Chat
10-23-2014, 05:06 PM
Indeed Chris -- When one steps completely “outside of the game”, one can appreciate (or take in) a larger perspective, it is possible to observe, appreciate, even embrace whatever it is that at a lower level appears to be an A versus B decision dichotomy. To me the question of choice as well as action/inaction at the 3d human level depends greatly on one's resultant to the recursive questioning -- "why?" -- and to each response, "Why?" yet again, until one has run the process as far as possible.
Decades ago, I was very much engaged with "anti-war" / "peace" movements (plural). Today I can neither advocate "peace" nor "war" in the way humans usually refer to these concepts and projections. One must even look very closely at those "causes" that seem so "righteous" in contrast to all that which is so very "un-right" in the human world. Human level of “judgment” is based upon a limited set of parameters that one needs to be willing to let go of to step far out of the “ball park”.
Likewise with regard to action or inaction. The question has to do with “why?” Why and to what end? Indeed.
Some humans argue that life under x-y-z regime or system of social-political governance is far preferred than life under z-y-x system, etc. History is full of examples of how so many believed in “just cause” to defend (fill in the blank) or who welcomed an invading force that promises to rid them of their present oppressors, etc. And in most cases there was always some plausible sounding rationale at the human-centric point-of-view.
For the spiritually focused, sooner than later fundamental questions of existence become inescapable. Some may not find this until that pivotal existential catastrophic moment. Suddenly, choices never considered present themselves –at higher levels of one’s existence –as well in the interim for one’s human level of existence.
I have seen this with many individuals.
-A
Decades ago, I was very much engaged with "anti-war" / "peace" movements (plural). Today I can neither advocate "peace" nor "war" in the way humans usually refer to these concepts and projections. One must even look very closely at those "causes" that seem so "righteous" in contrast to all that which is so very "un-right" in the human world. Human level of “judgment” is based upon a limited set of parameters that one needs to be willing to let go of to step far out of the “ball park”.
Likewise with regard to action or inaction. The question has to do with “why?” Why and to what end? Indeed.
Some humans argue that life under x-y-z regime or system of social-political governance is far preferred than life under z-y-x system, etc. History is full of examples of how so many believed in “just cause” to defend (fill in the blank) or who welcomed an invading force that promises to rid them of their present oppressors, etc. And in most cases there was always some plausible sounding rationale at the human-centric point-of-view.
For the spiritually focused, sooner than later fundamental questions of existence become inescapable. Some may not find this until that pivotal existential catastrophic moment. Suddenly, choices never considered present themselves –at higher levels of one’s existence –as well in the interim for one’s human level of existence.
I have seen this with many individuals.
-A