Author Archives: Ram Coceal

This kind of energy is of a different realm, of a form which is simply not about of the physical type where all is clutter free or of a mental form where one adopts a strategy based on a carefully planned way to forge ahead regardless of others. It is what is revealed as one witness sunset or perhaps that unique feeling one has upon being exposed to those glorifying natural sights

To be sure, being in an environment which haemorrhage of having a sod all attitude will reveal an abandoned area where all, are all over the place where all that one sees about areas which the onlooker may wish to avoid and or move on from. Unlike the aspect of organised chaos where one may as at least see a way through piles of a physically non palatable thingness about. … however, even that may not be what we are referring to.

To exist in such an arena means that one is contented with the form that are around and about us and the subject happily resides. The most obvious example is of a guy who keeps an unused car for years and years in his garden and create an aesthetically horrifying sight except for the former who carry on adding other broken fridge or a cooker to add to his collection of antiques non palatable sight. Obviously in such an environment all we notice is that one has created a comfort zone

Whilst this is the obvious others revel in equally carry a similar strategy non obvious way of maintaining one’s area of living in as much a state of acceptance that soon all becomes a norm. Translated this becomes a state of bad energy being circulated about through existing via piles of cluttering except for the subject.

There simply is not even the mental apprehension to intervene as one happily resides in that pool of material non comforting zone. To have an arena of a comfort zone is to be able to initially acknowledge one’s frailty first but where the latter is non-existent; one carries on through a motto of impulsiveness and or care based on one’s perception through a saliency of a false prestige of being. In that mode one is carried about through a notion of false pride and of non-acknowledgement of any other animate or inanimate hence the arena of darkness through either bodily and or mental clutter where one has litter comprehension to shift into a gear of operation which initially starts to negate the negative omens about the self.

Transcendental  energy is that form which goes beyond the format of the physical and the mental where one develops a willingness to naturally moves above and beyond that which is revealed but in the process the forms of the appearances and the mental resourcefulness simply emerges through intelligence: It is verily that feeling which one immediately has upon arriving g in an environment with a wow feeling, where one feels blessed to be at ease. In such a situation, there is immediate acknowledgement that one is in quite a special place…. where there is an immediate connection in spite of apprehending this for a first time.

It is the kind of feeling that one has upon being at a place where the self feels at ease almost effortlessly. And where one would say there are no contradictions to which we are too often exposed to. A natural expose where the self naturally realises that the energy about is not of a realm of the physical or of a mental form. We are referring to transcendental energy not necessary be exclusive to religious tradition. Or to be sure, as long as one goes beyond the norm of the material there is another realm   which emerges and it is precisely to this form that we are trying to convey.

There would be denial of such a form from some others as they also suffer from as much exclusivity as their fundamentalist counterpart as both are a fixed set form where the intent is to promote a way of being based on how things are perceived. And or extravagance shown onto others as if a non -material apprehension is either dismissed at the outset and or  be seen as an exclusive property of some others either through class, belief, or lack of it unlike the view that one belongs to the earth or let us the world and not that it all belong to ‘me’.

An energy which is not limited but expound itself to one and all, or being there and revelling at what is about in an aspect of grandeur! Walk in and arena and one feel it: This is non material energy which emerges and is there to behold and admire and witness and, in that moment, there is elevation of the spirit not simply limited to the few. It is an open awe which is perceived to one and all with no limitation where one is simply bewildered and realises in that moment that there is something unique and special about.

What is interesting is that when faced with such transcendental energy there is a calm and peace in that one feels automatically taken to a different realm which is not on the material or even mental form. It is about contemplating and being meditative to what is reveal in the immediacy of surroundings: A kind of aura where one is encaptivated and to be sure where one is uplifted not merely materially but also beyond the physical and witnessing a form which reminiscence of being somewhere unique and special.

Naturally, transcendental energy also brings about creativity as the self automatically goes in a gear of self-reflection and aspects of this; is always linked to pausing from the usual routine. One may say, whenever this is so; by the same token made to engage in a norm of which the energy is of a different form unlike the usual of the mental/physical form and so a uniqueness of both being there and that feeling of awe earlier referred to.

It is at the same time a moving away from complacency and of being merely entangled in a web of desires which keeps us firmly rooted in the temporal as it paves way on towards a form which makes us reach out beyond the ego towards responding to others by virtue of the fact there is something which goes far beyond the merely material. In that mode, one is confined or limited but verily in openness and in that format: One may perceive life as it is in a vision of beyond the limit!

Hatred, arrogance and desires culminating in suffering! All are interlinked as one seeks to address the problems of the material by this particular format. To do so is to forget that the realm of the mundane is fraught with a form that forces it to be so overwhelmed in a pool which is limited and may not go any further. It is like trying to understand something without knowledge, let alone comprehending!

Or one who hates and or sends vibes of negativity may not be a subject worthy of trust in trying to seek to comprehend life as it is as the former is already a victim and may only throw about garbage of similar arrogance, anger and hatred  which would further entangle one in another web of desires worthy of  lust but no more.

There may not be peace or calm emanating from a subject who is a reactionary as the latter’s vision is marred by a saliency which is not of openness but a brutal affair of ignoring the dialectics which is clear that one should always be alert if pursued within the realm of the material based on a bodily concept of being which is a fraudulent of being and or coexisting within the world. It does not acknowledge the other as a warmth and rather one is always at the throat of the non-me as if it is the self that is always a bodily affair of the type Shri Shri Ravi Shankar speaks of in that it is a real life partner (cf: current article circulating on WA on ‘Who is your life partner?’ as if all that matters is the bodily self.)

There is more to the non me and to oneself as one needs to move about to a level of transcendence not easily perceived by one caught up in the ghetto of the physical as being the be and all of everything! One may protest that in a world dominated by what is directly perceived and seen is the norm to abide by, whilst the non-bodily forms may never be so seen by the naked eyes, whilst seeing is believing is the motto of those who claim knowledge as being no more than the directly perceived. Obviously, we are inclined to dispute with our physical realist comrades by pointing out that there is more to one’s being rather than the purely material. Or if the material is the only way to be then it does not even make sense to refer to a non-bodily life form.

In this respect talking about aspects of even concepts of love and or its inverse makes no sense but as we are so; communication is taking place. On this view there is a realm which one may refer to and that is precisely the beyond of the merely material or physical. A movement away from a norm of what may be put to scrutiny.

Even our starting three words of this blog clearly is not physical and so one may appreciate the sense of it all. If this is so, therefore we may refer to beyond the material or the mundane and clearly remark that there is a sense of appreciation which is beyond the mundane.

One who simply sees material elements about and or is framed in the negative bodily aspects may never be one who may help, as the former revels in desires of arrogance and hatred which turns into wrath, and violence albeit verbal and or give rise to prejudice. Such categories are only worthy of one who resides on a platform or level which always brings about distress to the other as if there is no lack of it already.

With every phrase uttered, the speaker goes in a crusade of germinating seeds of what is being fouled about, as if to itself is ‘paradigm’ to follow  that one ought to follow as he/she never quite pauses to consider whether what one is verbose may yet be plain nonsense, in that all that one does is create a constant overflow of negative vibes. Such a trend naturally results in nurturing anger and hatred and whenever such a dialogue operates wisdom states that one either creates a veil about oneself and or physically disappears from the arena if it is impossible to do the latter. Life is an arena where one is perpetually at the mercy of so much attributions with only a few that brings about a redress of positivity; most of which are either forms of denial causing concerns towards leading a better life. The wise need to awake and note that we are of a mind that may be easily swayed by catastrophes of negativism: where one revels at similar forms with the latter and thus arises categories of the first three words with which we started. To be sure, nurture these and you are well on the way to lust and with the latter in operation, one is no better than those words as these become a measure of our being.

Follow these and one is at the mercy of a way of life where one may never rise up to that level of transcendence. Let alone, trying to be there, one who is so involved may never shrug free as the latter feels one knows everything and or truly be an imposer of their way of life… which we have referred to elsewhere as existing in the mode of impulsiveness as if to the latter only belongs the way of being.

Indeed, a far cry from apprehending the what is as revealed in life, surely moves us away from the mundane on to a form which calls for us to transcend and negate forms of the three categories which got us going and making sense of moving away from it and seeing the wisdom and comprehension of seeking a form where one is contented and or bringing about that realm of a calm and peaceful way of being where the negatives are negated and replaced instantly in a way of seeing only the best in the best in the other.

By doing so, one is no longer in the realm of being for ever in a criticism mode but of seeing positivity in every other one’s encounters. As they say life is too short to be entangled in a realm of anger and hatred and in changing these, what may emerge is a human who has learnt to appreciate the other!

Respect they say is to be earned as if this is something dependent on something else: It is conditional on something else. With this view, one takes it upon oneself to organise and set the boundaries of the game as one wish. There are demands made from the other in that it is all about expectations, seeking something in return. Do this and then ‘I’ shall abide or if you do not then ‘I’ may decide to carry on in its mode of usual negativity. A far cry from doing things for its own sake. Or respect proper is all about being something done for itself.

The idea that one does something in order to gain something else is repugnant as one is an ignoble, seeking advantages first for one self before trying for that which reflects kindness, and reaching out to others for its own sake. However, this is reflective of current relationships. ‘I love you. You love me. I do things for you. You do things for me’’

Conversely, if the reverse happens then hate is in the air. In relationships this leads to discord, anger hatred, sometimes violence whether verbal or otherwise. Or one may find that a friend of yesterday may become an enemy or be ignored completely so much so that one is blotted out. One only needs to look at a married couple who loved each other previously and the next moment it ends in separation and divorce where often hate emerges and all one remembers is the ‘bad’ that the other has caused. Call it the frailties of existence but where every other keep demanding as an individual or a group such occurrences are common. Respect is a material decode which is always dependent on something else. Verily, this is not respect but what one expects the other or others about him/her to be. Keep to the expectations and one is seen as a hero but somehow miss out once and you are seen as the vile villain forever. This is the ways of the world where trust or other positive vibes does not co-exist for its own sake. There is always an ulterior motive at play in that demands are made and the subject(s) make demands to maintain the ‘respect’ intact.

Or we find that where the ways of the world lack that essential mode then there are inherent problems . The material world is based on a mundane superficial mode of being where relationships are always not of that form which is eternal thereby causing undue expectations and that of getting something in return. The argument may be that the subject of respect is as temporal as the ‘expector’. In a futile world, one may never be as naïve but everything should be vibrant and dependent on something else. It is a question of survival echoing aspect of the survival of the fittest or the idea of winning, winning and winning where the sense of participation for its own sake is inexistent. It is a struggle, a war that keeps going on and on where the subject is entangled in a web of false desires within the material world which has its own agenda based on anger, lust, greed, hatred which are its governing principles; all based on the mundane where one does not relate to others in an authentic mode of being. It is always a negotiated aspect of life as if business comes into the equation even in a relationship. Or one may say that a relationship is measured in terms of gains and losses such that if there is nothing in it for ‘me’ there is no need to carry on. Such are the ways of the world: a world always rampant at deriving benefits for the non-me. There may not be real appreciation as within the conditioned world any other may not be perceived a living warmth for its own sake. To be sure, it is a rascal way of being full stop where it is always about fitting into a box and, fail it by an inch and ‘you’ are seen as enemy number one by the other!

Yet if this is so then the spiritual aspect of one’s being lacks any meaning in life. The impertinent would say that all life is materially conditioned as they do never take heed of that transcendental aspect of one’s being. Whereas it is towards that non material form which adds meaning to all sense of positivity often camouflaged in our way of seeking development from a miserable world where things are viewed in pairs of opposites instead of seeing things as they are.

In such a mode of being one opens up and reaches out to the other not because there is something to be gained but indeed it is a common facticity or dialectics to be so involved where the other is a comrade not because he/she does something for ‘my’ benefit and or would have some impact for me but the other regardless is a warmth. In this mode, respect is accorded to one and all regardless of the in-situation of the other. What we are attempting to communicate is the idea of merely seeing the warmth in all. The impertinent may remind us that one has to wise up in a world where the rogues also thrive at the expense of the naïve and that we need not unduly open up to everyone and that discrimination has its place. Even whilst acknowledging this point, it is also important to bear in mind that the overriding principle is positivity, an inherent quality which helps to be creative whilst its opposite albeit in terms of scepticism is simply a recipe to see oneself as special and everyone else as subservient to the self that one is or false ego, where one abides in the realm of the bodily self as if all and everything else need be so fashioned.

To be sure in such a modal way of being, one is a victim of the material, where it is all about engagement in life as if all are based on supplies and demands. Supply me with love and I am always there for you. Miss me by an inch and I shall not only despise you but become your arch enemy. A conclusive note may be whatever happened to Karuna ( Compassion) and Metta ( loving Kindness)  as the Buddha puts it !  

This is what emerges when one tries to play a role or being what one is not and or trying to live to an image that is making up to be something that others expect instead of being genuine in situation.

Therefore, one plays the role of something, someone which one is not. Or tries doing something that is not really the self but a made-up version of what is expected of me. Or when one does live naturally there is no need to put an upfront façade which others see. Life is to large extent a role play where one never is, in situation. Or we may remark that every other merely involves in role play but never quite recovers from that stage.

Sartre has remarked that to be in such a modal existence is that one simply is in bad faith that is not quite being there but carry on living a form of pretence. In this mode there may never be a real relationship that emerges as all one does is carry on playing a role; with the roles itself being staged by bad actors because the latter are never quite themselves or could not be so as they are engrossed in doing the expected rather than revealing as a warmth in situation.

When this happens with every other doing the same, no one is quite natural or facing up to the what is as revealed in situation. And it is a pretence in action all round. When this is so, relationships and togetherness give way to a mode of being that one is not. It is about putting an upfront to others and play a role.

Playing such a role in life means one is always not quite the self that one is. It is more of a truncated version of taking shelter of the false ego self which is projected by the bodily form which takes its directives off the mental which forces one to be or let us be more precise to act in a certain way.

The tragedy is that every other does the same: when this happens, it all becomes a nightmare as one then talks and walks and relates to others in a format characteristic of role playing but to follow what we are saying the participants do so for life.

There is no cut off point to reflect as in this mode one is doing simply what one is meant to be doing as per the norm.

The lack of course is that one misses out: it is all spurious engagements where the actors are never quite clearly with the audience: Indeed, there are no audience or theatre where the actors may break free and be themselves. The idea of being oneself is lost as one is entangled in a whirl of passion for ever and always being what one is not. In this scenario, even the audience are actors or to be precise plain actors as well as they are also part of the same scheme or format which coerces each other to be at a level where there is no reprieve from that superficiality where all are prey likewise.

That plain genuineness has been betrayed in the mode of a bodily self which has taken control of one’s life. The latter is never quite the self but a partiality where the self is lost and when this happens the subject is no more than a betrayal of the self. Where everyone does so, roles are predefined and set and the actors merely simply remain in roles. To be sure in a such a situation it is all about being in that mode. In such a style of life, it is always about living the life as is imposed from the exterior and when this happens, there arises bad faith that aspect which makes pretence the norm!

There is no proper connection as all is marred based on predefined format as if one may have to be at play constantly. It is a movement away from the Shakespearean diktat of the fact that the world is a stage when one tries to break free from that norm. Ambiguously, one may simply acknowledge that the English Poet/playwriter/actor merely was observing the nature of life and of our dilemma if so then the idea of breaking free from the norm remains the point which is always being referred to by way of irony in observation.

And sure, Shakespeare through the mouthpiece of Hamlet clearly was delving on the idea of to be and not to be…..which again, I have addressed elsewhere as being a question of how to be and as such very much a question of pausing , and reflecting towards that mode which takes us away from a mere aspect of pawn in the game of acting where we pays no heed to that which reveals to the self but seek to adopt to a form which makes us mere objects or no more than mere automatons or to be as what is expected.

Bad faith is that view which takes us away completely from what and who we are towards ignoring that self which one is and so merely being an object or to be in a set pattern. There may not be creativity in the format as we are plain re-activists and so are so entrenched in a dogmatic or  dictatorial mode: where this is in operation, we are a nonentity a plain thingness in the mode of in-itself to adopt an existentialist term. Or either letting aside that subjectivity with being entranced in a brutal reductionism where what matters are simply a format of placing each and everyone in boxes so that along with others there is a sense of contentment at being so involved. All becomes a pre-set pattern, and on this view, one continues to play a role.

It is about setting oneself free from that role, a role that one is deeply caught up into: The task ahead to shrug free and move onwards which may be possible when one reaches out to the self that one is, away from that mundane bodily self.

To fail to plan is planning to fail. Covey has taken this phrase to beware the other on the need to take heed of what is revealed about us not from a constraint of the immediacy where what matters or seems to matter is the obvious where one is made to be based on an imposed fragile and futile lifestyle which hinges on the seen…. the obvious not necessarily the what is but no more of a truncated form.

In the latter format, all that is viewed is subjected to a form which is absurd since it is a haphazard way of being, nay that which lacks a comprehension with intelligence. It is based on the format of a mind which merely is responsive or reactive to the modes as revealed. In this mode, one is simply impulsive. Or how one acts and or commune with life is based on a mode of being which is simply as per the whim of the mental; that which may at one time leads one to take a path as dictated on the spur of the moment. Whilst some may revel at this at being so called living in the present, there is to be sure not taking of the future and or checking the self against the learning process of the past.

The wise needs to take note of what that past may have taught whilst taking shelter of a non-reactive or more precisely a creative way which accounts for what is to follow rather than being rapturous in the singular present which denies the self that one is.

It is about being astute and being responsible and or not falling prey to the purely reactive modes which corners us. Elsewhere we have noted that to pursue such a way is akin as again Covey observed to be on a flight where the pilot has no direction of where it is going or an agenda of a goal of where or how to land.

Disaster strikes when there is a no directive of where one may go. A compass becomes imperative in that one is proactive/creative. In reactive mode one simply is at the service of the mental forms as it reacts to the whims which is generated as and when. To be impetuous is to be engaged in those actions which are done without thinking and or taking notes of what one’s actions may have on oneself let alone others. To be sure all that is based on a comprehension that one is never independent at least not fully in a world where one is bound up either in some way or other with others.

Or one is always a responsible regardless of what station of life one is in. There may not be such a thing as being independent. It is a myth of the mind to feel that one is independent and so may act likewise as if one’s actions may not have consequences for others. Where one is impulsive, the other is relegated to a non-entity. One is prized above all others and so the whimsical aspect takes precedence with an attitude of ‘damn the rest’ at work. Or so one sees the ego self as that which is of prime value. To be more precise, it is an exclusive way to be which takes little or no heed of the other, any other for that matter.

The way of impulsiveness is verily that which seeks to impose itself there and then without care or respect for those about. It is plainly acting on the whims of the mind or mental which adopts that obscure way which reacts sometimes one way and at other time another way. It is reactive and in that mode; one is simply being a pawn to a mind which thinks is knowing but in truth disregards all others about its being.

Intelligence is not at work: There may not be respect to oneself or any other. Or one may observe that there is an apparent fragment at work; which is reactive. The way without a compass is like the pilot who is guiding others along the sky not quite knowing what to do or where to go and or not knowing how to halt if caught up in a whirlwind or persistent turbulence.

The indignant self is no more than such a guy who is at a lost in the wilderness and merely takes actions just to survive a disaster at all times. It is all about the instant, the spontaneous which may be prized in some quarters but clearly no more than a reckless way to be which verily causes disturbance form the norm. To be sure there may not be any comfort in leading a plain ignoble way where one takes shelter of an always confused mind. Or it is a question of turning that mind to befriending it and makes it work for the self that one truly is and look at how one may re-tune in being a comrade.

The question always remains how does one awakens intelligence? The question of how to be is linked verily on a way which is open ended and never a closed affair. The whimsical takes shelter of itself, the ego self which absolves all others but adopts the self; whilst the accommodating self makes use of a vison to be; that which takes its being from the dialectics with a non -disrespect to the other but importantly taking shelter of intelligence where the mind is friend. Can one be that and or develop such a way to be?  Or should one perpetually be at the mercy of the reckless and be forced to adopt its ways? How may one be free of rashness? The other question is how may one be like that life pilot with a compass, a goal or a guide? ….. rather than its antithesis where all one does is be at the whims of one’s mind or like the pilot without a clear goal.

BEWARE: It is very much a question of choice!

To know is the biggest delusion in material life as in this mode one has invested in the petty self aspect of life which is exclusive to that self as if whatever one decides is or more precisely needs to become the norm. This is a movement away from the Socratic plea which stated that ‘all I know is that is that I know nothing.’ Here, the adherent is in a fixation where there is a partial clarity in operation with its vulgar modal forms which forces a certain way of being in exclusivity …. where there is no link to the self that one is but rather a temperamental one based on fragmentation.

Justification for that kind of belief is ample as the proponent develops a saliency of being in that no other matters. All that matters are a crude way where a boundary is set. The barrier at an impersonal level may best be seen in adopting crude nationalism or religious zeal or at the personal level an inbuilt element of me-ism where barriers are in abundance.

Material life exposes oneself in delusions of grandeur as if to the crude self belongs everything where the other is not only blotted out of one’s existence but is subject to one’s vile hatred and arrogance of being where all that matters is the little me in operation to the detriment of others about me.

The concern is not to be simply in the mode of negativities where one does not see above and beyond the petty ego or neophyte stage where one is stuck at a level of the mind which forces one to acts as per partiality of being.

In neophyte stage, one is stuck at a level of the conditioned mind where one is directed as per the whims of the latter. There is no movement or attempt to rise above and beyond the false ego, or the zeal of knowledge as per one’s petty self. Life is very much a question of at least acknowledging and to be sure not ignoring the other. The vile of course has its agenda of recreating life as per its whims which shuts out every other bar initially his ego self minus others whereas its crusade is clear as it is a movement towards imposing rather than exposing. It is plain impulsiveness where one reacts as per a partial way of being.

Only in seeing the whole may one move about laterally in but for one entangled in a level of a divisive mind this may be a daunting task since one claim to know! And with it comes a derogatory state of affairs where the vulgar is in operation, where hatred and violence becomes the norm where some other or certain others only are acknowledged… the rest are relegated or ignored to a conditioned mind which perceives only a certain way of being…. where what matters are its ways or impositions nay that impulsive self at work.

The question of divisions always dominates the arena as is viewed in a shade of being not akin to the dialectics. In such a mode there may hardly be a way forward as what merges are negativism where what matters are that truncated form of being to the detriment of the other as already hinted.

The arrogant self is marred in contradictions: it may not have any shelter as it seeks justifications. One may never quite justify arrogance, anger, hatred, envy and greed at a level of the mind which is reactive and caught up in the modes of a materialist culture. The arguments put forward by such a view is all too addictive and bear no resemblance to life as it is. It is a question of being simply ensnared in the diversity where the unifying aspect is abandoned. Part of the reason is that there is no real understanding beyond the merely material.

A conditioned form of knowledge is corrupted at the outset and is within a predefined set of boundaries where negatives are in abundance and where there may not be an escape to see and or just to perceive. Everything is marred in contradictions. The problem with partiality is that all is within a set norm and so knowledge is dependent on that which is seen.

Is there a way forward beyond the fragmentations and the conditioned?  Is this possible to move out of the realm of the temporal and the material? Perhaps on towards a transcendence without any contradictions where one is not a victim of the envy, pride, anger and hatred? To be sure, one is slowly moving away from the known categories towards a realm which challenges of that into which one has always been immersed in since being awaken rudely onto the world.

Or let us say is there a way out of our dilemma of being… away from that known towards that which is not in fragmentation or partiality but a wholeness of the type Krishnamurti speaks or of the non-divisive perspective which Prabhupada also refers to when talking about transcendental knowledge. Whatever it is it is, definitely not of the forms which causes aspects of the three poisons to use a Buddhist terminology.

Or those negatives which subjugate and keeps one rooted in the material. It is a transcendental form which may only be appreciated if one readily moves away from that which is readily perceived by the senses perhaps it is that which makes us meditate of a form away from the temporal and the world of hatred and anger and on towards that realm where there is calm, peace and a sense of togetherness… of a oneness within any division which may be readily observed by sociologists to the kind of divisions which politics usually thrives on. Or the kind of exclusiveness which a few, some and many others thrive on based on a demagogue type of existence where some always thrive at the expense of others whilst what is being stated herewith is a way which initially questions a roguish way which is both ill-conceived and thrives on hatred.

The question of course remains are we able to rise above and beyond the known and the temporal to both see and live towards that rather than be cornered within the temporal?

In the quietness of the mind, one may realise the form of mindfulness:That rare synergy of being which unfolds when one is there in the midst of it all…. not in the mode of distress or anger but when there is a link with the self. A state of purity untainted by the modes which often suppress.

It is no longer the petty ego in operation which is about the likes, dislikes and pairs of opposites which corners one’s being in a vile state often. On the positive side, it is a being revelling in a state on being on par with life.

This is a state which is not of a bewildered and or confused mind entangled in desires but of one who is awakened in intelligence where the mind is not flickering about and leading the bodily self in a state of panic from here, there and everywhere. It is a state where one is over and above the confines of being subjected to the diktat of the wavering mental and bodily forms. There is a controlled state of being. It is about just being there, seeing and observing and witnessing life as it is and not how it should be. The latter expression is about the call of the spurious to be involved in life as an automaton or keep succumbing to the pleasant and the sensory abundance of desires. There is a call to be in balance, and be aware in a consciousness of being not from a perspective but rather from a no perspective.

Mindfulness is that state where one is in tune with the dialectics of life and of not being so cornered into subjugation from the pressure of the mind but of a more attuned wiser self whose mental in in balance. It is that balance which gives a foundation of well-being, a more non flux way that is.

A sense of calmness and peacefulness emerges and the whole arena radiates hope and steadiness unlike the gross form which anger, despair and hatred demonstrates. Where one is so caught up, verbal violence is the norm and so all that one may perceive is plain negativity where the vibes brings terror and distress not only to the other but to oneself. In such a state one often wonders the logistic of pursuing a particular lifestyle in that mode. The subject needs to revise its own way of being and moves on wider afield such that one may transit form the distress to its opposite. The danger of holding on and hoping against the odds may only be illusory: illusory because it is expected that through a passionate mode of being suffices that transition may arise; that by one’s reactionary modes one may bring about a way to fits one’s being

This is far from the facticity as the call is to precisely rise above the way of the passionate form which is entangled in negativism. There is a sense of seeing that desperate acts of vile forms of violence with its anger and hatred may never be an overriding solution.

It is a call not to be bewildered or confused or co-exist in fragmentation. It is about witnessing life not from a mode of separation but from a wholistic perspective. It is a question of seeing the whole through being appreciative of the sky as it unfolds about us rather than ignoring its presence about us. It is taking time out to witness the beauty and that natural forms which unveils. A kind of a rare form which is there about us. To be able to watch the sky with the clouds moving about without any prejudice. Is it possible to perceive this form?  May one take time out for this exploration which is best seen not from a partial mode but from a fuller and more engaged self.

That engaged or must one say an enraged self is  witnessing as an independent being and creating modal forms based on a false ego self in fragmentation but of a more open being, one who is creative and one who perceives reality from a synergic perspective or it is a question of seeing not only the petty parts which unfolds but checking what is apparent in terms of a non-separatist form. In its non-separatist forms, one may witness life in its grandeur without constraint posed from the mind or a partiality: in a truncated vision all I see are divisions everywhere. With divisions comes hatred and anger and where these two categories emerge, other negatives would surface and when these happen there may not be peace of mind as the mental is governed within  a dense pool of darkness as whatever then surfaces are no more than mere negatives all of which translate in irritation and an uncontrolled mind which impose its diktats on one’ being which are projected about everywhere . The ideal of course is to make that mind a friend through awakening of intelligence. With intelligence will come a different mode of being, a more balanced or calmer form of the type which is the subject of this blog. To be in a state of non-partiality , a wholeness observed and characterised by one rising beyond the bodily self and or the mental forms which tends to subjugate the self as it is in that format or dogma of the modes…….. which keeps us rooted and within the world of divisions where one may never experience beingness but rather a diluted version of the whole where the finger pointing may be confused as that sun which the latter was pointing towards. There can never be a way of the forward march in division or in partiality: In divisions, everything is ruptured and what emerges is no more than truncated forms.

One needs to rise above and see life as it unfolds in nature and about us without any constraints. Again, this is about witnessing that which is over and above the mere projections of one’s mind and or idiosyncrasies which often would subjugate the real self. In the deep meditation of one’s being there arises one self as it is best often witnessing the forms as it reveals in life, in nature, and in perceptions without the veil. To be sure, the underlying question remains is this possible?

The idea of controlling another, any other is terrifying in the sense that the subject believes one possesses all the powers as invested. Or rather thinks that one has. Life is a question of being or the idea of trying to be for oneself.

In the final analysis one is all alone and having to encounter with what is seen or perceived. To think that any other may be so influential in one’s life makes it rather intrusive as if the inverse were to be posited the subject would surely be in rebellious mode. If that is so, it is a fair assumption that one may be able to live one’s life without much hindrance or at least being able to be able to lead a singular existence free from hindrances. It is unpalatable when one is being cornered to be what is not or put a face in the mode of bad faith and adopt a certain lifestyle that one abhors.

The idea of living in simple mode may not be appealing to the rest or the crowd but one may not live for any other but for the self that one is without subjugation. With the latter comes suffocation and where suffocation emerges, one is simply a victim of the trend, or adopt a style foreign to the self that one is and is caught up in a veil of being where what emerges is a no more than a false ego. Where the latter is, one simply is a mesmerised being and or so subjected to engaging in doing what one may not otherwise do.

A kind of a bigotry, non-sophistication non real way of being where one puts forward an apparition worthy of just playing a role as per what is expected. There is no meeting of the self but a meeting of concealed type of being where one simply is existent in the way of playing a role.

It is a spurious way of being which is prized over and over the real self that one is. The self that one is left behind for the apparition. In the latter, one is simply not in tune with the what is or what one has to do. It is all about actions based on what not to do.

There is little or no direction about how or what one should be. One simply adopts and apply trends which suits one’s being and happily carries on. A way of being where there is no reflection or mindfulness but simply based on the idea of eat, drink and be merry… where there is no pause towards attempting to halt the direction of the false ego.

Where there is little or no understanding there may not be respect and where respect is lacking one falls into a pool of wilderness of the common trap which seeks to make one adheres to a particular lifestyle based on the senses which demands that a certain code is followed. Any deviation from that and one is viewed as an ignoramus. The forces of the way of the ego self is so fixed that it seeks solace in the non-real and pronounce a fixation: On the other hand, a certain way to be based on the perceptions which may be blurred and not quite reflecting the what is

It is particularly rewarding that one does not fall prey to such ways of being. There is no need to adopt a particular lifestyle and or pretend to be what one is not. To do so means that one has given up as if one’s lifestyles is relegated albeit for a few others’ s pleasure. Or it is a question of joining in with the crowd. The latter has the upper hand whilst one has to curb one’s being and lives in pretence. Such a way of being means one is not what one is but merely a shadow, a figment of imagination for the other. It is the other who has dictated based on a certain way of being which revels at the other’s denial to its own advantages that of happily a certain lifestyle which has nothing to do with what is but keeping to be image, an icon for the other.

The adaptation of such a modal way of being is fraught with suspicion as one is like a maggot, an automaton, losing sight of one’s subjectivity to being an object for the other and awaiting to be moulded in a particular shape where what matters may not be what one is but what should not be based on a preconception that one has to fit in to a certain lifestyle to be cognised. To be sure, there is no need to be in bad faith as Sartre may puts it. To do so is to be a being in itself as if one’s consciousness is not there or so one is mould upon by the non-me  whereas one needs to shrug off to arise and retrieve one’s for itself and so engages in a way attuned to the self where one is not denied or made to be or be subjected to being what one is not. The importance of awakening is precisely that one is always there primarily for the self that one is: to be in pretence is to have abandoned and fallen victim to the other where the latter has taken control. One needs to always recover and be what one is without any fear or apparent lack of trust in the self: After all, the self remains a silent observer who simply goes by how it is dictated by the mind. The latter though may well be tilted hither and tither and so loose sight of one’s nature of being!

In prudence, wisdom arises and so the realm of the what is acknowledged and one revels in the self. Where there is no such meeting point, one simply is forced into surrender. The question of course is very much about how to  not be  a prey but in a non-spurious way where one is free and verily protected in order to be there without hindrance!

Climate change and the state of the world: What has happened so far? Where are we heading? Is there a need to stop and ponder or must one carry on doing the same thing as one has done in the past? Is there a need to pause or must one simply ignore?   In another way, one may not ignore. It is a massive problem which reasonable minds find a must in a world often dominated by each for oneself where the common has taken over by the ego self where the latter is prize above and beyond all forms of way of being. It is a rampant tragedy where the physical self and its needs has become the immediate concern.

On the other hand, that earth in which one resides is brutalised on a daily basis through a lack of concern and care. All has been brutalised and neglected for a more ‘I’ where the latter seems it has carte blanche to do as it wants regardless of the dialectics. The latter clearly shows the state of the world which has been tampered with through one’s greed. It has been exploited as if we may do as we please. We continue doing the same over and over again.

The youth of this world, the new generation has been alarmed to this disaster awaiting to happen. To be sure, there has always been a concern as I recalled reading in the sixties that there was always a need to be so aware. They would say that by planting a tree for every new born is a way to combat environmental issues back then.

Moreover, decades later it is a different scenario, one where whether one likes it or not there is a disaster awaiting to happen. It is precisely that which has led school children to take to the streets in an effort to alarm their elders or the governing authorities that they need to stop, pause and reflect. If one does nothing about climate change, a physical doom awaits. The threshold of human input is alarming by how one contributes in an arrogant way towards it.

To rise above pettiness and see the actual concern may mean a different way to be. A change in our lifestyle. Or a movement away from the calculated or a cool way to be with a lack of respect for earth or its exploitation which has put us where we are today.

Britain started the industrial revolution some 200 years ago and now with the disaster looming has become the first country to pronounce that it will go zero emission by 2050. In some ways, this is most welcoming as I write the whole arena is dominated with Brexit yet parliament in its wisdom chose to ensure that it shall take a lead in this matter of trying to undo what has been done for the past two centuries and decades after decades all these were intensified and repeated globally and so we have a global problem.

Every effort done towards improvement is in the appropriate direction but the situation calls for action now not a token gesture on a global scale. We may no longer exist in isolation. It is a fact that any action in a state affects others elsewhere. To retrieve into oneself may not be deemed as prudent nor diligent as one may not exist as independently as one may think.

The spirit of separatism or sense of individualism in isolation bears no change. The sooner one adopts a way of togetherness and see how we are cornered in the world the better it would be. Perhaps then the sense of hatred and arrogance may give rise to appreciation of others. Where there is a lack of respect certainly, we are cornered and others feel that they know or that their way is the best. The consensus may not be there. Or the call is to sort out oneself first and the extended one before moving on towards an usness of being without which one may only fall flat!

Things are changing at a fast rate that experts agree there is a need for action. Some others though still nurture the belief that it will be fine….cometh the hour as humans will find a way out of this dilemma which is some way putting trust in humanoids and its ability to rise up to the challenge. All a question of trying to find common grounds rather than venturing in the way ahead not quite knowing of where one is heading or what to do.

At the base, the call is to be in reflective mode where one may see and feel the need to be alarmed that there is a readiness to play one’s part in an effort to find a solution and a way forward. Is it possible to do so in isolation? Or should there be a common ground, an agreement in principle that there ought to be change in our lifestyles but there must be. Or else that disaster awaiting to happen may be a reality as we are being warned by school children who is teaching the rest of naïve ones of what to do and or not what to not to.

A clear question of listening to others rather than venturing in a single one tract mindedness where all one does is simply follow one’s diktat whilst disregarding all others. Or we may still carry on doing so in bad faith where what matters is the parochial self belief that only ones elf and those who espouse our way of being has a monopoly as to how the world should be which of course politicians are fully aware of as theirs are trying to see their community or their country through a loophole or that of perceiving things based on a preconceived way of being often engaging ferociously with the opponents as if they know it all.

The point of the stark reality which face us is precisely seeing what is to unfold if no consensus or compromise is acknowledged……… carrying on in our vile ways both personally and impersonally with the resultant which may be a question of ‘Awake humanity’ Pause Stop and reflect what may be done. Are we ready?

It is always a question of trying to find out what one needs to do or not to do. Those who have developed the art of understanding or the right action and inversely refrain from engaging in those actions which often may be deemed inappropriate are seen as wise.

Therefore, it is all about being responsible in life. This is not a simpleton of engaging in one’s work but more of engaging or reconnecting with the life process as a whole where it comprises of duty … where the call is not simply about earning but more so about creating a balance towards the self but also keep a profile of engaging with those with whom one has an affinity and or seeing the importance of the facticity as it unveils itself of which one is a part.

Within a family that is about where one has grown up and adhering to a general mission as often may be the case at an informal level where values are taught and shared in an atmosphere of respect. Covey had talked about actually having such a mission statement as being vital for promotion of values.

Without a common mission statement, there is a tendency for a family group to drift apart and be easily influenced by exterior forces where before one knows other norms may be adopted…. which leads one to adopt ways based on the outer rather than the inner.

The former brings a state of flux whilst in the latter there is a norm, a format, an agreed consensus. It is towards such a form, that is more in line with the dialectics albeit within the superficial and for that matter even successful business has a vison, a goal of how to be.

Or as the dictum of ‘to fail to plan is planning to fail’ suffice to make the point that one has to look inwards at the depth of being and seek to be from that. The reactionary though has its own agenda at being just at a level as govern by the mental as it contacts matter.

Most families have an unwritten brief about how to be. That keeps all in check and one moves about in a safe environment but sometimes where things become far too suffocated some members may feel the need not to adhere to its ways…. Hence, we have a rebellion and or drifting about and around. That is where it seems that there is no real consensus. Suddenly each and every member seems to drift about and apart moving around to discover other ways and where the aspect of togetherness is gone and thrown to the dust.

Part of the reason may lie with a figure head or lack of it where there has never been a more rigorous upbringing unlike in some families which have strict ways as how to be. In such a situation at least, everyone knows what to or how to go about moving onwards.

In such a way there may not variations but rather each one is aware fully of what is expected from the other. Or what to do and not what to do. Expectations and the ways are set clearly and there are no confusions. This may not be the case where there have been a kind of more non rigorous upbringing where each and every other is deemed as equal within the framework of family. In such a mode of being, no one is disrespected. Each is seen of as one who is already a valuable member.

The flip side of this is that it is too loose. Every other suddenly awakens and feels that there is no longer any meeting point where that sense of togetherness has gone precisely as there is no meeting of the minds. There is a meeting at the physical level where simpleton of greetings is exchanged but in truth it is all at a level of the mind without a real or an interactive connection or more precisely a lack of togetherness or rapport with one another.

The tendency is to adopt other norms, lifestyle. Or take shelter of even antagonistic ways. What is left is a non-cognisable of the arena where one grew up. The cry is can one revert back to the old days. Sorry comrade your game is up. It is time to move either forward, onwards or left or right sideways but there is no going back in time where quality was at the heart of being where existence was a simpleton of being. Gone are those days.

Or we also seek to be secretive in our dealings with one another. Life itself teaches us that we need to maintain a non-open dealing with others about us lest we fall prey in our naivety to others who is ready to pounce on our innocence. That this is so is obvious and it is good to maintain a scepticism of this form with the other for our own sake less we are betrayed.

What seems to happen in the case that such scepticism bears no credibility within a family or should not as the family is the arena where we beget our sense of security and growth. To not be open at least within the nucleus form is a case for concern although one may understand if this still maintained within the larger family group.

Trust is paramount for a relationship to flourish and moving on: without the latter, one may cut a lonely figure. In many ways a family provides even one’s raison detre. A lack of trust shows in a way drifting apart of  the self  and where this is the case, it is wise that parties concerned either revised their modal beingness or precisely move on rather than be cold and callous and or rebellious and or take shelter of  violence even in its verbal form which causes distress not only on the doer but also on other around and about.

The emerging question from all this is it possible to make sense of this maze or just carry on in bad faith that of indeed despise of the relevant other and seeing one self as the core a patron par excellence whilst negating the other. In this dilemma, whatever happened to that family mission? Or indeed the desire to create or recreate one! Yet in a way this is precisely the nature of the frivolous self as entangled in the ways of the world! Time to awakened and just observe!