Thursday, October 17, 2019

“I Got Engaged!!” [Cue Mechanical Excitement Response]

by John Boodhansingh of Zero Mindfulness



“Oh, congratulations! … [Does my smile looks as real as it is fake?]

When someone tells you that they got engaged or married, what do you say?

Why?

Not-So-Great Expectations

I’ve never bought into this whole marriage deal.

Something about it has always rubbed me the wrong way, but for most of my life I hadn’t questioned my thoughts or feelings. Indeed, I didn’t want to for the sake of fear and change.

I therefore continued along with the status quo beliefs and expectations embedded within our culture such as
  • Serious/long-term relationships should roll into marriage.
  • Marriage is a good and necessary thing.
  • You should approve of the marriages of family members and friends.
  • You should be happy for others when they’re getting married.
  • You should lie about your true feelings to yourself and others.

Well, I got tired of being fake and decided to thoroughly question my motives and feelings and be myself instead of a phony.

“Guess what, John!? Marissa and I got engaged!!”

“...Okay...”

I’m such a let-down.

Marriage is an opinion as to how to live life. People can call it a religious necessity or a validator of love or a tax break or whatever they’d like to call it, but it’s merely an opinion, albeit a very popular one.

If it’s an opinion anyone wants to accept as their own, that’s wholly their business. But, like anything worth calling one’s own, it’s important for people to understand what and why they are calling it their own to begin with and why they are approving of others who’re of like mind.

It all starts with integrity.

Here’s Why…

If you’re truly happy for an engaged couple or newly-weds, then by all means share in their happiness. But if you feel any other way, then you would be lying to respond contrary to those feelings.

Rebuttals may arise to this such as, “But I’m afraid to hurt their feelings,” and, “I’m afraid they’ll hate me and gossip about me if I show disapproval, or, God forbid, they find out I think it’s a horrible idea.”

I get it. It sucks to see others hurt, and it sucks when others reject us because we didn’t live up to their not-so-great expectations.

But I also get that:
  1. It’s all programming, conditioning. Which doesn’t necessarily mean that any of it is right or sane, but just simply the accepted norm.

  2. Their disappointment is based on an expectation based on an imaginary depiction of “who he/she is” and “how he/she will respond to my good news.”

  3. This is not so much a fear of hurting the feelings of another: It is a fear that in hurting someone else’s feelings—even if we’re fully in integrity—our own feelings will be hurt.

  4. If another is going to reject us in any way because “we” have upset them, we can accurately assume that we’re merely stoking a fire that had already been burning. The trigger for this reactive negativity had been embedded long before the current circumstance; we thus only trigger what is already there and are not the ones creating it.
If you must, when the engaged excitedly tell you, “We’re getting married!!!” in integrity you look at them and say, “Okay.”

Because you know just as I do that to lie about this is going to make you miserable. Especially if the person is a family member or close friend, you’re going to have to uphold a lot of fakery. If you tell one lie, you either have to come clean immediately or keep on telling them.

And what does the lie get for you? So you didn’t hurt their feelings in order to avoid hurting both their feelings and your own. But now you hurt anyway because you carry a guilt which makes you wish you’d told the truth. Now you have to either fess up, which will make them double miserable, or keep lying, which will leave you feeling bad repeatedly and embed you with guilt for life.

You better hope he or she doesn’t then ask you to be in his or her wedding party. (Yikes!)

In fakery, everyone gets hurt and unhealthy expectations and behaviors perpetuate.

Seemingly Reasonable Approval

Now, let’s say you do approve of a given engagement/marriage, or you know of a currently unengaged couple and think that if they’d walk up to you right now and tell you they are getting married you’d congratulate them.

My question is: How reasonable is this approval?

To answer this, I’m going to look at a few different scenarios and their underlying mentalities. Keep in mind with each that I’m making up scenarios in order to illustrate a point: As needed, read in between the lines; insert details from your own life or from the lives of people you know or alter the details to make the scenarios more or less fitting.

The Little-Known In-Law-To-Be
Suppose you have a nephew who you only see three times per year. As far as you’re aware, he’s more on the up-and-up than the down-and-down. He seems nice and friendly and all that, and he’s your relative, so how can you say anything bad about him? However, you don’t know him all that well.

Your nephew has a girlfriend. And maybe you’ve only see her once or twice per year. Maybe you’ve never even seen her in the five years they’ve dated.

If your nephew comes to you one day and says, “Hey, guess what, Uncle Ripley!? Believe it or not, me and Tina are getting married!” what are you going to say? I would hazard to guess that you’d say, “Oh, how wonderful! Great to hear!”

But is it? You hardly know your nephew, and what you “know” about his girlfriend, if anything, you’d learned second-hand. What do you really have to base your judgment of approval on?

Marriage is, after all, at least traditionally speaking, a rite meant for those who are truly in love and wish to be together their whole lives. Aside from merely seeing ideas such as, They should get married because “it’s time”, or, They must love each other since they’ve been together for so long, how much of a feeling do you actually get that they’re a really good match? Is it enough to endorse a marriage?

Misplaced Trust
Trust—as in, “I trust [my nephew, niece, second cousin thrice removed, etc.] to make the best decision.”—may be claimed in cases where knowledge and interaction with those getting married is sketchy.

Here, trust seems a reasonable thing, but maybe only at surface value.

Following the example above, your nephew and his girlfriend could turn out to make an outstanding couple. Alternately, maybe what you view in your nephew as being “quiet and shy and kind toward his partner” is actually a major lack of self-confidence. Maybe his girlfriend, the one you’ve only just met, now, as they tell you of their engagement, pushes your nephew around all the time because she’s a miserable snot and he’s too weak to stand up for himself.

To congratulate is to give approval, and to give approval in blind trust is, potentially, misplaced.

Two-Faced Approval
When I’d written the post “Silly Traditions: Permission To Wed,” I’d said:
When you realize, if you realize, the depth to which the average person is making nearly every decision not by free will as it appears but as driven by subconscious (i.e.: unknown) fears, errant beliefs, and trauma-based directives, you will also realize how it is that a grown man can “give his daughter away” … to a man he disapproves of.
I still feel this is true. And similar can be said, or asked, here.

Even if you knew a newly-engaged couple fairly well, on being told of the engagement, how many of you would offer prompt congratulations even if you didn’t agree with such a marriage?

How many of you would, perhaps, smile and say something like, “Oh! Good for you!” only to say to you spouse or friend or a coworker later on while rolling your eyes, “Isn’t that the girl who’d told us that she’s only marrying him to get citizenship? That’s mad whack, yo!”?

Or would you put a justification to it? You might congratulate the couple while thinking, I’m a Christian, and they’re Satanists. But it’s not in my place to tell anyone, if unasked, that I find their marriage unacceptable.

On one hand, sure, if a couple wants to get married, their marriage doesn’t cause harm to others, and they don’t ask for the input of others, it’s not really anyone else’s business to be negatively disagreeable. On the other hand, why did you offer congratulations? That’s effectively your approval, your agreement. You don’t have to say, “I disagree because you’re Satanists who want to get married in a black mass and will go to hell and burn forever—die, die, die!” but neither do you have to extend congratulations if you believe the marriage is wrong.

It is so important that people give conscious attention to what’s actually going on in their minds, to notice the obscene number of rationalizations and all the non-integral thought-to-deed behavior to result, and then internally align themselves as needed.

The Over-Eager Marriage Endorser

Another way people offer junk marriage approval can be seen in the instances where someone is over-eager for someone else to get married, such as a mother or father persistently insisting that their son or daughter get married to their partner.

Unless there is direct harm being done to others in not making a marital commitment (which seems very rare, at best), one’s discomfort over someone else’s relationship choices and path is solely on the person who experiences the discomfort.

If anyone who is in this category of over-eager approval would look deeply enough, they’d find these words to be 100% accurate. The proof would be found in beliefs such as, They better get married because my religion demands it, and fears such as, If my kid isn’t married but he sleeps in the same bed as his partner, what will my family think of me, what will my friends think of me, what will God think of me? I could go to hell. I’m a lousy parent. Oh, my parents would roll in their graves if they knew my son lived with his girlfriend out of wedlock. Oh, and the sinful things they must be doing with each other. Oh, God, please have mercy on our souls!

To prod another in this way is interference; it’s arrogant, selfish, and immature.

Also, while the one doing the urging might claim unconditional love, what they’re actually projecting is conditional love. Do this, or else…

Inadequacy is also implied: What I want for you is more important than what you want for you. And, I know what you need better than you know what you need. And, You can’t run your life properly, so I’m going to tell you how to do it.

No one appreciates being told what to do as though they’re an ignorant and irresponsible dope. You don’t like it, I don’t like it, and no one else likes it.

To those who do this: Learn to take control of your own lives rather than seeking to control the lives of others as if this could actually, somehow, maybe, eventually, if you only finally say or do the right thing at the right time and say or do enough of it, give you what you want.

As You Be, So You See

There are things I point out in my writing that go straight to the core of our fears, false beliefs, and behaviors in such a way as to immediately reveal distortions. While it’s possible, and even likely, that a person who carries a resonant distortion will try to deny it, since the points I make are sometimes so sharp the person will not be able to deny in honesty.

Yet there are others who may honestly not see the distortions for what they are.

This is one of the reasons I see self-inquiry and the general practice of self-help as so important for everyone:

As you be, so you see.

Earlier, I’d thrown out the hypothetical instance of Uncle Ripley’s approval of his little-known nephew’s engagement. Then I questioned the potential behaviors of his nephew and fiancé.

It could be that Uncle Ripley is quite blind to the fact that his nephew is weak-willed and his girl pushes him around even if he knows both of them well and sees their negative behavior regularly. This would be so under the condition that Uncle Ripley has the very same dynamic playing out in his own relationship.

Perhaps belittlement of husband by wife is what Uncle Ripley had learned to be “love” by his parents. So, weak-willed himself, when he went seeking love he found a “perfect” match with a pusher-arounder female. Now, he sees nothing particularly wrong with such relationships. They may not be perfect, but “What is perfect?” or, “It’s the way life is.”

In this light, we can understand why there are occasions when a person could be both ignorant and of distorted perception and still honestly offer marriage approval: The person is seeing an unquestioned external reflection of what they perceive as true within.

Easy it is for the mind to see whatever it wants to see, especially when it’s been looking at life from a skewed perspective since birth. Self-inquiry then becomes the required key for pulling together the whole picture in order to heal, see clearly, and make quality and truly self-integrated decisions.

As You See, So You Be

As I make points as to what to be on the lookout for, I realize there are things that the average person doesn’t or can’t know about others. But much of this is simply due to our high levels of self-ignorance.

This is where the ever-useful tool of self-inquiry comes in—again. The more you open up to yourself, the more you’ll be able to observe the world clearly with your outer eyes, and the more you’ll be able to perceive intuitively with your inner eyes.

With practice and healing, what you’ll come to discover is that whether you meet someone once per day or once per decade, they are presenting you (and everyone else) with signs, both subtle and coarse, as to what they believe, how they were raised, what they really feel about this, that, and the other thing, and so on. The average person has no idea how much they’re “saying” without saying anything at all or even speaking to the contrary.

As this applies to the current marriage engagement topic, I can’t help but think that if people actually knew what they are offering congratulations and approval about and why then they’d be doing it far less.

…Or maybe not.

Because if self-inquiry leads to healing and everyone were self-inquiring, then everyone would be healing, and everyone would be making healthier choices, and fewer people would be getting engaged and married under false pretenses, and fewer people would have to deny approval, and we’d all be happier, more integrated people!

Option 3

This whole time I’ve been talking in terms of approval and disapproval. Are there other choices?

Yes, at least one: indifference.

Personally, for plenty more reasons than discussed in this post, I feel an overall indifference to marriage in nearly all circumstances.

I intuitively see a lot of the more subtle issues of relationships, but, except maybe in cases where significant harm is involved, what others choose relationship-wise is irrelevant to me.

Everyone has their personal life lessons and thoughts and behaviors, some for the better and some for the worse, and if people want to attach a marriage onto it all, it’s not mine to be concerned with.

In indifference, I don’t offer congratulations or attend weddings, but I do, if only in mind, wish them the best.

It’s Personal

Although at times I’ve been more direct with saying that certain behaviors (such as the over-eager marriage endorser) are thoroughly distorted, I encourage you to find your own answers (which you should be doing anyway, regardless of whether I claim a thing to be right or wrong).

This is far more about you than anyone else. This is about using self-inquiry to personally see circumstances more realistically and then using that awareness to make wiser, more integrated choices.

Again consider the “little-known in-law-to-be.” I’ve provided you a couple guideposts to follow, my intention being to lead you, not to “the right answers,” but to the answers that work for you.

There are many perspectives by which a person can look at a given situation, but how diverse and meaningful are they?

My sense is that most people haven’t reflected on relationships and marital circumstances as I have here. I therefore hope that you’ll find this to be a useful tool in moving forward, in engaging with yourself to come ever closer to living in whatever way works best for you.

Thursday, October 10, 2019

You Are the Meaning of Life

by John Boodhansingh of Zero Mindfulness



Have you ever accidentally…

…slipped on ice?
…burned yourself?
…stepped in poop?
…stubbed a toe?
…crashed a car?
…walked into a glass door?
…tripped on a shoelace?
…gotten a splinter?
…fallen down the steps?
…locked yourself out?
…bought rotten fruit?
…gotten a paper cut?
…chipped a tooth?

“Accidentally…? Yeah, right, because I do them on purpose all the time.”

Well, truth is, we all do do these things on purpose all the time. We just don’t realize it because it’s not a conscious aspect of us that’s directly responsible.

Similar can be said of when our…

…dishwasher leaks.
…car’s timing belt tears.
…stove doesn’t turn on.
…computer gets a virus.
…clothes majorly shrink in the dryer.
…house’s foundation cracks.

Flush 'Em Out

When hardship strikes people so often have rationalizations at the ready such as, “Life is a bitch,” “God hates me,” “I’m doing penance,” “It’s one thing after another,” and so on.

Please, get rid of these rationalizations.

Write your rationalizations on a piece of toilet paper, on the top write These are shit:, and then flush the list down the toilet.

Then ask aloud, “What is the cause of my hardship? Please, Life/God/Source, what causes me all this pain and suffering?”

The Cost of Ignorance and Stagnation

Except for the penance excuse, with the vast majority of us carrying the victim mentality, it’s very easy for us to overlook any benefit to pain.

Think again of the rationalizations mentioned a moment ago. Where is there any room for an alternative view, potentially one that’s more positive and thoughtful? There isn’t.

Painful experiences occur and the mind says, “This random hardship is happening because life sucks like that,” or, “This is happening because I’m unworthy of happiness.”

Life responds by saying, “Okay, well, that’s a pretty closed-minded, ignorant view you have, claiming you know the truth and thus shutting yourself off to anything better. But if that’s what you want, then that’s what you can have. I will gift you with more pain.”

Why does Life say this? Is Life evil?

What Life knows—but few of us do—is that we are not who we’ve constructed ourselves to be. Life knows that we are not our collection of beliefs and fears. Life knows that we are not the distorted things we say and do based on our faulty internal software that we imagine to be true. Life knows that we are not little cosmic accidents that shouldn’t even be here.

Life gives us pain because pain, and the usually consequent suffering, is the ideal impetus for positive change.

“Out There” Is “In Here”

There is a fact of life that I repeat over and over again on this blog. It is that

Life is a mirror. What is external to us is a mirror of what is within us.

I really cannot stress this point enough.

The reason I told you earlier to flush out your rationalizations about why you experience hardship is because, in order to understand the mirror-image of life and to understand what you’re being told, you have to first open your mind to the possibility.

Even if you don’t like the idea, can you at least not believe that you don’t believe?

Life is going to continue giving you unnecessary hardship whether you want to face it or not. At least if you decide to change, to open to possibility and self-responsibility, then you’ll immediately be able to see the truth for what it is.

Try This…

When you slip on ice, ask yourself if there’s something about your overall experience that’s “slipping.”

When your house gets infested with termites, ask yourself if there’s something that’s been psycho-emotionally “eating away” at you.

When you get a sore throat, ask yourself if there’s something you’d wanted to speak up about just before getting sick but failed to do so due to fear.

When you drop food on the floor, ask yourself if perhaps it’s time to eat healthier or lose some weight.

When you bang your head, ask yourself if you’re being headstrong or big-headed or hardheaded about something.

When a tire on your car blows out, ask yourself if you’ve been getting enough rest, if you’re “overtired,” or if you’re “tired” of faking your way through life.

When you hear excessive car alarms and horns, ask yourself if there’s something that desperately needs your attention.

Leakage before the Levee Breaks

Let’s suppose that you’re “headed for a crash” in some area of life.

Perhaps you have stocks that are about to tank or maybe you intend to tell a coworker something that will put your job in jeopardy—I don’t know, and it’s completely on you to read the signs and figure out the metaphor.

For the most part, there are stages, or there is a progression, in which Life offers signs before an incident occurs.

Let’s use the example of your intention to tell a coworker something that will, unbeknownst to you, put your job in jeopardy.

As you formulate what you will say to your coworker, Life is working to set up unusual incidents meant to get your attention and suggest to you that you’re about to make a very poor decision and you need to reevaluate.

Maybe you decide that before saying anything you should first type up your thoughts cohesively. You double-click on Word and nothing happens. You double-click again and nothing happens. Thinking this odd but probably an easy fix, you open Firefox intending to search for a cause and means of resolution and the first link you click on causes a virus warning to pop up. This seems even more peculiar to you, but, well, peculiar is the way life is sometimes.

You decide to give up for the time being but can’t stop thinking about what you want to say.

The next day, you order Chinese food for lunch and get a fortune cookie with it. The message reads,

Your mouth is only as wise as your mind.

You chortle to yourself and sarcastically think, That’s why I get paid the big bucks—I’m a genius and people love what I say.

Upon leaving the restaurant, as you drive through the intersection, another driver misses their stop sign and drives right into your car. Naturally, you place blame on the other person.

The next day, having ignored the deeper meaning of your hardship and even blamed it on others, you go into work, you tell your coworker what’s been on your mind, and soon afterward you lose your job.

The Trajectory of Pain

Your hypothetical situation escalated very quickly before its climax.

This is not uncommon, but Life does often give us plenty of time to see the signs provided and adjust ourselves accordingly—sometimes we’re given years or decades.

This is not to say, however, that a time extension makes life any more pleasurable.

If, for instance, you have a resentment for life, if you can’t enjoy your life, if mostly unconsciously, you might be on a trajectory for pancreatic cancer since the pancreas releases insulin which allows you to absorb sugar, or the “sweetness of life.”

You might not be diagnosed with cancer until you’re 64 years old, but you might very well spend several decades prior with diabetes and other metabolic disorders.

Repeat Offenders

Also, hardship’s pain can be repetitive; it’s not always varied.

Repetition can be a more powerful attention-getter than the variable because the repetitive can be so peculiar.

For example, if you’d intended to buy a certain used car, even though your (physiological) motor skills and spatial perception are usually in great shape, you might unexpectedly slip on the stairs three times within the three days prior to the date you’d scheduled to buy the car.

Slipping on the steps like this could be a sharp message to you from Life saying, Do not buy the car! You will regret it!

This doesn’t mean that you’re going to drive the car home and the engine is going to fall out… At least not for a few days.

If the seller is being dishonest to you, Life would know this and could be helping you to make a better decision. If you don’t have the intuitive openness to just “get it,” the only thing you have to rely on is the signage Life puts before you. And the signage is always there whether you know it or not.

Context

Regarding all the above, take this as a significant chuck of the full picture of hardship and pain, not the whole thing.

In one instance, consider death. Everyone and everything must pass away. These circumstances cause hardship and pain, but there is nothing we can do about them but embrace them for what they are.

In a second instance, perhaps a painful event happens as a means of balancing a person’s karma from another lifetime. In such cases, unless a person were either highly intuitive or went to a healer or psychic of some sort to find an answer, which might never come, a person could exhaust themselves through effort and worry trying to connect dots in their life that simply cannot be connected.

Whether pains are mild and short-lived or intense and long-term, while many do have very specific psycho-emotional components that must be addressed for healing, some must simply be experienced as they are and left alone.

You Are the Meaning of Life

I made a note for myself on my computer’s desktop that says:

Every little “glitch.”

The fact is:

Nothing in life is meaningless.
There is no such thing as a coincidence.

We’re so lost in our ideas about how we imagine life to be that we’re unable to see how life is in reality.

We’re unable to see the Oneness of existence; unable to see that Life is madly in love with us because Life is us, and, with whatever leeway we allow Life based on its inability to interfere with our beliefs and fears, Life is doing everything in its power, desperately trying to get our attention, for the sake of us remembering this very fact.

Life doesn’t appear to have much meaning to so many of us because we don’t see meaning within ourselves.

But Life puts out sign after sign after sign anyway in hopes we’ll finally realize, Yes! I see that life has meaning because I have meaning, and I have meaning because life has meaning!

Does God hate us? Is life a bitch? Does life suck?

Admittedly, life can be incredibly fucking difficult sometimes—many sometimes!

But Life is also madly in love with us because Life is us.

Life works tirelessly to reveal to us that, no matter how ugly the external circumstances, there is a space of pure, unconditional love within each of us.

And what is pure, unconditional love but God itself?

Do you remember?

Saturday, October 5, 2019

You Say You Don’t Actually Mean That? Are You Sure?

by John Boodhansingh of Zero Mindfulness



Some time ago I was out for a walk and passed an older guy on a cellphone who sounded like he was talking to his grandson.

From what I briefly overheard it sounded as if the guy’s grandson had made a mild joke about this guy to which the guy laughingly responded, “Do you want a knuckle sandwich, kid!? Do you know what a knuckle sandwich is!? Do you want me to give you one!?”

As the guy said this, an image came to my mind of this grown man smashing his 10-year-old grandson’s jaw with his fist for making a silly joke about him.


This incident got me thinking about the irrational things we say that we don’t at all think are irrational.

Although usually said seriously, another phrase, which isn’t very common anymore and I probably remember more so from watching cartoons as a child, is, “You’d better scram before I make mincemeat out of you.”

If we would stop for a minute to actually think about what we’re saying, although these things may be meant jokingly, there’s still an edge of wickedness to them.

Our grandson makes a well-intentioned joke and we react by telling him we’re going to smash his teeth in?

Or maybe our neighbor doesn’t want us in his yard stealing tomatoes and he threatens to put us through the meat grinder?

Am I mistaken to say these things are at least a little bit intense?

While I can accept humor where humor is due and seriousness where seriousness is due, the fact that threats—and such harsh threats, at that, even without any intention of following through—are how a person impulsively responds seems to point back to something internally troubling.


I’ve become far more conscious of my own language over the last decade, and I’ve noticed how, as I clean up my internal world, it rarely occurs to me to make such threats. Of the few times that I do I tend to feel very awkward about it.

Ten years ago I was of a coarser level of consciousness. For someone to make a joke about me that I knew was a joke and one which I would have agreed was it’s true and funny and ha-ha-ha, I might have jokingly replied with a statement such as, “I’ve killed people for lesser offenses.”

Nowadays, I can’t say that I’d never say such things again. But I’m quite uncomfortable with it.

Why would I want to tell someone, especially if they’re being humorous and mean no offense, that I’m going to bust their face in?

What would my mental disposition have to be that, if a kid were to come into my garden and steal some tomatoes, my instinctive response would be a threat to hack him into 50,000 itty-bitty pieces?


An interesting thing about all this is that the violence is perceived as acceptable.

You never hear of two characters on TV or your brother say to his wife, “If you don’t get over here and help me right now, I’m going to come over there and rape you!”

Woah!

Culturally speaking, by and large, rape has never been acceptable. Violence, however, often as a solution, has been glorified.

Child-rearing, or beating the shit out of one’s kids for the sake of conformity and devil-purging, was a totally acceptable practice not all that long ago. Some parents even still practice milder forms of it.

And in the media, what would TV, movies, video games, and the news be without violence?

This is something that sits in our consciousness both individually and collectively. It drives us to say things we may not think we mean but on some level do.

There’s something in us that wants revenge. There’s something hidden deeply within us that gets triggered unreasonably and uses current events, which reflect the original, repressed, traumatizing events, to give us an excuse to get a little bit of the revenge we desire.


Periodically on this blog I talk about words and phrases and their often unrealized power of creation; I talk about the different ways people manipulate words in an effort to manipulate others.

What must also be understood is what was created before the words that the words themselves are now pointing to.

How we use language is not an accident.

How we use language is directly correlated to our inner state, most of which remains in our subconscious and thus out of our conscious awareness.

In a way it could be said that “speaking just happens” for most people because most people don’t place conscious attention on what they say. The words just tumble out of their mouths as a combination of their understanding of grammar, their culture, and what resonates with their state of consciousness.

Other times on this blog I’ve mentioned how people may think they can hide their issues but can never actually do so completely because they’re always somehow giving themselves away.

The way a person speaks is a great example of this.

Yes, some people are pretty good at “speaking highly” (and will reveal themselves in other ways). But peoples' secrets are usually embedded in their very words.

Because if words and ways of speaking, whether lighter or darker, don’t resonate with one’s inner state of being, the person simply won’t say them.

Wednesday, September 25, 2019

Adam and Eve: Guilty Not of Original Sin but of Heresy

by John Boodhansingh of Zero Mindfulness



The Gods of the Old Testament and the New Testament are two different characters.

Adam and Eve did not live in paradise.

The serpent of Eden was not evil.


The Gods of the Old Testament and the New Testament Are Two Different Characters.

There’s a very good reason why the “God” of the Old Testament—hereafter referred to as “god,” with a small “g”—was such a miserable bastard—because he’s not what “God is…”, as stated in the New Testament, which is “…love,” and thus he is not the one, true God.

According to the Nag Hammadi Scriptures, before the manifest world came to be there was a distorted being created known as Yaldabaoth, king of the Archons.

Yaldabaoth is a non-physical being who has a tremendous power of creation. He is the one who created the low-density, or veiled, physical Earth that we inhabit, as well as this form of human.

In the Old Testament, god says that he is a jealous one and there is no other greater.

Strange thing to say, is it not?

Imagine sitting down at the dinner table and your spouse unexpectedly says, “You know, I think the woman who works in the cubicle next to mine is super attractive, but I love you, and I wouldn’t cave in to kiss her if she happened to come-on to me.”

Why would your spouse ever even think to say such a ridiculous thing if his love and fidelity toward you were true; unless he had doubts and felt the need to try to prove to himself that it weren’t so by rationalizing aloud?

In this case, Yaldabaoth had imagined himself to be alone; he hadn’t yet realized that any being/essence/God had already existed that is greater than he.

The angry, vengeful, and insecure nature of the Old Testament god is proof that he is not the one, true God spoken of by Jesus.

Adam and Eve Did Not Live in Paradise.

Seeing that the Old Testament god is a fraud, I think it’s fair to conclude that he wouldn’t give us all we are due nor allow us to know exactly what our due is.

In the Old Testament it’s stated that man was made in the “image and likeness” of God.

How this is interpreted by most people is incorrect because it assumes that
  1. Yaldabaoth, who is never mentioned by name or origin, is one and the same as the one, true God, and
  2. the “image and likeness” are referring to the same being/essence when they are not.
The image is the physical human form which Yaldabaoth created based on seeing the pure Spirit-Human that had already existed in a higher density realm.

The likeness, however—which is the Spirit of God itself—did not come from Yaldabaoth. In fact, Yaldabaoth did not even have the power to animate the physical human body that he had created. This breath-of-life- or Spirit-giving act was provided by an essence of far greater purity and ability than that of Yaldabaoth.

This life-giving act was greatly to Yaldabaoth’s dismay because it meant that the truth of the human Spirit and it’s worthiness we’re of pure Godliness in its nature, far above his own.

Yet, through Spirit’s placement in a dense, physical human form and like existence, it was made ignorant of its true, divine nature.

Whatever delights the “paradise” of Eden may have offered, not only had Adam and Eve been imprisoned by ignorance from the get-go in a place also created by Yaldabaoth, but, once they’d eaten the apple—or awakened to their ignorance—Yaldabaoth threw them out and into the darkest depths of his realm—Duality—in hopes they would never find their way out.

The Serpent of Eden Was Not Evil.

Think about this in the context just provided.

Adam and Eve were ignorant.

The serpent—the one the Church forever claims to be the devil—tempted, or persuaded, Adam and Eve to eat the apple from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Is this really so bad?

If one is ignorant of their true nature and of the reality of life, is being urged to eat of the knowledge of good and evil an indisputably devilish thing?

Wouldn’t the devil be the one who says, “Don’t eat! You’ll die!” because he would rather there be ignorance than awareness?

And wouldn’t God be the one to say, “Eat up, kids! Know the truth, and it will set you free!”?

The serpent (a metaphor for kundalini energy, by the way) knew exactly what it was doing and who it was working for—the serpent was working for the greater good of God.

In truth, eating the apple from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is a metaphor for the mind’s awakening to the illusory, dualistic nature of this form of existence.

Like Plato’s Cave, only by becoming aware of the illusion can one escape from it. The serpent therefore offered Adam and Eve not Original Sin but the greatest of gifts—an open door to Self-/God-realization, to Oneness.

This Ain’t Your Mother’s Christianity

There’s vastly more material covered in the Nag Hammadi texts, but we can see in this little bit alone that it’s no wonder the Church has rejected any and all of these scriptures and has claimed any adherents as heretics.

Acknowledging potential error and variations between different accounts of the same information, the Nag Hammadi’s books still pose a great threat to Christian indoctrination.

This collection of books stands way too close to the truth of creation, who has been working avidly to control the world, and the revelation of who and what humanity actually is. Religion runs rampant with guilt, shame, and victimhood indoctrination, and, where these books are accepted, individually or collectively, it becomes impossible to continue on with such distorted programming.

And get this… Jesus wasn’t actually a super-serious, tight-assed SOB. There are plenty of occasions where Jesus is talking with the apostles and the author writes, “Jesus laughed…” It is also written that Jesus had spent a significant amount of time with a woman named Mary of Magdala whom he had regularly kissed on the lips.

Hmmm…

The Nag Hammadi Scriptures

The Nag Hammadi Scriptures I’ve read is the collection edited by Marvin Meyer.

The Nag Hammadi Scriptures: The Revised and Updated Translation of Sacred Gnostic Texts Complete in One Volume (HarperOne; 1st edition; 2009)

I don’t have anything negative to say about it.

The introductory texts to each book, the translations, and the footnotes are very comprehensive.

The contributors offer their views from very open-minded and well-versed perspectives, and they include plenty of references to other cultures, lines of thought, etc. from that time period that resonate with the scriptural material.

Although the Nag Hammadi has a Christian bent, the intention of the contributors is clearly about extrapolating the truth rather than catering to conventional Christian teachings and expectations.

Don’t Take My Word For It: Do Your Research

As necessary, take what has been said here and what is stated in the Nag Hammadi largely as a metaphor and with a grain of salt. For one, scripture is always heavy with metaphorical value, and, two, in the Nag Hammadi there are numerous similar but varying accounts of the same situations.

What I provide above is a bare-bones generalization of a portion of the Nag Hammadi in an effort to bring awareness to a deeper truth and reality of life.

At no time do I claim this to be any sort of be-all-end-all set of accounts. But, for me, the basic concepts of the Nag Hammadi hit far closer to home than almost anything I’ve ever heard out of the mainstream Christian domain.

I would also direct you to educate yourself regarding Anu and the Annunaki. Here’s one resource of many:

WingMakers: The Neruda Interviews
(Click: “Fifth Interview”)

The Anunnaki, Mankind’s Enslavement
(YouTube video, transcript reading)

I see a fair number of similarities between the Nag Hammadi texts and the story of the Annunaki, only the latter can be interpreted far more literally.

What If…?

In closing, I want to take a moment to address the topic of disbelief and denial regarding this material. The information regarding the Annunaki especially, it seems to me, will come to many as a shock—or maybe as stupid.

It’s always your choice to believe and accept—if only as a possibility—or disbelieve and deny.

If you lean toward the latter, would it not be better to look objectively with an open mind in the context of What if it is true?

As stated earlier, there’s a lot of metaphor involved and I don’t view this as any kind of be-all-end-all account of history.

But it’s information—information that could well have a high degree of truth. (After all, the Church has rejected Gnostic-type literature and thought as heretical and had wantonly tortured and slaughtered any who’d believed such things on their way to becoming the greatest power in the world. So, yeah, it’s probably true…)

By any means of mainstream theology or conventional research, what do any of us actually know regarding the creation of the world and how man-as-we-know-him came to be?

Taking the scriptural approach, although the opening of the Book of Genesis provides some very valuable information, at least symbolically, it simultaneously says very little due to the distortions it contains (as noted above) as well as its lack in length and detail. From the beginning of the world to the time Adam and Eve are thrown out of Eden, everything fits into 3 chapters at about 2.5 pages.

The Nag Hammadi, on the other hand, discusses the same material—including what came before the creation of the world—from a variety of perspectives in roughly 10 books and 150 pages.

If one prefers a scientific approach, well, obviously, it’s hard to say anything about anything when interpreting what is metaphorical and/or had taken place on a different plane of existence.

As for what had taken place here, where does one start? If we assume that Adam and Eve metaphorically represent humanity as we know it, what about all the precursors to the modern human that we’ve supposedly evolved from?

The theory of evolution can’t even explain this because no fossil records show a gradual shift from one form to another. Either we were seeded here more or less as we are now, or there occurred some grand shift that miraculously turned everything up a notch.

As for combining mainstream theology and conventional research to create a cohesive picture—forget about it! Talk about cognitive dissonance!

All the more reason why I and many others see significance in the information regarding the Annunaki—it can be accepted fairly literally and it fills in many of the gaps left open by metaphor, the “mysteries” of religious dogma, and half-baked science.

Again, you can believe and accept or disbelieve and deny whatever you want. It’s your choice.

But as you engage with this information, if and when rejection arises, I’d ask you to look into what your rejection is about.

Is it the material itself? Really?

Or are you being challenged, perhaps, to shift your worldview in ways you’ve never imagined?

Are you being challenged, perhaps, to change your beliefs, to step out of the status quo, and you fear the rejection you imagine you will receive from others for doing so?

Are you being challenged, perhaps, to admit that the egoic bubble of “knowing” that you’ve been living in is very fragile and on the verge of popping?

There are many people who claim to want the truth.

It’s not an accident that only a few ever actually find it.

Monday, September 23, 2019

I Asked for a Shirt but Only Got the Shi_t

by John Boodhansingh of Zero Mindfulness



I’ve been buying a lot of clothes from L.L.Bean lately.

Some people might imagine that to do this I must “have money.”

Well, I do—it’s not like I’m stealing the clothes.

But money isn’t something I have much of.

Ten years ago I left my stable job (you know, a job that was dependable and reasonably paying, not one with horses) to try my hand at “my own thing.” This mostly collapsed and a couple years later I dropped into a dark night of the soul that included joblessness, zero savings, and a long-term health crisis that I’ve been working to resolve ever since.

Not much room to make an income under these conditions.

All the while, being a person of self-inquiry and self-discovery, I’ve gained a few insights about myself and, in consequence, about other people and the world at large in terms of self-worth and having and spending money.

Benny’s Is Qualitatively Challenged

I used to shop at “Benny’s.”

Benny’s is fictitious, but the commentary not.

If you don’t know, Benny’s is a department store where things are usually on sale for anywhere between 20% and 70% off and, if you’re a member, you get a bi-weekly or monthly mailer giving you up to an additional 30% off, plus for every $50 you spend you get another $10 of in-store cash to use on a later purchase.

I shopped at Benny’s for years, and I would say that the clothes were at least decent up until, perhaps, ten years ago. For around this time it seemed that every damn piece of clothes I would pick up, and occasionally buy without noticing or thinking it would cause me so much annoyance later on, had something wrong with it.

One sleeve of a long-sleeve tee shirt would be two inches shorter than another. The seam of a shirt that began at the armpit would strike a curve and end four inches toward the back bottom. Shirts would feel twisted when worn. Jean denim was thin and would wear out with a quickness.

Why, Oh, Why?

Surely I’m not the only one this has happened to.

By all means, yes, my troubles were primarily at a time when Life wanted me to move on and seek a higher and better path. So I totally understand if when thinking I was buying a shirt I “just happened” to only ever get the shit.

But, c’mon. Low quality is low quality. Maybe I hit on the worst of it, but people must be buying this stuff all the time.

If I can shop at L.L.Bean (and similar stores) that sells their clothes (at least what I buy) for basically the same MSRP as Benny’s sells theirs—but at 3x the quality—while also regularly running significant sales (e.g.: 40% off, free shipping over $75, etc.) on their full-priced inventory, why would I want to shop at a place such as Benny’s?

Why would anybody want to?

Maybe because people don’t know of stores such as L.L.Bean, maybe because they want to buy Ralph Lauren products or graphic tees, or maybe they like the variety offered by a department store all in one location.

On one hand, these may be legitimate answers. On the other hand, a great deal of what is sold is low-quality, imported garbage and people know it.

What, then, keeps many people going back?

The answer is 2-fold:
  1. People subconsciously believe that they’re worthless, that they’re unworthy of more money and better clothes (and other belongings), and
  2. People are unhappy.

Feeling Bad Feels So Good

Whatever we feel or believe or fear internally, we express externally.

Sometimes we can cover these things up fairly well, at least temporarily, but in some way or other how we live is a mirror of what is going on internally.

When people feel unworthy within, in an attempt to prove to themselves that this worthlessness isn’t so, many of them spend money since money and what is acquired when spending it is perceived to be an external symbol of self-worth.

To make matters worse, people are unhappy. And what commonly makes people happy (at least for 14 seconds) is spending money, buying stuff.

Furthering this predicament, people mistakenly imagine that they can resolve their internal discomforts by doing externally escapist things.

People are not therefore of the mindset that,
If I save my money for a few months, I can go to buy that $800 pair of Gucci shoes. Imagine how good I’d feel with those on. Imagine what all my friends would say. I could buy those shoes, feel good, and then be satisfied for a few more months.
Instead, people are of the subconscious mindset:
I’m unhappy and believe myself to be worthless.

This is a chronic issue and I know that buying a pair of $800 Gucci shoes will only make me happy to the extent that other people compliment me on them. Since compliments will be limited and unsatisfying, it won’t be long at all before I’ll want to buy something else to quell my inner dis-ease—but won't have the money.

I therefore choose to shop where I can buy a bunch of cheap-ass, poorly made shit that I’ll be disappointed with, will complain about, and may have to return.

If I return it, then I can get the double whammy of goodness of feeling good about both getting money back and then immediately spending that money once again.

Since I buy low-price items, the cycle can go on and on—internally and externally.

I will keep pretending I don’t have the money for better clothes and other belongings, but, truth is, I just don’t want to feel the internal discomfort that will arise if I spend a few dollars more on quality stuff. If I’m satisfied with what I get and don’t have to replace it for a year or ten, I don’t have a reason to spend more money and won’t be able to provide proof to myself that I’m not worthless, nor will I be able to get regular endorphin highs.

The Receipt

Next, consider this:

Let’s suppose you were to buy $1000 MSRP worth of merchandise at Benny’s.

To start, there’s a good chance you’d get, roughly, 40% off what you buy simply because it’s already on sale. As a card-carrying member, you’d get an upwards of an additional 30% off after that because you got the mailer coupon, and then you’d have, let’s pretend, $50 of in-store cash to redeem that you were rewarded from previous purchases.

$1000 x .60 (or 40% off) = $600
$600 x .70 (or 30% off) = $420
$420 - $50 = $370

Your receipt would show a grand total of $370 and then say: Today you saved: $630.

Every item would be listed there at full price minus all the discounts, which would be tallied at the end, as though you’d bought some quality stuff at discounted prices rather than a load of child-slave-fabricated shit from the Far East that was heavily marked up and then discounted to what its MSRP should have been initially (which is probably somewhere in the single digits).

Mind-Slavery

In order to market effectively marketers must know what drives the people they’re looking to sell to.

Here, not only is this knowledge available, they actually target peoples’ most base, distorted, and unconscious urges and make no qualms about using psychology-based behavior manipulation—commonly referred to as brainwashing.

As screwed up as this is, the marketing must be working to adequately condition the masses because the marketing hasn’t changed for years and Benny’s manages to stay afloat even as their competing anchor stores die off.

Worth Begins Internally

Ultimately, choosing quality has little-to-nothing to do with “having money.”

Choosing quality is about seeing yourself as worthy of it within.

And in seeing, not only do you become aware of your own deeper truths and needs, but you awaken to the manipulation around you and become much more capable of either choosing differently or consciously choosing the same.

Moreover, you find that you actually have more money, even when you have less, because you spend it in wiser ways.

The folks going to Benny’s (and other such cheapo places) have so much more money than they know. It’s only because they want to claim unworthiness and be unhappy and allow themselves to be manipulated that they keep on spending themselves into poverty and the perception thereof.

The Song Remains the Same

It seems to me that, whatever the financial topic, the same can be said about it.

What do you really want?

Do you want quality and satisfaction, or do you want poverty and misery?

People so often say, for example, “I can’t afford organic food. It’s too expensive.”

But they’re going out to eat all the time, they eat processed food and don’t exercise, and they’re therefore chronically sick and regularly paying for medical bills and such.

If people would stop choosing the path of the victim they’d have more than enough money to buy organic food and they’d be far healthier and happier.

They might well even have money left over to save or to put toward other wants and needs.

Self-Responsibility

Wherever the finger might be pointed in blame at the distorted ways of the world, the finger is always ultimately pointing back at the one who is pointing.

The problem at hand is a personal, internal one.

If you abide by the programming and behavior discussed here, the task is fully on you to make the change if you truly don’t want it anymore. Otherwise you’ll stay right where you are.

That’s one of the wonders of this Earthly experience of duality: We can have whatever we want.

If we want poverty and misery, we will draw circumstances into our lives in which we will be aided in bringing about those wretched conditions. If we want prosperity, abundance, and satisfaction, we will draw circumstances into our lives in which we will be aided in bringing about those wonderful conditions.

Whatever we may want, dark or light, painful or pleasurable, Life will place itself at our service; people, places, things, and situations will come into our lives to provide for our desires.

In this way, Life takes very good care of us.

Unfortunately, we haven’t yet learned to take very good care of ourselves.

As our mouths say, “shirt,” our subconscious screams, “SHIT!”

Wednesday, September 4, 2019

Crime and Punishment... Or, Crime and Crime

by John Boodhansingh of Zero Mindfulness


“You do the crime, you do the time.”
--Authority

“Great idea! With a catchy phrase like this, people will really think twice.”
--No One Ever


As a kid I’d often run up and down the steps at home. My dad would see or hear me and punish me by making me walk slowly up and down five or ten times.

All I’d thought to do back then in response was grumble, hang my head and slump my shoulders, and then take the hike.

Now much more inquisitive, I have to ask:
  1. Had I really done anything wrong?
  2. If so, did the punishment fit the offense?
  3. Did the punishment have any value in curbing my behavior?

Had I really done anything wrong?

I would argue that I hadn’t. I would argue that wrongness is in the eye of the beholder in these types of situations.

This seems like one of uncounted instances that play out in everyone’s lives where a parent chides their child for “misbehaving” only because their parents had done the same to them. For reasons few people ever actually question, running on the steps is just an inherently “bad” thing that only “bad” people do.

If safety is a concern, is this concern realistic?

I would say not so much for the same reason that Mark Twain said, “I have lived a long life and had many troubles, most of which never happened”: people usually imagine far worse futures for themselves and others than they ever actually experience.

I was lucky enough to grow up in a time when kids still practiced the nearly lost art of playing outside. This caused me plenty more harm than running the steps ever did, yet I was never punished for it. What’s the difference if I run the steps or run a hill and climb a tree?

Did the punishment fit the crime?

To answer this question we must, of course, assume that I had done something wrong.

This is a hard swallow, but let’s pretend.

The most significant thing that comes to mind to answer the question is:

Punishment is horrendously subjective!

Couldn’t my dad have instead told me to walk up and down only once or given me the belt or taken away TV-watching for three days? Theoretically, yes.

I heard a story the other day in which a mother had left her kids home alone while she worked and had told them before leaving that if they wanted something to eat to call her. It ended up that she got home, saw that her son (perhaps 6 years old) had taken it upon himself to eat a canned spaghetti-type meal, and then beat him to death with an extension cord.

Did the punishment fit the crime?

Internally disconnected and without any “Healthy Standards for Human Engagement” rulebook, everyone’s left to do their own subjective thing. Such is hardly conducive to fairness and balance.

Did the punishment have any value in curbing my behavior?

Sort of, but not really.
The punishment was superficial because it didn’t in any way address the underlying cause of why I had been running to begin with (again assuming I’d done something wrong and hadn’t simply been being a kid and doing what kids do).

If my running had truly been a problem and the issue was then looked at in a truly helpful way, my thoughts are what would have to have been addressed rather than my behavior since behavior is informed by thought, not the other way around.

Regardless of the number of times that I had to walk up and down the steps as punishment, the only limitation I recall making was to temper my speed when my dad was around—but still run as usual when he wasn’t.

In other words, I partially stopped because I didn’t want to get punished, not because I came to see the light.

And if I was told things such as, “Stop running, you’re going to fall down the steps,” think about it—when do such cautionary statements ever work? We’re hammered day in and day out with cancer warnings, legal warnings, and numerous other warnings, and yet we all pretty much go on doing exactly as we’ve been.

If true, positive change is to happen, the mind must either willingly release its former view and/or be offered healthy reasoning that trumps everything it already holds as “truth.”

Yes-ish.
Why any punishment might have curbed my behavior comes down to three things: belief, fear, and/or trauma.

I think it’s inappropriate to say that I was ever traumatized by stair-running punishments, but, generally speaking, belief, fear, and trauma are what cause people to change their behaviors in these sorts of situations.

Nothing is healed and change is not willingly chosen. Rather, old programming is forcefully layered over with harmful beliefs, fears, and/or trauma for the sake of unnatural self-protection.

All in all, this parent-punishing-child scenario is how it’s been for ages. For some it’s not been as bad, for some it’s been far worse; in times past the punishments tended toward brutality, in recent times they’ve tended toward mildness. Nevertheless, the same threads are woven throughout.

Crime and Punishment in the World at Large

Although my personal stair-running “crime” and punishment scenario is quite minor, what underlies it is the very same thing that underlies the vast majority of crime and punishment scenarios around the world and through time.

Let's look at the questions asked earlier, but let’s change the wording slightly:
  1. Are any crimes actually being committed?
  2. If so, do the punishments fit the crimes?
  3. Do the punishments have any value in curbing future crime?

Are any crimes actually being committed?

People commit crimes all the time and we can say with certainty that this is so because crime, it could be said, is behavior that causes direct or indirect harm to others.

There are also definitely times when “crime” is merely a matter of stupid laws and conspiracy and profit, such as the illegalization of marijuana and putting people in prison for 20 years for carrying a mere ounce of it.

Assuming crime is legit, however…

If so, do the punishments fit the crimes?

Just like my story from home, although crimes are fairly well defined, there’s rarely if ever a standardized consequence for a given action. Worsening matters, our “criminal justice” system has been little more than a system in which so-called “justice” is meted out by criminals.

Two guys could murder their wives in an identical manner and receive the same charges, yet one could be sentenced to 10 years in prison and the other to 75 years. It seems more dependent upon whether or not the judge was angry because he ripped open the roof of his mouth while eating Cap’n Crunch that morning than do to any real desire for fairness and balance.

I understand that similar crimes may have differences from one another and so there may be some subjectivity and variation on punishment. But the general manner of punishing crime has been abusively arbitrary.

Add to this the fact that the whole legal/court/prison system here in the US is heavily monetized. To describe only one facet of this abomination:

If someone gets arrested, they might be told that even though they’re potentially guilty they can get out of jail until their court date by paying a bail fee.

So it’s like: You’re being convicted of murder, but we’ll let you out of jail until your court date because you paid us an (arbitrary) $50,000 bail fee… But the guy who would have been your cell mate and has been convicted of the same thing as you couldn’t afford his bail fee, so while you’re out free, he’s rotting in his cell for the next year until his own court date.

Do the punishments have any value in curbing future crime?

Make no mistake: crime and punishment is a Big Business.

Like all those fields that we have blindly depended on for eons to tell the truth, to find cures for disease, to end poverty, and all that stuff, crime and punishment has basically remained unchanged because it’s all about money and power.

If people were given paths to healing, knowledge, happiness, prosperity, and abundance, that would be at least a little bit detrimental to the Controllers, don’t you think?

So the area of crime and punishment has largely been designed to steer clear of offering ways to help offenders heal the very psycho-emotional beliefs, fears, and traumas that had set them up for prison time.

Heck, there are even those who, upon their release from prison, deliberately commit crimes and get caught once again because they know that in prison all their needs will again be taken care of.

I'm sure, too, that, if we don't live in such a place or time, most of us have heard about governments that have used “eye for an eye”-type punishment systems. Any half-reasonable person wouldn't dare to steal if they knew being caught would mean losing a hand or commit rape for fear of being castrated—but people have gone and done the deed and been brutally punished anyway.

Behaviors don’t change if minds don’t change, and minds don’t change so behaviors don’t change.

…But I suppose there’s the death penalty… In terms of potentially repeat offenders, that seems to work quite well in cutting down the crime rate…

It’s Not Enough to Merely Make Change—We Must Be It.

I fully accept that if someone is harming another then action must be taken so that the harm ceases.

The trouble is, whether a parent toward a child or the legal system toward a potential or known criminal, our methods of crime “management” and “prevention” have been so utterly deranged.

These methods don’t work, and when they “do” work, they cause people to take on negative beliefs, fears, and traumas which themselves drive people to commit more crimes in the future.

It is critical that people wake up to this fact and make an effort to turn the situation around.

For most people this will have nothing to do with involving themselves in the criminal justice system, and for everybody it will be internal.

"If People Want the World to Change for the Better..."

The way parents treat their children is in large part due to their own inner state but also is as a fragment of the local collective consciousness (for example, generally speaking, parents in the US raise their children how parents are taught to raise their children in the US; they don’t raise them like the !Kung of the Kalahari Desert).

The people who work the broken system, who create distorted laws, who lobby for special interests, and so on, they are there because it’s what resonates with the collective consciousness. Joe and Jane Citizen are the ones who put them there, directly or indirectly, and allow them to remain there.

What this means is that we each have to change ourselves in order to change our respective individual lives, and we must also change ourselves in order to shift the collective consciousness, both global and local, and thus deny support to the wicked.

As life-as-we-now-know-it is proof of, making up crimes is of no benefit; punishing people for these made up crimes is of no benefit; maintaining junk beliefs, fears, and traumas is of no benefit; meting out punishment for valid crimes without regard for the internal mechanisms that drive the negative behaviors to begin with is of no benefit.

And so we have to do something about it.

You do, and I do. We all do.

Because nobody is going to do it for us.

Even those who’re waiting for a savior of some kind, whether Jesus, the Fantastic 4, or a Powerball lottery win, even if a savior were truly coming, so what? That savior hasn’t come.

Does that mean we should just continue sitting here and letting the world go to hell? For how long?

If your child, father, or neighbor were drowning, would you just say, “Meh. Not my problem. They should have learned how to swim”?

As each of us is a piece of the whole of humanity, we have an inherent responsibility for each other.

More importantly, we have a responsibility for ourselves.

I hope you’ll take these responsibilities seriously.

It could be said to be a crime to do otherwise. The punishment is self-inflicted.

Tuesday, August 27, 2019

I’m Illogical and Gullible… So Say Illogical and Gullible People

by John Boodhansingh of Zero Mindfulness



Like anyone who has researched conspiracy “theory,” alternate science, etc. and attempted to tell others of their findings, like anyone who has proposed a novel idea, I have been rejected over and over.

People have disgustedly told me things such as, “That’s illogical,” and, “You’re so gullible.”

Folks… I'll be honest… There's been at least a few times in my life when I've been guilty as charged. But I must tell you, these sentiments are hypocritical and therefore misplaced.

“That’s Illogical.”

Has anyone ever actually stopped and asked themselves what makes an idea “logical”?

The simple fact is that when a person has a belief—or, more likely, many beliefs—about a thing being a certain way, their mind becomes geared to perceive—to interpret, potentially even with wild distortion—exactly as their belief-filters cause them to perceive.

This means that a given person sees what he sees because he imagines he sees it, because he has beliefs that shape his perception such that he can’t not see it. Thirty-five people who witness the same event will all perceive it differently, each respective to their beliefs.

For most people, “logic,” “rational thinking,” and so on have nothing to do with “true facts” or open-minded thinking but with what any of them believe to be “true” or “factual”—and often, for fear's sake, what they want to be “true” or “factual.”

The scientist thinks he’s logical, does he not?
The religious adherent thinks he’s logical, does he not?
The psychopathic serial killer thinks he’s logical, does he not?
The average Joe Schmoe thinks he’s logical, does he not?

The truth is that most people are unable to exhibit true logic a significant percentage of the time.

It could be said that people generally have (for lack of a better word) “faux-logic” because they have an ability to correlate the contents of their minds (at least the contents they’re willing to look at) but they correlate it in a self-verifying way: information is believed to be “true” and thus perceived to be “true” and therefore all is accepted as connectable pieces of the same puzzle.

This is so even in a thoroughly cognitive dissonant mind. How can the unanalyzed mind know of its lack of harmony when all it sees is “truth”?

This is especially so considering that most people have strong egoic agendas to support their view of “how it is.” The ego loves to be a know-it-all and fill in any gaps of ignorance with half-truths and flat-out lies; the ego is totally not okay with the unknown.

To move toward and exhibit true logic one must be very willing to be wrong, one must be very open-minded; one must actively analyze and remove their faulty beliefs in order to see what is right in front of them rather than whatever they’d see had those perception-skewing beliefs existed.

“You’re Gullible.”

“And you're not?”

In calling me gullible, people mustn't have noticed that belief sets its believer up for gullibility by its very nature.

Common “logic” is a function of a person’s beliefs and beliefs are self-validating. This means that a person’s “logic” must inherently be skewed toward what is in alignment with their beliefs.

This means that people are going to be more likely to fall for what appears to them as “true,” even though it may not be, simply because it lies within the realm of what they already believe, and, in many cases due to fear, what they want to believe.

By all means, I’ve most certainly been guilty of being gullible.

But who do others imagine themselves to be to tell me when I’m looking through an alternate lens that they’d never dare to look through themselves that I am the one who’s in error, that I am the fool?

Judge not, for as you judge others so, too, do you judge yourself.

Be You, But Respect Me

By the nature of individual perception there must always be some level of subjectivity between viewpoints.

However, the more we analyze our beliefs and resolve the inconsistencies, the more we see life with an open-minded and objective view, and the more discerning we become regarding what is fact or fiction—regardless of its source or level of societal acceptance.

Might we still experience moments of illogic and gullibility?

Sure. But so what?

The aim, here, is not to be perfect. The aim is to be a decent human being who doesn’t get stuck in the rut of imagining that he or she somehow knows any more than the next person merely because their mind appears to “know” and be “logical.”

Of course the mind “knows” and is “logical”! The unanalyzed mind is arrogant and stupid like that! It’s the story of every mind’s life!

So let’s take some time to self-analyze so that we can not only perceive more clearly but also be more accepting of the perspectives of others.

We just might learn something.

Friday, August 16, 2019

Congratulations! ...Or Not.

by John Boodhansingh of Zero Mindfulness



A high school senior is accepted into college…
A couple gets engaged/married…
A person gets a new job…

…and everyone congratulates them.

Except me.

This isn’t about withholding approval. Everyone does better when they’re given support, and I endorse this support when it’s due.

But in many cases, what have people actually done to deserve congratulations?

A high school senior is accepted into college.
What if this student doesn’t really want to go to college? What if this student had unconsciously applied only to schools he knew his parents would be proud of? What if this student has struggled madly to maintain top honors because his siblings have all gotten top honors and he fears looking like the family dunce?

The more one does self-inquiry and healing and gains self-knowledge, the more they open to an innate sixth sense regarding the truth of other people. The answers to questions such as those just posed become intuitively clear; many times the information pops into one’s awareness merely by being in the person’s presence, by “getting” the subtleties of their words and mannerisms and such.

With this awareness, offering quick congratulations is often misplaced. Not only have people not really done anything, but they’ve gone in directions perpendicular to their integrity.

A couple gets engaged/married.
What if a couple gets married because they fear resisting familial, societal, and religious expectation? What if, say, the woman is super dependent on the man to take care of her because when she was a child her father had heavily sheltered her? Or what if an arrogant man needs a weak woman to push around and take the blame for his woes?

It’s not like there’s any standard saying that certain criteria must be fulfilled and each partner must be free of an adequate level of fears, junk beliefs, and repressed traumas in order that they can see clearly enough to make truly healthy, satisfying relationship decisions.

Most often marriage is two people deciding to do what we’ve all been told is “what you’re supposed to do.” They don’t know their true motivations for being with those they choose to be with: they seek to wed a “second half” externally in attempt to satiate their inner void, rather than first integrating the fragmentary aspects of themselves within and realizing their inherent wholeness.

A person gets a new job.
What if the work a person chooses is heavily determined by the unconscious, childhood programming of what their parents want instead of what aligns with their true needs and desires? What if a person regularly takes new jobs because, driven by self-victimization, their jobs always turn sour and “the grass is [always] greener on the other side”?

Where peoples’ occupations are concerned, major negative attachments can typically be found.

In a way this is okay because the work people take on is one of the most significant metaphorical guideposts Life offers for the discovery of what each soul seeks for fulfillment. However, if people spend their whole lives polishing their respective guideposts but never actually read what they say or go where they lead—as happens with most people—well, was anything really accomplished? Has the soul received any nourishment?

Otherwise, work is simply what people do; it’s what Life does.

What Do I Tell People?

Being slow to offer congratulations, how do I respond to others who tell me of these things?

Since there are many varying scenarios in which any number of responses could be made, it’s difficult to answer this question too specifically. I make an effort to say what is in integrity and feels appropriate in any given circumstance. Often enough, I’ve found that I needn’t say anything at all.

When hearing first-hand, two general responses I’ve found to be useful are, “I wish you the best,” and, “Good luck.” If someone tells me, for example, that they got accepted into college, I might respond with, “Oh, yeah? Where to?” or ask for what degree.

These are situations that can potentially be awkward and uncomfortable but are unavoidable due to the facts that, one, I’m intuitively open to seeing into people well beyond their words and actions, and, two, I’m on a path that demands integrity.

Even if I don’t agree with others’ choices or am indifferent to them, it’s not in my place to be unkind or, in 99.9% of cases, to tell them why I see otherwise. But I can at least smile and be a decent human being in my response to them.

An Imitation of Life

We’ve all become like everyone else, and without conscious, self-healing work we will all remain this way: a product of the distorted world we live in.

Part of this implies that, in desperation for love and approval and such, we put great effort into constructing and maintaining facades that project an illusion of “fitting in,” of being “good enough.”

Even if deep down we disagree with others and the ways of the world or feel indifferent about them, we still congratulate others for their choices and walk those over-trodden paths ourselves. We live the status quo life wherein everyone abides by the same, lame status quo expectations.

We even go so far as to condemn any who show resistance to this norm.

How phony!

Awareness, Not Ignorance, Deserves Honor

I’m not opposed to giving support where support is due. However, the way people so quickly dole out congratulations to others is unreasonable.

What have people actually done?

How honest are people really being with themselves? And if not with themselves, then how with others?

It sounds awkward and perhaps silly to say it like this, but maybe it’s more appropriate to congratulate people later on in life, the gist of the congratulations being:
“I'm glad to hear that you two worked with a healer to resolve your differences. ‘Distance’ relationships are no fun, and if you'd have separated, each of you would have carried those same issues right into your next relationships. Now you're happier and closer than ever, and if you decide to have kids, they won't have to bear that added weight on their shoulders.”
Or:
“Congratulations on your realization, upon seeing that each successive job you’ve had has repeatedly failed the ‘6-month test,’ that your jobs haven’t been the problem so much as your lousy beliefs have been. Good for you for changing yourself this time and finding a new job that resonates at a higher vibration and is more fulfilling.”
To me, these are the kinds of things that are truly worthy of congratulations.

Because it is inherently every human beings’ right to be educated, to get married, to have a job, and so on, but it’s also then automatically the responsibility of everyone who wishes to follow such paths to heal their inner distortions so that they can do so in a truly positive, healthy, integrated way.

"If People Want the World to Change for the Better..."

Friday, July 19, 2019

Stop Being Sorry!

by John Boodhansingh of Zero Mindfulness



Do you know what irks me?

When I read advice columns wherein troubled people tell the advice givers that they’re being treated like slime by others and the advice offered is, “Tell the person that you’re sorry but you don’t feel the same as they do,” or, “Tell them you’re sorry but you don’t subscribe to that kind of behavior.”

Folks… Stop being sorry all the time!

Drop the prim and proper, politically correct facade of self-repression, and just say what you mean.

It is your right as a human being to be respected simply because you are a human being.

By all means, it’s your responsibility to bend a little bit for others out of respect that we’re all different (just as others should do for you). But when, say, someone is in your house and pompously demeans you for the way you do things, you shouldn’t have anything whatsoever to be sorry about by standing up for yourself.

To be sorry about being yourself is to tell them, I accept that I am lesser than you, and so I must apologize for suggesting to you that you’re imperfect.

Is this really the message you wish to keep telling yourself about yourself?

Is this really the message you wish to keep broadcasting to the world about yourself?

It’s About Equality

This has nothing to do with anyone being greater or lesser. It’s 100% about being equals and demanding respect due to this fact.

Some people might argue, “But that’s my mother or best friend or dog trainer; I can’t treat them like that.”

Treat them like what?

They’re dumping their crap on you, and you’re sitting there taking it like a toilet during the Super Bowl.

If others are going to get all offended because you demanded respect, an action they will falsely imagine to be you making them look inferior, that is their problem, not yours. To the one whose consciousness is programmed toward taking offense, offence will be taken as long as they don’t get their way; your politeness in word choice is of marginal value.

Because it should be obvious, of course, that this has nothing to do with being a jerk. It’s your right to say something, but if you have inconsiderate guests at your house, for example, you can say, “Please take your feet off the table,” without adding, “you unconscionable dick,” to the end of it.

Imaginary Infringement

Another thing people are way too sorry about is in asking for what they want, as though living in integrity with their true needs and desires is automatically an infringement on others.

This makes for significant negative consequences.

For instance, consider a relationship in which one partner doesn’t ever seem to have an opinion. Even if this person comes across as opinionated when speaking with others, when their partner gets involved they opine less and lessen the value they feel of their opinions, and they allow their partner to “win” most, if not all, decisions.

There’s no balance in this type of relationship. In fact, they’re quite strained because there’s a constant power struggle between the “arrogant and mighty lord” and the “inferior and powerless victim.”

Even when circumstances are trivial, the negative consequences don’t actually change that much. This is for the reason that the small things are merely the pieces that make up the larger chunks of life.

To use an instance of a particularly bad case (but hardly unrealistic): A person could be pouring iced tea, this person could directly ask their guest if they’d like some iced tea, and the guest would say no because they feel guilty, perhaps because the tea-pourer would then have to get another glass out and later take the effort to wash it.

How inhibited must a person be that they cannot even accept a glass of iced tea that is already being poured?

If they feel so unworthy and guilty of asking for something so trivial that’s already within their reach, how much less so do they perceive themselves as deserving of the greater things of life?

Outside: “Yes, of course.” Inside: “No! Dammit!”

People are quite deficient when it comes to saying yes when they mean yes and no when they mean no.

People frequently don’t maintain boundaries regarding things that are truly in integrity with them yet they do usually maintain boundaries regarding things that aren’t.

Let’s use an example of a guy who washes his father’s car once per week. The guy doesn’t really want to do it, and many times he has to go out of his way to get it done. But every week, spoken or unspoken, he tells his father yes because he’s afraid to say no. All the while, if someone were to suggest to the guy that he not wash his father’s car because his father is taking advantage of him and he’s being weak, the guy would get all bent out of shape at the truth-speaker.

In terms of the guy’s father, we could imagine that if his son told him he didn’t want to do it anymore his father would start up with the persuasive arguments, the guilt-tripping, the intimidation, the claim of irresponsibility, and so on.

This is just one totally arbitrary example. I’m sure anyone could easily come up with countless more because this false yes-no behavior is so common. Saying yes when they mean no and no when they mean yes is a way of life for a great many people.

We’re programmed to expect that others should agree with us and that the discomfort of rejection that arises within us when they don’t agree is their problem. Since we don’t see ourselves as accountable, we dump blame on them. Unconsciously, this is an attempt to make others feel and accept guilt so that we don’t have to consciously face the discomfort of our own errors.

We’re simultaneously programmed to believe that the guilt others put on us is truly our own and that we’re best served by playing the victim card and giving in to their selfish expectations.

Guilt is a profound motivator. Unfortunately, more often than it not motivates us in unhealthy directions.

Guilt Is No Fun

I went to the grocery store the other day and parked next to a guy who was loading his groceries into his car.

The guy looked at me and said in a serious but loose tone, “Hey, sorry about the shitty park job. If I would have realized it before, I would have straightened it out.”

I said, “Eh, it happens sometimes.” Then in a deliberately hesitant voice while smiling and shaking my hand in an either/or motion, I said, “And, I mean, you’re kiiiindaaaa soooortaaaa in the line.”

As the words began coming out of my mouth I realized that what I was saying was a rote response based on stupid programming.

Truth is, the guy didn’t park terribly, but if the lot’s lines wouldn’t have been the double ones that are spaced ten inches or so apart, then he would certainly have caused a problem.

As I walked away I thought about how what I’d said was based on a false sense of guilt. He was clearly in the wrong and yet the first thing that came to my mind to say is what one would say who’s afraid to tell someone, indirectly and even if they’ve already admitted it, that, yes, they are in the wrong. Heck, I’d even gone so far as to help justify him as right!

I got annoyed, too, not just because of the stupid programming, but because I’d realized how much of a block the stupid programming causes.

I wanted to be light-hearted and humorous in my response, but it was inflicted with guilt. I thought that, since the guy immediately presented himself as friendly and open to humor, I should have responded to his apology with something to the effect of, “You know, you’re lucky I’m not a jerk or I’d have already called the parking authority and had your ass thrown in jail.”

Funny, right? I can be quick with the witty and humorous comments, but, my, oh, my, did that lame, prerecorded guilt-response ever come out in a hurry.

The Cause

This stupid programming and its resultant self-confidence destroying and self-sabotaging behaviors come from childhood.

For any given person it could come, for instance, from the childhood traumas of threats, abuse, and punishment and of religiously instilled guilt.

At such an early age children simply don’t have the capacity to understand the truth of difficult circumstances and to process and filter out the negative bits appropriately.

When parents are constantly on watch for their children’s misdeeds and are quick to punish, when children are being indoctrinated into a religion that is forever hammering it’s congregants with the idea that everyone is a sinner in desperate need for a savior lest they burn in hell forever, ignorant children with brains that still have years of development ahead can’t do much of anything other than accept that what is experienced and heard is true.

The guilt imbeds itself deep, and if the child is guilty, surely he’s worthless.

There’s also the explanation of weak, guilt-ridden parents. Even if children hadn’t experienced trauma, per se, parents who carry guilt, lack self-confidence and worth, and so on teach this same programming to their kids through their words and deeds.

Absent healing or other deliberate changes, the fact of the matter is that who children become as adults is little-to-nothing more than older versions of who they’d been programmed to be as children.

If they’d spent the early years of their lives endlessly slogging through the guilt bog, they’re not going to reach out for anything beyond—they simply don’t see it within themselves. I mean, they may reach, but what they actually grab onto, if anything, and what results of it won’t be quite what they’d hoped.

DANGER: Highly Corrosive!

Guilt eats away at everything.

For whatever we may want to say or do in integrity, guilt is there to say, “No, you don’t deserve it.” Guilt is there to say, “But if you get that then you’re going to make yourself greater than others, which means you’ll be making others lesser, and you’ll feel bad about yourself, will you not?”

And we believe the voice, right? Oh, how awful I would feel if I told my neighbor to stop letting his dog shit all over my lawn, and how awful I would make him feel.

And then we stand still, we stuff down our feelings and desires, and we live the lowlife of hunchbacks because we have no spines to support us.

We invite into our lives all number of coping mechanisms to deal with the repressed pain, to pretend the pain isn’t there.

We complain to others as though venting in irrelevant directions is going to alter the source. We get violent as a means of expressing our frustration at our inability to speak and act freely. We seek to control others as not to have to witness others getting what they want when we seemingly cannot. We become nosey and try to live vicariously through those who do get what they want. We feign indifference in attempt to hide how much we actually care. We repress our emotions in order to deny ourselves the powerful impetus of the need to move. We absorb ourselves in the TV, our “friends’” goings-on on social media, and so on while telling ourselves that these are “important and meaningful matters.” We get lazy and apathetic and just don’t give a damn whether we live or die.

It’s All Made Up

But guilt is nothing but programming.

It’s overwhelming, to be sure, but it’s just programming.

It’s the result of living in a super messed up world and as such is most certainly not an inherent part of who you or I or anyone else is.

This means guilt can be removed, and we can remove it.

Thank God.