Dear Yaaqub and all,
Fluid dynamic exesotericisms to the One and Many of you in holey communion
(preferably, for me, without the 'w')!
Below is pasted some writing from the final chapter of the book I've just
finished drafting entitled 'Natural Inclusion - How to Evolve Good
Neighbourhood'. I have now put this on CD and will send a copy to anyone
who asks me for one and lets me have a note of their mailing address.
Warmest
Alan
-------------------------------------------------------
Inclusional Implications of the Boundless ‘Fifth’ Dimension: Curing Cosmic
Cancer
Perhaps it was unwise of Mother Space, in her everywhere-Divine Wisdom, to
enable any of her diverse local expressions to become aware of its
awareness of itself. But if there is to be creativity at all, any
possibility of life and evolution, maybe such possibilities must also be
entertained. The trouble is that such a form of expression could develop a
Mind of its Own to declare itself an independent entity and so make an
enemy of its neighbourhood, setting the scene for invasion of its
birthplace, determined to take over vacant possession.
Maybe it was this declaration of independence, through an ever-hardening
belief in its own free will or purely internal purpose as ‘first cause’ of
its own actions, associated with its ability to make absolute judgemental
choices, that brought about the Fall of One such a form from Merciful
Grace. The difficulty lay in its declaration, as an abstraction of its Mind
alone, not the actuality of its inescapable inclusion in interdependent
relationship by and of All, space included. For, by no stretch of
imagination is this form truly able to act or be acted upon as a superior
or inferior object independent from its dynamic situation. It cannot be an
absolute, independent singleness. Every man like every form is no more and
no less than a transient island of flow, connected through and undersea
with every other, a distinct identity but never a discrete entity.
The declaration of independence was the product of a partial and idealistic
vision, which led this one such form mentally to Box reality securely and
paradoxically in a finite, three-dimensional Euclidean frame stretched to
infinity, whilst vaunting its own free agency. By the end of the second
millennium CE, life in this frame was painfully overheating. Was there no
escape from the pressure cooker? What could this form do about it? Could
this form, for so long the World’s plunderer now save the World from
depredation? What kind of transformation would such a noble act of rescue
take? Would it be some wondrous new technology and/or legislation, of the
kind that this form was so good at inventing, again and again, in the nick
of time, as crisis loomed? Then there could be some great collective sigh
of relief, followed by a return to die-hard habits to await the next crisis
of exploitation. Or, perhaps, as one of Man’s star mathematical performers
suggested, it was already too late: it was now time, through the ultimate
technological fix of space travel, to move on like a virus to other host
planets, leaving the wasteland of His own vacant possession behind.
But there always was, is and evermore shall be a loophole: a window into
and out of the solid confinements of the ‘Adverse Square Law’, through
which the unbounded presence of space everywhere melts all into coherent,
fluid dynamic relationship. An eye of the needle through which to ask not
how to shift the world from a disastrous course, but how to help the world
transform our sense of individual, active-reactive self-identity into
receptive-responsive neighbourhood. A loophole at the intersection of
Vertical (‘I’) with Horizontal (‘-‘) outwardly recurving planes, to form an
electrogravitational centre of inference: a centre of dynamic balance in
the core and spread through the surfaces of all tangible, primarily
non-linear form, a zero-point source and receiver of all through all,
distributed everywhere. A core of pure spatial relationship, continually
reconfiguring, and hence utterly different from the fixed-point control
centre of Euclidean geometry upon whose illusory existence so many
principles of human governance have been founded. One place and many where
apparently opposing sides are conjoined and transformed into complementary
dynamic partners via the inclusion of light in darkness and darkness in
light, in vastly unequal proportion. One place and many corresponding with
the notion of 'space' as the '5th element' in Hindu philosophy, which both
includes and is included in the 'melted elemental forms' of 'Earth, Air,
Fire and Water': a boundless ‘fifth’ dimension transcending the
three-dimensional singularity of frozen space and extraneous time.
Once ‘seen with gravitational feeling’, this boundless dimension utterly
transforms and revitalizes understanding of how we may manage our lives and
living space in a loving and sustainable way. Here boundaries are
understood as co-creative, co-created zones of differentiation, mutual
respect and complementarity, not severing divides between conflicting sides
in opposition. It is the implications of this transformational
understanding of our natural, dynamic human neighbourhood for the way we
may live in harmonious, respectful, co-creative evolutionary relationship
that I wish now to consider in this opening ending chapter.
--On 07 December 2006 10:26 +0000 Paul Murray
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>
> Apologies to All -- this is an addendum to my earlier posting today.
>
>
>
> I wrote -- "What I admire about European Buddhists is how, in abandoning
> the esoteric languaging of thinking held in the Judaeo-Christian
> construct, they 'master' a whole new and exoteric languaging. What is
> amazing about Jekan Adler-Collin's doctoral journey is that not only is
> he learning Japanese, not only is he learning an 'esoteric' action
> research, living theory language (living theory languaging is esoteric by
> definition because it is 'my language for my research knowledge') in
> which to frame his 'practitioner knowledge' he is also learning a new
> ontological language as a practicing Buddhist: and all of these languages
> Jekan is juggling at one and the same time."
>
>
>
> What I left out of the note was an important linkage in terms of my
> meanings; and this is the addendum:
>
>
>
> In the midst of this multiple take up of 'new languages', Jekan
> Adler-Collins has also been 'de-learning' a language. He has been
> de-learning a particular and secretive terrorist esoteric language of
> family in which an underlying assumption that a grammar of love is
> operational was corrupted by the actual syntax of sexual pathology in
> which Jekan Adler-Collins was trapped, and through which his innocent
> humanity was violently abused. As I picture Jekan as a child an image of
> Zaki, my grandson, comes into my head and feelings of fear,
> protectiveness, and an understanding of terrifying wrong connect me with
> Jekan across the miles and oceans, and virtual space, across many years
> too as neither of us grows younger, and I feel the tear drop on my cheek.
>
>
>
> Jekan's narrative was the subject of a British television documentary and
> so I'm not speaking about anything that Jekan hasn't placed in the public
> domain prior to my posting. However, my insights are my own and I take
> authorial responsibility for these. In recovering from this esoteric
> language of violent abuse to construct a 'livable life' is a testimony to
> the power of Nietzsche's superman. Jekan seems to be decolonizing himself
> from the grip of esoteric languages while at the same time immersing
> oneself into others [forgive my inarticulate stumbling here; this is only
> my exceedingly partial and clouded perspective Jekan). It is this insight
> as a practitioner-researcher that I should have added in my posting to
> Brian Wakeman's note. The categories 'esoteric and exoteric' are
> presented in Brian's posting in the form of a binary oppositional logic:
> what we need is not to be 'esoteric' but to be 'exoteric'. This way of
> framing esoteric versus exoteric makes me feel like I'm being 'forced' to
> choose between two options, and the tensions arising from choice are
> present in me as I write this. But I don't want to take sides between
> esoteric and exoteric: these aren't sides; they are part of the wholeness
> in which I place my languaging. In my life as a practitioner and as a
> researcher I'm operating within and through the flow of esoteric~exoteric
> thinking and languaging. I love the way i-chat on Mac technology enables
> me to see this inclusional flow happening: just try it for yourself. I am
> in my esoteric space with my esoteric idea as I speak with Jack, say, and
> as 'we~i' explore the exoteric implications of my emic knowing wrapped up
> in my esoteric language, we move back and forth, like a two-way rippling
> movement in flow form such I completely lose sight of esoteric and
> exoteric as we seem to enjoy the pandemic moment. And in that proximal
> moment (lovely Keith, thanks bro) that I see Jack's face light up my
> screen in a smile of mutual availability I feel the boundary between
> esoteric and exoteric simple fall away, dissolve, because esoteric and
> exoteric no longer 'exists' as categories and are replaced by 'wholey
> communion'.
>
>
>
> So the value of Brian's posting is enormous; through it I'm getting
> closer still to appreciating the multiple quality standards of relational
> judgment that can occur when I ditch categories, explore flow, and refuse
> to get hooked into invitations to either/or. Unhooked thinking is the
> possibility available to us here: unhooked thinking is thinking that
> isn't hooked into traditional binaries, canonical either/or's and other
> the constriction of categorizations.
>
>
>
> Respect to all
>
>
>
> Yaakub Murray
>
>
>
>
|
