Category Archives: All of Us

Normality and Expansion

Maya - illusionWhen one looks at something – an object, an idea, a shared concept, or perhaps a Truth – so much of ourselves comes along with it.

When one looks at another person, listening to them speak or watching their motions – sensing their feelings and intentions – so much of ourselves comes along with it.

It is so easy to generalize in the interest of expediency or the self-preservation of what we hold true. It is so simple to laugh about or dismiss something that challenges something within ourselves, something that we claim as a Given – a prima facie definition that lends us comfort or security.

Yet we all experience those unsettling periods – sometimes lasting only moments – sometimes for hours or days – where all the world around us shifts into the Unreal, leaving us exposed to the terrifying vastness of all possibilities that exist beyond the small little shells we have constructed to contain ourselves within.

In our days of perfect order, where the mechanical certainty of well-ordered events and schedules are disrupted only to small degrees, we take comfort in the mundane. We improve ourselves, or gather more for ourselves by means of the tools and processes given us by the histories of our progenitors. Our long history of agreements, or rather, prevailing doctrines, guide us and help insure our prosperity by the adoption of normalized behaviour, and even moreso, by the adoption of normalized attitudes.

Religious people throughout history, bound together by common beliefs, have established institutions, both great and small, that revolve around canonical self-reference, if not, canonical solipsism. Depending upon how powerful any group was, the people not within that group must either fear or desmonstrate a “healthy respect”.

More recently, as priests are replaced with professors, a new canon has emerged. This canon, though in most ways a marvelous, powerful, and potent force toward the benefit of all, easily becomes twisted and exploited by those coming in contact with it just long enough to extract what information and resources they require to achieve their hedonistic objectives, and to promote doing the same to others in justification of their exploitations.

It’s an odd thing, this “modern” cannon – rife in detailed empiricism, rich in the artistic accomplisments of the spirit, seething in the techniques of human control – both individually and collectively, deluged with both contradiction and resonance, and framed immaculately in hope and despair – desire and self-sacrifice.

In such a glorious place, how do we so rigidly cling to the illusory safety of what we feel we want or need – when what we want or need changes, as quickly as a commercial? How is the ideal we maintain for ourselves, which most people cannot even fully grasp, yet knows, limits them to a role of unfulfilling minor achievements while, with certainty, so much more could be achieved.

From where does this fear originate – this self-doubt?

We tell ourselves that as we grow older, certain realities become apparent. We tell ourselves that we must make compromises – and begin making them – then the best of us wonder when we should stop compromising – but the majority never do.

Some rebel after hitting a breaking point, and nearly anything involving others becomes a compromise of themselves – regardless of whether that other is beneficial or detrimental. They will dominate, or perish.

Some learn that compromising is no big deal at all – it leaves them with what they really want, and they never have to put themselves on the line. They become the fertile ground for the powerful to root themselves within.

Some never compromise – not out of anger or rebellion – but because they know what is important. And these people move Outside, often in obscurity, simultaneously admired and disliked by others.

Considering the great mechanics of our many interconnected systems – the great collaboration of agreement, bound together by greed, that keeps our very lives functioning – the notion of Compromise is a key issue, as long as our souls survive.

Shiva - the danceAt universities, Philosophy departments dwindle, often relegated to the smallest corners and basements. Literature and arts, studied by only by the lazy and freaky people, is held in disdain by the majority – a simple requirement they must fulfill. The jocks, swarming to the schools of business and commerce to achieve the greatness they never could within their sport. And finally, the monsterous quantities of money flowing into the technical sciences where the lure of financial stability and the hypnosis of many little things can occupy most of our greatest minds.

And then the greater hordes that never even enter a univerisity — utterly untouched by the higher forces, who will work in regularity toward whatever ends are provided to them — live out their days in whatever entertainment or momentary undertaking catches their fancy. Ironically, these people often become the most judgemental and self-righteous of all, finding pureness and absolution in their simple choices just made to survive.

While each, no matter where, as they wake in the morning, can feel the humanity within their hearts – have felt the same pains and longings, to varying degrees, and have known great lonliness.

And so I look at this person I see in front of me, knowing so much about them, and so very little. All of us, just standing, or sitting, or laying, or fucking, or staring off into some place that is just our very own, where nobody else can go – all of us, just right here.

And I remember a commercial I saw a few nights ago, asking if I had ever felt detached, anxious or uneasy around others – if I found it difficult to focus on the tasks I needed to complete. If I felt tired, or withdrawn. And they offered me a pill.

Kali - death and awakeningThe cannons of Science, Psychology and Sociology, intermingling in this tiny capsule. Strange how they all grew out of Philosophy – and how Philosophy is dwindling. Perhaps this is the result of the marketplace – the Laws of supply and demand. Perhaps the canon of Philosophy has swallowed wholly its own tail.

I imagine a feeling – and confusion – of knowing something, and being uncertain in that knowledge. I see my friends and family, and I speak with strangers. I notice the common threads. I watch explore the strenghts and weaknesses, the certainties and the doubts.

A Philosopher visits a Psychologist, in weakness and despair, knowing full well the foundations of their disciplines, and asks a question – what is wrong with me? The psychologist answers with a question – forcing the philosopher to examine himself. Then the philosopher looks outside, back to the psychologist, asking if the answer is within him. The psychologist answers with a question, leading the philosopher back within. The philosopher grows angry, saying, is this all you have learned from us? This circular solipsism? Why should I not just see an Psychiatrist and get a pill? The psychologist says, this anger is good – now carry on.

In the functional sterility of interactions, no true risk is assumed. The egoism of knowing that you do not know, and the paralysis of fearing that you do not. And worst of all, the foolishness of believing that you do, or that it does not matter.

So I imagine Normality and Expansion – a pill and a sacrifice – a death and a rebirth. And I imagine a poem – a combination of words – words that each of us knows, words brought together and arranged in a way that we cannot understand — yet, somehow, we know and feel to be true.

Then I look at this person here, once again, seeing so many things. And he is looking at me, with all his histories, decisions, accomplishments and disappointments – all the joys he has discovered, all the fears – and all the tendernesses and strengths – his loyalties, and his betrayals. And then I compromise: I do not hug him, and cry – I smile, and shake his hand.

Krisha - wisdom, joy and love

A Dream of Spiritual Death

Cycle of Life and Death

Last night I dreamed I was on the bottom floor of a house, or maybe it was a department store.

I was walking up the stairs, or coming up the escalator, and it was bright, and I was happy.

I arrived on a floor, the third floor, and it was pure darkeness – and this floor was my kitchen. Pitch blackness. I could feel the railing behind me, my way of escape, but I was there, and I knew something was in that darkness.

It was distant, and I wondered, then realized it had no physical form.

It was moving toward me in pieces, in tendrils of maleficent being. I heard a very faint laugh, a woman’s laugh, a sweet giggle of pure madness.

I saw nothing – but felt the tentrils form into a blackened head, which moved swiftly toward my own. I remained, and did not run. There was no fear.

She touched her forehead against my own, and I saw a vision of a blackened third eye, and a bindi, like a clitoris, and darkened skull.

It came into me, pointedly, and I accepted it. It passed into a great expanse, like the arch of the blue and clouded sky, that surrounded, filled and encompassed my interior – a vast area, yet so much unexplored – yet familiar.

It became so small – a tiny bucket of poison thrown into a boundless ocean, deepening beneath a boundless sky.

I sang to her in welcome, feeling her Will, as she dissolved into the air.

Married Men Who Aren’t Gay

Lately I’ve been a member of this online group for men that deals in support for men who are in heterosexual marriages, yet they are gay, or bisexual. I joined because I wanted to understand better what was going on with myself, and another man I have been involved with who was married.

At first I went in with great fascination – amazed at how many men were in this situation, or wanted to be in it. They call it a “closed-loop” relationship – where a married guy commits to a relationship with another married guy – or, less preferably, a single gay or bi man.

Whether or not they tell their wives is not important to most. The issue is, in fact, considered taboo in the group because it generates such heated words from people. The strange thing is, it’s always the guys who don’t feel they need to tell their wives that do all the shouting, even at guys that merely talk about how they have told their wives, and the various things that have happened. I think these men must feel a very strong pressure of guilt, and twist the other men’s testimonials about coming out to their wives into an accusation that they are horrible people for not doing the same.

This issue certainly is a very ethically complex one, particularly when children are involved.

Oddly enough, the majority of the men seem to be in their fifties, though there is a large splattering of ages. But they are certainly in the majority. Most have waited until their children have grown up and left the home. Most want to keep their family in tact, though some are very torn on the issue.

Of particular interest is the way they identify themselves sexually. Some men say they are gay, but they are in the minority. Most men say they have been curious, or “having these feelings of attraction”. Most do say that they’ve had those feelings for a very long time.

They are much more likely to identify themselves as bisexual, which would stand to reason, I suppose, considering their predicament.

Yet I wonder, why is it they feel so heavily compelled to act on homosexual desires, and risk so much, if they are bisexual? Almost all of them have a very deep fear of being exposed. Something is just not right in this.

Recently, a man posted that he’s changed his mind – that he just can’t deal with the “homosexual lifestyle” – and that he and his wife just had amazing sex, chandeliers swinging, etc. And that they were moving. And also, was there any man in the group who happened to live near to where they were moving…

Many feel that they need to only be with another married man – that this man would be the only man who could could understand that their families have to come first. But I know this isn’t true, based upon my own experience – I would often remind my “friend” that his family had to come first, not me.

I think, rather, that they need someone who they can remain straight with, even though they have sex together. If they are with a gay man, that means they have to admit they are gay – or at least bisexual. But if they are with another married man, then they can both remain straight. After all, you’re not gay if you’re married.

Some of the men have wonderful stories of how they told their wife everything, and their wives, though not at first, have grown to become supportive, and even allow them to have a male partner. They see little conflict.

But there are also stories of how the wife refused to accept it, and promised that she would leave with the children if he ever acted on it.

And most of the men choose to sneak. They will actually pine on about how wonderful their male counterparts are – the part of their lives that they so look forward to. And the ones that don’t have a male counterpart have no problem pining on about their dream of it, either.

The interesting thing is seeing new people join the group, who are younger – who have just entered into marriage, or who are considering it.

I wish there was some way to help them understand that they must enter into their own lives, fully as who they are, before they enter into the life of another.

I actually feel very sorry for most of these men – the majority are not happy at all. They are trapped, in their ideal dream, and/or in their hiding place. But that’s not to say that the rest of their lives is diminished – but it is to say that sexual intimacy – spiritual intimacy – is very fundamental to the core of our being. And theirs is messed up – for lack of the time to type any more…

I hope that my friend find happiness in his life. But I’m a little more than reasonably sure that he may just find mere satifaction, if he is lucky.

It’s too bad that fear can conquer love in some men.

Warm hugs

Innocence Lost

Time, Occurances and Probabilities

No Time!I’ve been spending a little time imagining events, when they happen, and their relation to time. It seems to occupy me when I play solitaire on my cell phone whilst sitting on the toilet.

I deal the cards. In doing so, the event of the card distributions occurs. Barring a few choices I then have on moving the cards around – the outcome of the game is determined at the initial card distribution.

I finish my game, and I’ve either won or lost.

Now, I decide to begin a new game, and I am readying to hit the Deal Cards button. My question is, were I to wait to hit the button until after I’ve wiped my ass, would the distribution of cards be the same as if I were to hit the Deal Cards button before doing so? (assuming truly “random” programmatics built into the mechanical game)

I thought the answer might be a simple one, relying on mere esoteric equations in probability mathematics. But on my cursory examination of such things, it is not so apparent. In fact, it led me back to philosophy, and the arcane notions of destiny and pre-determination – or chaos. And if mathematics were to meet the physics of practical observation, does my role of choosing or not choosing to hit the button at any given time even effect an outcome?

If not, there seems to be a bit of hopelessness. If so, then what forces influence such tides?

Mathematics alone does not seem sufficient. It can just reveal the liklihood of a particular event occuring, and can even go so far as to determine the liklihood distributed over time. But it doesn’t much deal with the actuality of the event occuring.

To resolve this with physics would require observing not only an event in the future (or the past, from which no information has been transmitted), but also would require observing two or more events simultaneously – i.e., you would have to know the state of the cards both now and the state of the cards in the future – and know them both simultaneously in order to make the determination.

I know that lots of physicists don’t like this sort of thing, and one good explanation they have is to say that the “wave” representing how the cards exist (in a compound sense, which is even murkier), exists throughout all space-time, and will collapse into a specific state when an interaction occurs. That our notion of past and future and now just don’t really exist.

But then, is it all predetermined – our consciousness moving along it’s tiny and pinpoint little “peephole” along the compound waves comprised of particle waves, like a rollercoaster locked tightly to rigid tracks of a multitude of causalities that exist, statically, throughout all space-time, and rooted to the Big Bang?

Or is it perhaps our little negentropic selves, realizing more and more the growing entropy, who need so desperately to encase ourselves in a safe, hardened and immutable shelter?

I’ll have to consider it some more, and hope that my leg doesn’t fall asleep while doing so.

But, given the choice… between superluminal communication and eternally static waves, I think I would choose superluminal communication. That might explain a good many of my problems, actually.

Superluminal Communication