Being together is an effortless exercise particularly if one learns to live with and or for the other. In this mode of existence there is no separatism that is, the other and me. Rather one yearns to be in a spirit of togetherness. There is as such a unity, a goal to be achieved that of synergy where a sense of calmness swipe over and all one sees about is a frame of how to be. Reaching out becomes a measure of being where the subject always is intention to be positive.
To be destructive on the other hand, is to always find fault with the other at all times. In this mode of being, there is no meeting place of being together or reaching out. It is about putting the other down and seeking something non positive. One takes that approach presumably as the subject wishes to keep control. Divisions takes over and the subject here is much interested in a kind of self -preservation /survival and with it naturally comes arrogance, hatred, frictions and disharmony.
A kind of a senseless approach where the individual is for ever intent at first of all looking at the minute negatives about the other whilst thinking that the latter is the cause of all the malaise about. Whatever the other may do, may never be sufficient for one who has espoused a route of hatred closely associated with anger at the base where all one cares about is verily to thrive on the separatism aspects that exist.
The mindset of one who is positive seeks to view the other as a living warmth, a comrade which may enhance our being whilst the negative -prone subject sees the other as a constant threat not only to be put aside but indeed the latter intently seeks to firmly also see the enemy in the other, someone to be despised. In destructive mode, there is a one-way traffic of frictions, fragments and hatred usually resulting in violence. The spirit of togetherness is substituted for aggression making hatred the base of one’s being.
Such feelings are part and parcel of one who has taken up materialism at its core or a way forward and thereby relying on what the modes offer, in its mostly ignoramus and passionate forms whilst the ‘goodness’ aspect is usually sub cultural or meant for a selected few if at all, to the detriment of the rest. Obviously in such a trend, all become a subject of despise and with this being so, there is hardly any reflection on how to be and move into that realm which seeks to better and better oneself as all has a clear strategy to devise ways at creating distances. Rapprochement or reunion of one and the other is a far cry. One simply remains in congruity only where there are sadly aspects of dislike, contempt, hate and vileness. A way to be at a level of the mind where one adopts being in the world whilst seeking to outdo the other based on an intention of suppression or annihilation of others.
Divisions and fragments constitute a non-healthy way to be as espoused by those who creates and thrives on differences. The positivist always seeks to see what unites whilst its opposites always find ways at placing those of a certain type in control starting with themselves of course whilst undermining others.
In their vocabulary the norm of the transcendental way is non-existent. It is all about resentment, hostility and animosity in play and that where their strengths lie, in carrying that is forging disintegration whilst throwing seeds of frictions if only to further germinate aspect of separatism. Everything is disjointed: obstacles are created if they are not, they do not arise due to the frictions which are set in motion. Thus, problems emerge everywhere, frictions and factions to be in a certain way by the so-called controller or those who may be seemingly in a stronger position.
The aim of the latter it appears is to make the weaker others as perceived to submit to their vile ways and with time the negativists take the view that those on the receiving end of nastiness may lose their identity and conform to the strategy of the autocrat who germinate discord, would prevail. On the other hand, no one in the world would acquiesce willingly to grow into anonymity. Individuals, and people everywhere throughout history has awakened and risen above and beyond constraints placed either physically and culturally or otherwise taken actions to shrug injustices and arise towards reasserting themselves so as to bring about a different world order where frictions and hatred are replaced by well being of one and all and to be sure not for the few but to one and all on towards a realm of mankind where one is recognised rather than being suffocated.
Just like at the interpersonal level, one abhors being cornered into subjugation to one or other likewise at a more impersonal level the concern is to move out of the domain of being stifled towards seeking freely opportunities just like any other without constraints.
Yet all these norms pertain to the platform of the material which thrives on divisions as there is simply no vision to awake and verily seek that which is above and beyond the mundane. If one moves from the platform of the mundane, to be sure all else becomes clearer in that there is reflection on the realm of the material. It is a question of moving away from that altogether which brings one to the level of seeing that one is really, not from a perspective or a view or via a veil. Or, like we have remarked in previous writings: Is it possible to simply be and so awakened to a form whereby one neither is part of an ‘ism’; a kind of freshness of being without constraints. Can one just be and inversely see the other equally as someone without referring to or bringing in the equation one’s own historical baggage which makes one fails to perceive and see clearly and distinctly. That is a challenge that the mind needs to awake to if it has to make sense of the world in to which one has been thrown into. Make sense of it all and be at peace. Or take a side, some side and adopt an ‘ism’ at one’s peril since all one does is then to conform and become a victim of that emotional hindrances. Is it possible to be free? Or is one for ever a victim of history?