Even if I can speak in all the tongues of earth—and those of the angels, too—but do not have love, I am just a noisy gong, a clanging cymbal.
If I have the gift of prophesy such that I can comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge, or if I have faith great enough to move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.
If I give away everything I own to feed those poorer than I, then hand over my body to be burned, but do not have love, I gain nothing.
Love is patient; love is kind. Love is not jealous, it does not put on airs, and it is not snobbish; it is never rude or self-seeking; it is not prone to anger, nor does it brood over injuries. Love doesn’t rejoice in what is wrong, but rejoices in the truth. There is no limit to love’s forbearance, to its trust, its hope, its power to endure.
Love never ends.
I Corinthians 13:1-8
Saturday 29 January 2011
Tuesday 25 January 2011
Heart Food for Music Lovers
I would go to more classical concerts if the conductors were as entertaining as this! Be sure to watch all the way through to the end.
Saturday 22 January 2011
From Judgement to contemplation to action - Richard Rohr
St. Thomas Aquinas said in the thirteenth century: “If it is true, then it is from the Holy Spirit.” The important question is not who said it or where it was written, but “Is it true?” If there is indeed one God of all the earth, then it is this one God who is breaking through in every age and culture, and monotheists should be the first to recognize this one truth (Ephesians 4:4-6) and that God is “all in all” (1 Corinthians 15:28). As Rumi said, “There are a thousand ways to kneel and kiss the ground.”
Many writers in the early Christian era called the radical shift away from the judging and separate self “contemplation.”
Buddhists called it meditation, sitting, or practicing.
Hesychastic Orthodoxy called it prayer of the heart.
Sufi Islam called it ecstasy or delight in God.
Hasidic Judaism called it “living from the divine spark within.”
Vedantic Hinduism (the earliest) spoke of it as non-dual knowing or simply breathing.
Native religions found it in communion with nature itself and the Great Spirit through dance, ritual, and sexuality, and often enjoyed “original participation,” as Owen Barfield called it.
Presence is experienced in a fully participative way, outside and larger than anything the mind can do by itself.
For more insights and words of wisdom from Richard Rohr you can sign up to his daily meditations on the website http://www.cacradicalgrace.org/
Many writers in the early Christian era called the radical shift away from the judging and separate self “contemplation.”
Buddhists called it meditation, sitting, or practicing.
Hesychastic Orthodoxy called it prayer of the heart.
Sufi Islam called it ecstasy or delight in God.
Hasidic Judaism called it “living from the divine spark within.”
Vedantic Hinduism (the earliest) spoke of it as non-dual knowing or simply breathing.
Native religions found it in communion with nature itself and the Great Spirit through dance, ritual, and sexuality, and often enjoyed “original participation,” as Owen Barfield called it.
Presence is experienced in a fully participative way, outside and larger than anything the mind can do by itself.
For more insights and words of wisdom from Richard Rohr you can sign up to his daily meditations on the website http://www.cacradicalgrace.org/
Thursday 20 January 2011
The thoughts I think determine the relationships I attract
"As you turn your attention toward the positive aspects of the personalities and behaviors of others with whom you share your planet, you will train your point of attraction in the direction of only what you desire. Not only does the power of your thought determine which people make their way into your life, but the power of your thought determines how they behave once they get there."
- Abraham -
- Abraham -
Tuesday 18 January 2011
The underworld
... I'm wandering down in the underworld, liminal space, lost in the transition between life-death-rebirth or severance-threshold-return ... shedding the skin of my first life, searching for the seeds of my second life - whatever, it's a whole bunch of words for the biggest total headfuck I can possibly imagine and then some more ... no self pity allowed ... simple facts ... nothing is as nothing was ... I am still a very tiny young girl inside the darkness of a cupboard trying to keep myself safe as best I can ... I am the tightrope walked taking my first wobbly steps looking down into the void with no safety net below to protect me ... I am both of these and yet none ... is it growth I am after or depth ... should I be taking myself deeper and deeper into the darkness ... away from the head stuff ... I need to find the heart food ... move into experience ... today I felt the bodily ouch from the ego of another ... 'who are you?' came the voice from behind the finger ... 'you are in my theatre, I am the show', he says ... hum, 'I feel uncomfortable' I say, trying to offer my vulnerability ... the quick retort, 'I'm not asking you to speak for 45 minutes' ... don't I/we know it I think remembering this is his show, his performance, his ego ... I smile and withdraw, 'I'm here enjoying meeting people', I reply ... all I can hear is his booming voice, I, I, I, I, I ... it's the I show and I don't want this ticket, this seat, it's time to go ... I wish I could be more like Rafa and laugh this off, but I can't ... I feel the surge in my body that says go go go ... I'm angry ... I don't want to be near his ego, his Iness, his-story, his confidence, his false modesty ... and yet I know there is a human being there, with feelings the same as mine, with a soft-centre the same as mine ... but I don't know how to bridge the chasm between us ... his power over is to strong for me ... ggggrrrrrrrrrr ... off for a walk in the rain to the post office, I caught this one just in time and yet over lunch I'm curious as to how others respond ... I can feel my judgement rise up through my throat an burst out in spite ... I am no better ... I know I need to refocus, bring my attention back to where I want to be ... aaahhhhhh breathe and into the library, quietness, stillness, silence ... and yet my body/head is whizzing, bursting, rushing with energy and emotion ... I know I need to get back in touch with my whole self, my body, my thoughts, my feelings, my core ... off for a walk to the gardens in the rain with a new friend ... we talk and I can feel my emotions rise again as I try to speak of my truth, of my experience, of my fears, of my lack of safety around others ... the words don't take me to a place of responsibility, they don't take us to a place of engagement, it's all too abstract and yet it is getting better, better than before ... people and places and things I don't know scare me, particularly people they really scare me ... I don't know who I can trust and when I can trust them ... the biggest question of them all - CAN I TRUST MYSELF - Can I trust myself, well if I can't who can ... I've got to start with myself, which means being honest with myself, being true to myself ... what is my truth? Who am I?
Saturday 15 January 2011
Monday 10 January 2011
Natural Radicalism
These ideas / words are not mine. They belong to Christian de Quincey and are based on the last chapter in his book Radical Nature.
The central thesis is that 'it is inconceivable that sentient, subjectivity, or consciousness could ever evolve or emerge from wholly insentient, objective, non conscious matter-energy' (p.263).
Let's take a step back to the modern world we live in, whereby there is a dominant assumed ontology of substance (the world is made of components) and an epistemology of sensory empiricism (that all knowledge of the world must come through the senses in the form of physical signals). de Quincey questions this dominant philosophy and proposes an alternative - an ontology of process and an epistemology of presence. By doing this we get a different story about the fundamental nature of reality and our ways of knowing it.
To become this new story we need to cultivate other ways of knowing beyond reason and sensory empiricism.
How do we live (be) the story de Quincey (and others, cf. Berry, Swimme et al) is proposing? By placing our attention on the following processes:
1. Complementarity rather than dualism
2. Organicism rather than mechanism
3. Holism complementing reductionism
4. Interconnectedness rather than separateness
5. Process rather than components/objects/outcomes
6. Synchronicity as well as causality
7. Creativity rather than certainty
8. Participation and engagement rather than objectivity
9. Recognising all matter-energy is sentient (all the way down)
10. Nature, matter, the cosmos is inherently and thoroughly meaningful, purposeful and valuable in and of itself
Matter-energy is itself the bearer of consciousness, it has the intrinsic capacity to feel; it is therefore intrinsically experiential and subjective. Thus entities/bodies embedded in the creative matrix of matter are equally embodiment of the creative matrix of mind.
If we accept natural radicalism, where all matter-energy is subjective and sentient and where the being of other bodies is literally incorporated into ones own being, then we can know the presence of others directly.
Radical naturalism implies an epistemology of shared feeling. Nature from this perspective is viewed as sacred. With this new story comes an ontology where the basic ingredients of the world are not substantial things, but experiential events or processes. Natural radicalism is a process ontology where all parts of the cosmos feel the being and presence of other organisms. Cosmic feeling is extra sensory, it is beyond that of the known human five senses. We must therefore begin to explore our ouwn extra-sensory abilities in order to be the new story.
All nature 'the cosmic organism' is at least potentially in mutual communication with all its constituents. All the multitudes of moments of experience that constitute each body can feel the presence of every other body in the universe. Meaning becomes the connection between matter-energy. The cosmos as a whole resonates to he creative meaning of its own never-ending story, a narrative of ensouled matter and embodied experience, embracing the sublime paradox of 'subjective objects' of multiplicity in unity.
consciousness and matter
mind and body
li and c'hi
always go together, they are unity, a non dual duality.
The paradox is that we speak of is in dualistic terms. The singular nature of the ground of being is, ultimately , unrepresentable and ungraspable. We hint at it with words, but once words are conceived they block out the light of being itself. Our language can only point like fingers at the moon. The 'what is' does not stand still anymore than the 'now' has any meaning beyond the momentary flow of experience. Yet it is all we have an are.
My own questions are - Is the cosmic joke about the ego? If we can transcent the ego will we step into unity consciousness?
My favourite line is - OUR LANGUAGE CAN ONLY POINT LIKE FINGERS AT THE MOON.
The central thesis is that 'it is inconceivable that sentient, subjectivity, or consciousness could ever evolve or emerge from wholly insentient, objective, non conscious matter-energy' (p.263).
Let's take a step back to the modern world we live in, whereby there is a dominant assumed ontology of substance (the world is made of components) and an epistemology of sensory empiricism (that all knowledge of the world must come through the senses in the form of physical signals). de Quincey questions this dominant philosophy and proposes an alternative - an ontology of process and an epistemology of presence. By doing this we get a different story about the fundamental nature of reality and our ways of knowing it.
To become this new story we need to cultivate other ways of knowing beyond reason and sensory empiricism.
How do we live (be) the story de Quincey (and others, cf. Berry, Swimme et al) is proposing? By placing our attention on the following processes:
1. Complementarity rather than dualism
2. Organicism rather than mechanism
3. Holism complementing reductionism
4. Interconnectedness rather than separateness
5. Process rather than components/objects/outcomes
6. Synchronicity as well as causality
7. Creativity rather than certainty
8. Participation and engagement rather than objectivity
9. Recognising all matter-energy is sentient (all the way down)
10. Nature, matter, the cosmos is inherently and thoroughly meaningful, purposeful and valuable in and of itself
Matter-energy is itself the bearer of consciousness, it has the intrinsic capacity to feel; it is therefore intrinsically experiential and subjective. Thus entities/bodies embedded in the creative matrix of matter are equally embodiment of the creative matrix of mind.
If we accept natural radicalism, where all matter-energy is subjective and sentient and where the being of other bodies is literally incorporated into ones own being, then we can know the presence of others directly.
Radical naturalism implies an epistemology of shared feeling. Nature from this perspective is viewed as sacred. With this new story comes an ontology where the basic ingredients of the world are not substantial things, but experiential events or processes. Natural radicalism is a process ontology where all parts of the cosmos feel the being and presence of other organisms. Cosmic feeling is extra sensory, it is beyond that of the known human five senses. We must therefore begin to explore our ouwn extra-sensory abilities in order to be the new story.
All nature 'the cosmic organism' is at least potentially in mutual communication with all its constituents. All the multitudes of moments of experience that constitute each body can feel the presence of every other body in the universe. Meaning becomes the connection between matter-energy. The cosmos as a whole resonates to he creative meaning of its own never-ending story, a narrative of ensouled matter and embodied experience, embracing the sublime paradox of 'subjective objects' of multiplicity in unity.
consciousness and matter
mind and body
li and c'hi
always go together, they are unity, a non dual duality.
The paradox is that we speak of is in dualistic terms. The singular nature of the ground of being is, ultimately , unrepresentable and ungraspable. We hint at it with words, but once words are conceived they block out the light of being itself. Our language can only point like fingers at the moon. The 'what is' does not stand still anymore than the 'now' has any meaning beyond the momentary flow of experience. Yet it is all we have an are.
My own questions are - Is the cosmic joke about the ego? If we can transcent the ego will we step into unity consciousness?
My favourite line is - OUR LANGUAGE CAN ONLY POINT LIKE FINGERS AT THE MOON.
Saturday 8 January 2011
Sweet Darkness
When your eyes are tired
the world is tired also.
When your vision has gone
no part of the world can find you.
Time to go into the dark
where the night has eyes
to recognize its own.
There you can be sure
you are not beyond love.
The dark will be your womb
tonight.
The night will give you a horizon
further than you can see.
You must learn one thing.
The world was made to be free in.
Give up all the other worlds
except the one to which you belong.
Sometimes it takes darkness and the sweet
confinement of your aloneness
to learn
anything or anyone
that does not bring you alive
is too small for you.
~ David Whyte ~
the world is tired also.
When your vision has gone
no part of the world can find you.
Time to go into the dark
where the night has eyes
to recognize its own.
There you can be sure
you are not beyond love.
The dark will be your womb
tonight.
The night will give you a horizon
further than you can see.
You must learn one thing.
The world was made to be free in.
Give up all the other worlds
except the one to which you belong.
Sometimes it takes darkness and the sweet
confinement of your aloneness
to learn
anything or anyone
that does not bring you alive
is too small for you.
~ David Whyte ~
Is it my imagination, or is it true?
Is it my imagination?
Or is it true?
It could be you.
I hear the front door swing open and then close.
Footsteps grow near my door.
My imagination tells me it is you.
The next sound will be a ra-ta-tat.
My heartbeat rises.
My eyes turn to look at the door-handle expectantly.
Will it start to move?
It could be you?
Please be you.
I wait.
I'll wait forever for you.
Next time I hear the front door open ...
It could be you this time?
My imagination tells me so.
That you got to the airport and changed flights.
Destination Love.
One day.
One day it will be you.
I know it to be true.
Or is it true?
It could be you.
I hear the front door swing open and then close.
Footsteps grow near my door.
My imagination tells me it is you.
The next sound will be a ra-ta-tat.
My heartbeat rises.
My eyes turn to look at the door-handle expectantly.
Will it start to move?
It could be you?
Please be you.
I wait.
I'll wait forever for you.
Next time I hear the front door open ...
It could be you this time?
My imagination tells me so.
That you got to the airport and changed flights.
Destination Love.
One day.
One day it will be you.
I know it to be true.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)