The illusion of “positive thinking”

We are told to think “positive”, we are told to have “happy” thoughts, and the reason for this is: that our thoughts are picked up by the universe, and so we, ourselves, create what we focus on.

This is, in a nutshell, a popular concept, a set of beliefs, that a lot of people take to be true these days…….but is it?

It has a nice ring to it: “think positive and nice things will happen”, it brings about a feeling of being in control, and “a way out” of our unhappy, unfulfilling, non-perfect life’s.

But what is at the core of this all? At the core of this concept?

Doesn’t it all start with a judgement? A judgment about life as it is, right here, right now?
Don’t we judge life as “unwanted”, “undesirable” and “not right” as it is (right here, right now)?

In fact isn’t it a rejection of life itself, as it enfolds itself, to and through us?
We are life, we live, we are “it”, so isn’t it a rejection of ourselves?

The illusion of positive thinking is rooted in a thought construct, a set of beliefs and rules, put together by our “mind”, nothing wrong with that, but it tends to distract our attention away from what we are, to “an external world”, we (mind) oppose rules upon the world, we make demands on life itself…….here is where the confusion starts, in a way, we want to master ourselves……

There is no doubt that thoughts are creative, but what do they create, not merely more illusions? We see what we expect to see, what we focus on, but does that make it true? Or is this more self-deceive?

The concept of “positive” can only be by the mercy of the opposite “negative”, rooted in right / wrong, judgement (conscious or sub-conscious judgement). There is no way out of this, the concept of “me” can only exist if this “me” has a counterpart: “not-me”…..

So “me” and “not-me” are making up the world…..the world we create, it is the core of dualism ;-)

Would there be any use in “thinking positively”? Of course, it would matter to a “me”, but therefore it doesn’t mean it bears any truth……it would keep us tied to the world of concepts, which is imagination …..

An other matter is to live the life that you are, we already are “that” positive and negative ;-)

I am that

I am “this”, I am “that”, are all expressions of the need to feel special, to distinguish yourself from “the rest”, …… funny thing is that we overlook how this is pointing away from the one thing we all share: the “I am”

The illusion of being special

Specialness is a contradictio in terminis
If every-one is special then no-one is ;-)

Specialness can only be.....in-relation-to....
This "being-in-relation-to" is no more or less "relative"
And what is relative, bears no truth......

The part, in the sentences above, that I left out, is the one thing that specialness needs the most: (a) ME.

It is the “ME” part that brings specialness into “being”, but this is a relative reality……

But to a “ME” it works the other way round to,….the “ME” sees (creates) a special reality and makes it “personal” by putting itself in the middle,……

So without “specialness” there would be no “ME” ……

But, argues the “ME”: I am, I exist, there is definitely a “ME” …….a seemingly contradiction no?

Until we start investigating this “ME”, the “ME” that does all of the talking, the reasoning, the thinking, the “ME” that we so easily mistake ourselves to be……

------

The use of words, in itself, limits us......it can only be used as a tool to point to something, that only can be talked a bout in a conceptual way, until you can relate to it in your own experience......

And we can use the tools differently, all in favor of our own particular needs.

We are all "special" and we are all not, I see no contradiction here, do you?

Does nature discriminate?
Only to "ME", things, occurrences seem to be unfair......but does this make it to be true? Isn't it not just a relative view of a "separate me"?

So "Specialness" holds the key to both separation and unification, we all are special, unique......and in the same time, because it applies to all of us, it unites us into ONE BEING......as in "BEING ONE".

Don't we all share the ONE life? Was there a time we were disconnected from life?.......In time we always were (a life) alive.

Was the start of the "special you" not a merge between an already alive sperm and an alive egg?
Life was there all the time, we are IT ;-)

Self deceit

Self deceit is a wondrous thing, in essence it represents the very basis of existence.

To me, I see the humor imbedded in the words itself, it is right in our face ;-)

Let me explain what I mean:

It begins with reading the words “Self Deceive”, the most common way to read it, and the meaning we usually give to it is: “a Self” being deceived…….

This could raise some questions, like:
Who would be the one doing the deceiving part?
Who would be deceived?
And why would one deceive one-self?

Reading these two questions carefully, could make us aware of the key words being used, namely: One, Self, Oneself
Confusion starts very easily when you mix these words up, as we do all the time…

A seemingly singular entity falls apart in “one” and “self” and presents itself as “Itself”

To me, it is the other way round, the opposite to how we normally read it: it is “the self” doing the deceiving……”the self” that brings about the veil of illusion to cover up “the One”

“The One” being the awareness that we are, and “the self” being the construct that we think we are made of, the construct that we made up “ourselves”….. :-)

“One” points to awareness, consciousness, being….truth
“self” points to character, life experiences, body, status, past and future…..illusion

Hard to untangle? Maybe?, but no harder for me then it is for you or Arunja...
Maybe listen more closely? Pay more attention to what we feel? The inner guide?

Whitout me nothing exists

This sentence, to me, includes it all....literally
It is an very powerful statement, very clear and confusing in the same time....

When you look at it at an superficial level it might come across as a bombastic, egocentric quote, like saying that you are the centre of the universe. For the reader this can evoke a sense of resistance because it seems that all the rest of us are being dismissed, this goes against our deepest feeling of being, and our own experience that we, ourselves, are the centre of the universe....

So this statement is seemingly full of contradiction....but is it really?

How can we read it?

I can read it like:

without me being present, nothing will be in existence (like when you are in dreamless sleep?)
or
when I die all of existence will cease
or
without "a me" (being the concept of a person) no other thing will be conceptualised and therefore will not come into existence

or I can read it like this:

without “a me” no-thing gets room to come into existence (meaning it does comes into existence)

So it’s about “me”, “no-thing” and “existence”….

These 3 words, with their seemingly different meaning, make me happy and laughing with a big smile….hahaha what a joke, these 3 words are in fact 1 and the same!

Me, being no-thing in existence…..

I can’t get closer to truth then this <3

RelativiTIJD

Ons leven lijkt geregeerd te worden door Tijd.

Tijd lijkt zich aan ons voor te doen als de opeenvolging van opzichzelfstaande gebeurtenissen, een stroom vanuit een verleden naar "de toekomst".

Als we naar onze tijdsbeleving kijken dan heeft iedereen wel eens de ervaring gehad dat de tijd soms sneller (als je iets leuks doet), en soms tergend langzaam (als je in de stoel bij de tandarts ligt) lijkt te gaan. Tijd lijkt zich dus in onze eigen ervaring ook relatief te gedragen. In de algemene relativiteitstheorie wordt het relatieve karakter van Tijd gekoppeld aan de positie van de waarnemer, de waarneming is relatief voor de waarnemer, in feite zeg je dan dat de waarnemer de voortbrenger van de waarneming is, het relatieve karakter van de waarneming is direct ook een synoniem voor illusie (Maya). Iets wat relatief is kan geen waarheid zijn, waarheid is altijd onveranderlijk, heeft geen tegendeel en is niet afhankelijk van de waarnemer. "Kijk" hier eens naar en "zie" wat het met je doet....

Ook hier wordt de parallel tussen de wetenschap en de esoterie duidelijk, het maakt namelijk niet uit hoe en waar je de waarheid zoekt, ze is altijd hetzelfde en onveranderlijk, iedere weg leidt uiteindelijk naar die ene waarheid.

De illusie zit hem in het feit dat wij denken dat wij onder invloed van de tijd staan, terwijl dat in werkelijkheid andersom is...

Tijd is het instrument waarmee ons denken (onze persoonlijkheid of ego) iedere keer
zijn eigen sterfelijkheid en zwakte aan zichzelf bewijst. Kijk hier maar eens beter naar, kijk eens in jezelf, in je eigen ervaring.....

Is verleden niets anders dan een mentaal beeld wat je vasthoud? En is "toekomst" niet precies eender? Kun jij je herinneren dat je er niet was? Wanneer begon je "er te zijn"?

Wat zou een mensenleven, als portie tijd gezien, betekenen in een oneindig, onvoorstelbaar groot heelal? Het heelal dat wij aanschouwen biedt ons een blik in het verleden (het licht heeft namelijk tijd nodig om ons te bereiken), deze argumentatie wordt als bewijs naar voren gebracht dat er echt zo iets als tijd bestaat. Maar in feite zegt het maar één ding: er is geen tijd, in het nu wordt ik dus omgeven door het verleden, iets wat niet meer is (bv het licht van een ster die misschien niet meer bestaat), in werkelijkheid is de tijd nooit begonnen en nooit geëindigd, alleen de droom van Tijd....