and not only the Islamic State’s gunmen,” a resident of the Syrian city of Raqqa wrote via WhatsApp, using the Arabic acronym for the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL. He gave only his first name, Abdul-Rahman, for fear of the jihadists.

so there is the story.  now let’s look at it through a spectrum of lenses, landing on the mystical to close:

the cynical view is: the military industrial complex have asked for a $54B increase in military spending, so they need to fire off some stock.

the real-politikal view:  this is the thrust of a nation that is aware that is needs to re-assert its geo-political dominance in the face of declining power and a shift towards Sino-hegemony in world affairs

the religious context: it’s the natural extension of the clash of civilizations narrative that surfaced as a key driver in US foreign policy after 9/11. this has real apocalyptic planks as Mike Pence is professing to be a pure evangelical. and Steve Bannon wants to drive civilizational paradigmatic conflict.

the conspiratorial view: this sets up a justified narrative for the travel bans, possible muslim registry, and potential blowback on US soil.

each of these has their own built-in conventional wisdom in terms of how to oppose and disarm the threat.

now let’s take it from the mystical context:

first, let’s be clear this has to be intuitive not intellectual.  so this read comes from my gut and not my brain. but here is how i see it:

the earth is a generative free will plane. everybody gets to experience what they believe in at some level. especially those large groups who operate under consensual collective paradigms. part of the game here is to get as many generating organisms to buy into your paradigm, and thus make it a dominant world-building engine.

history is made by those who achieve that and get to live out their stories on earth.  

Trump’s election is about those groups (who are united across a broad spectrum of social economic, military, and religious ideologies) having agency in the historical narrative.

and those who buy into the binary; into conflict and competition and right and wrong. they will get to fight it out.  

it needs to happen if they are ever going to learn about the nature of their impulses. which is part of the trip for us here on Earth.

but that is not to say we should sit back and not fight for the world we believe in.  not at all.

what i would suggest however, in the context of (r)evolutionary mysticism is that we not feed into that binary impulse that drives those groups who are currently engineering reality for the great part of the world.  but rather, that we consider that by opposing things with the intent of destroying them, we edify them in the process.  and that there is another way of vanquishing and disarming an “opponent”… and that is through the understanding the nature of flow and systems of energy.

if we are all connected… if we are all part of the same system (which is a cornerstone of the mystical paradigm), then we are not seeking to destroy our opponent, but rather to draw them into the wisdom of our perspective and our practice.  so what do you do with a three thousand pound gorilla who appears to have nothing but ignorance and self-interest as their driving force?

the mystical answer: pull away.  vanish into the interior realm, where true generative power resides. and move from there. at least for some small percentage of the time you put towards the oppositional consideration and action.  see what happens to that force, which gathers its momentum from opposing forces.  it will topple over with its own false momentum.

this is a form of aikido. which differs from traditional combat.

the definition of aikido?

aikido is often translated as “the way of unifying (with) life energy” or as “the way of harmonious spirit”. [the] goal was to create an art that practitioners could use to defend themselves while also protecting their attacker from injury.

i know how counter-intuitive it is, my brothers and sisters, but with everything i understand about political revolution and the militarization of domestic and world police forces, some of us will have to develop a new approach to engaging what we oppose in the closing moments of the old paradigm.  and this is going to mean surrendering the conventional wisdom that informs political opposition.

the spiritual precepts of non-duality and soul-based world-creation can no longer simply reside as philosophical novelty items that we pull out during times of peace and tranquility.  they are ancient and practical strategies for creating the next world.  it’s time we put them to use.

(a follow-up to this piece with answers to questions about it: here)

(there is also a facebook page now for this blog, here)


with deep bows to my brothers in the CJ and especially BB who always puts me through my paces