Origin and return

[3bob]

to deny our aspect as a particular being and or a matrix connected to source would also be "ignorance", for source has no problem with particular beings or matrices and neither should we; an analogy for that would be saying a window should have no problems with houses...

 

...or along the lines of a reciprocal take on the Taoist saying below:

 

11.
THIRTY spokes converge upon a single hub;
It is on the hole in the center that the use of
the cart hinges.

We make a vessel from a lump of clay;
It is the empty space within the vessel that makes it
useful.

We make doors and windows for a room;
But it is these empty spaces that make the room livable.

Thus, while the tangible has advantages,
It is the intangible that makes it useful.

Edited December 20, 2014 by 3bob

[steve]

What I am curious about is what your experience of what the alchemical process, which is basically a process of refinement, says about "returning"?

 

h

 

In an absolute sense, there is no returning when one has never departed.

Until we are familiar and habituated to the absolute, the relative predominates.

In a relative sense, returning seems to be about constructing and then deconstructing.

 

In life, we construct our reality through conditioning, learning, memory, judgement.

It starts before birth and continues beyond death, doesn't it?

Towards the end of our life all of that weighs very heavily and we must let it go at some point, often very traumatically.

And then it starts all over again.

 

If we are fortunate, we may see the wisdom in beginning to look at this whole process of construction and deconstruction while we are young and healthy. Then I think that we use alchemical methods to see the reality we have and are constructing, and many (?all) of these methods are used to create a new reality, something we can work with more effectively. At some point, however, we must see that we need to let go of all of that, even the method. That process may be a gradual one, a systematic deconstruction, but the more expedient way is to simply let go completely.

 

In my experience that letting go is not a one time deal. It is an ongoing process that is very active in the sense that the habit which takes us in the opposite direction is very strong, like the paper.

(PS credit goes to my teacher for the paper analogy)

Perhaps at some point there is no longer a need for any effort but I'm not sure about that.

I certainly have not reached that point.

It appears to me that even the most advanced masters continue to live in the world and work at something or other while they are alive.

[Marblehead]

to deny our aspect as a particular being and or a matrix connected to source would also be "ignorance", for source has no problem with particular beings or matrices and neither should we; an analogy for that would be saying a window should have no problems with houses...

I couldn't "Like" that yesterday for whatever the reason but do this morning.

[dawei]

the alchemical process, which is basically a process of refinement, says about "returning"?

 

That is an internal practice which is, IMO, fraught with challenges. I think it is doing the deconstruction that Steve talks about but it is the road less traveled... or at least successfully and fully traveled.

 

I think it is not successful for most due to what 3Bob calls the 'matrix' which is something I mention in the Karma thread ( I just didn't call it matrix but it is the same idea).

 

I only differ in that I see something selective going on in the matrix... call it Karma or fate or destiny... not sure what to call it; not from being partial but simply dependent on being 'in tune' , 'in sync' or not. If we're not, it seems to me that the energy/spirit/light simply does not connect/shine... and we simply continue trying to move along.

 

I agree with Steve that on the absolute level, there is nothing to return to... in fact, we're getting recycled effortlessly by the universe. The problem is a relative one (or a local one); it is we are not yet likewise 'effortlessly'.