The world opens up to those who have love, and are closed where love does not exist. And this applies not only to human relationships, where we know it is so, but also in everything else. The world reveals its secrets to those who have love. What are secrets, not because it is secret, but because so few, so rarely, see it.
"Everyone has a story to tell." You're always whole. Everyone's life, and way of seeing and experiencing, is a work of art. In this regard, no one is "more" or "less". By evolving, you don't get bigger, you really just become different, and from the side of life it certainly doesn't matter what you are.
When the subway train had stopped at a station, I saw an elderly man with a blindfold trying to settle down on a chair. It was very slow and soon the train would leave. Then it is another gentleman, not completely mobile or trouble-free himself, who extends his hand across the aisle and keeps it prepared right next door for as long as necessary. Seeing this strengthens and inspires in depth. You don't live by bread alone.
It is so important to be amazed. You get out of bed in the morning and get standing, weighing on your two sticks to your legs. This is an object of meditation that could last a lifetime.
It's almost time for walpurgis fires. I passed one of those the other day, and there was a lot of rubble. Old furniture, boards, a couple of worn rag rugs. Except for a lot of rice and twigs, of course. When I came by the next day, a couple of little guys were making a hut in all of this. They had spread out the carpets, stowed the debris so that it formed like a room, set up two discarded chairs. From a blue plastic bag, they had made a flag. Martinus mentions this as one of the hallmarks of advanced man: everything he touches causes him to develop. And that in some cases the children would serve as our example, others before him have pointed out.
To write is to make yourself clear.
Breathing is also something symbolic: one supports the formation of an inner room, detached from the hustle and stress of everyday life – but collaborative, rhythmic, with everything.
Outside it has started to rain and drops are hanging on the window pane. It is a drama in the small; the desire of the droplet to remain drop, secluded and whole, against the weight of the water. As a lens for someone, to collect and break the world. The yellow of the field and the grey-white of the sky, the dull green of the forest duck. While the water bullishly presses on and just wants to crawl back into the soil.
Something that can really put your equanimity to the test is doodles. The sense of style – and the desire to make it beautiful – of those who do it is also so diverse. Everything from beautiful artwork on demarcated surfaces, to an almost manic "splash" on everything that the color attaches to. How to behave? Are there mitigating circumstances, can there even be anything positive in this?
Just as a person can for a long time push signals away from his body, and not change his lifestyle, so surely this can even for larger structures. In part, the scribble can be seen as a kind of "blush" or "rash" on the social body. Society tries to keep up "a neat façade", but is fundamentally deeply unjust (in a defined perspective; the same perspective from which the scribble can angrate).
Or as a natural phenomenon. Nature never leaves anything naked. On earth, herbs and weeds grow, on stones come lichens and mosses. In the same way, doodles spread, where it is bare and clean.
Things I buy are often defective. They are cracked and mis-sewn, expired and old, in all combinations. The fact that such problems have affected me unusually often during, say, the last twelve months should be proved statistically! How can this be explained? Someone who places high demands on their gadgets, and on getting the greatest possible exchange for their money, will find more errors than the one who is not so careful with such things. Of course. In fact, you may never really be satisfied? Perhaps you will also be tested in this? Having too high a claim is not good, you should learn to look after the positives of everyone and everything. A backpack is a wonderful thing, even if it's a little mis-stitched. A hundred years ago, they had their tie on a stick.
How important is it to live simply in the physical? One can imagine a scale from, say, "Peace Pilgrim" – the woman who walked across America, with only a few possessions and a message of love – to Martinus. Now I do not mean that he would be an extreme in this regard, but at least he seems to have found a joy in surrounding himself with beautiful things. To have it cozy and beautiful in your home. With paintings on the walls, memorabilia, beautiful colors. But in his case, it certainly did not contradict an inner purity and simplicity. (Perhaps a clearer representative of those who do not renounce the host good would be the guru Bahgwan Sri Rajnesh. But his spiritual greatness may not be convinced by everyone.)
I guess there's something else to look for. Yes, love, of course! The ability to do so is superior to everything else. As they usually point out, who have self-perceived experiences in this area: Development does not make us less different. But the ability to love grows (and many abilities with it), it is the common. Here one can imagine that the personal background also comes into play, even for personalities at such a high level: He who lived with scarce circumstances growing up has his relationship to the material, and the one who has lived an affluent life has his own.
Bodily purification cures can make it easier for higher energies to penetrate. They create concentration in consciousness, simplicity. They can make the foundation more solid and even, strengthening mental resilience to temporary fluctuations, etc. But perhaps sometimes the value of such cures is too highly estimated? Development is primarily an ascension of the soul, and the ability to develop is love. Life often feels easier, when the body is light and more trouble-free. Perhaps analogous to the fact that you usually feel lighter in mind when the weather is beautiful? This is also the "higher energies" that come in.
Perhaps the visions experienced in connection with bodily purification procedures are mostly a kind of celestial phenomenon, similar to those observed in cities that have a lot of air pollution, when the toxins are examined by the sun?
Don't be too yourself. Life still provides trials and challenges so that's enough. "Every day has enough of its own torment," you can say, even if you look positively at life. Perhaps you also feel that when you have treated yourself mercilessly, you have also acquired a kind of free letter to go hard with others? But that's not how life works. You should not only think about treating others the way you want to be treated, but also about treating yourself the way you want to treat others.
The dust is a reminder of the transience of life – something very important. It's finding its way in everywhere. A thin white membrane settles on everything. If the dust had not existed (broken down textiles, worn skin cells, hairs, etc.) then you could clean "once and for all". One would not have to be reminded that life requires our presence, commitment and responsibility, all the time. However, life is always in motion, under construction or degradation. It's not just sometimes. It is constantly reminded.
It's like being on a seeded log: every careless, jerky move risks getting one off balance. It also takes skill to just stay. But also to move forward on it! Curious, discovering, searching what laws work; seeking, childishly daring, putting their conquests at risk, is something even more difficult. It's the balance between emotion and intelligence — not too much or a little of anything — and between weight and emotion. Not too energetic, cool, but at the same time not too restrained, fearful, carefully, etc. "When you start thinking about showing your best, supposedly best-looking side, to the audience, you've lost," he said in an interview.
Although it is certainly far more important, in the vast majority of situations, and in relation to most moods (intolerance, racism, etc.) to remind ourselves that we humans are so similar after all, it can sometimes be important to pay attention to how different we actually are. I think about life and what dreams you have about life. Even if you have a so-called "spiritual" outlook on life, and share it with many in your social circle, the vast majority of people have a more practical, materialistic view of life. One does not need to take a position on what is most consistent with reality, but simply to note that we humans necessarily make very different priorities in life. For those with a one-life perspective, certain priorities and reasoning, life goals and ideals, which have come naturally. A highly unscientific survey of the music in P3 on a normal day, results that 95% of all songs are about love, things that have broken or what you long for. "Show me love, what it's all about…"
I learned something about taking notes. That you should wear on your formulations, preferably also write them clean on a machine, before putting them down. Today I have read through a bunch of old handwritten notes, and the overall impression of them is thin to say the least. It is side up and side down with a kind of "seismographic" movements, which – I hope – however, when they were written, were expressions of an inner experience with some kind of substance. Those were inspired moments. But the texts at their current stage are hardly catchy for anyone else. They hardly even shrug with me. It's also good to think of a reader when writing. Then you concentrate, make higher demands on yourself. You have to make the texts independent, yes, so that they can stand on their own until – if you – a day later you pick them up.
You should always live as if "every day was the last." Psychologically, the one-life perspective is refreshing, if you think about it seriously. A lot becomes unimportant, other things become so much more important. It should be easier to mobilise care for those close to them, for example. Yes, and also about others. Prestige, the need to assert oneself, feels like futile efforts, when you have so little time here on earth. Then it is easier to be accommodating, not to collect in barns. But even the perspective that we would live multiple lives, even forever, also gives it depth to one's actions and possibilities, when you think about it. Even then, it doesn't feel justified to fight your way to a position, or howl that you've achieved it. Everything is in motion, high and low alternates in an eternal succession.
But there are clearly "half forms" of both life perspectives. The materialist often lives as if, after all, he would exist for longer than his only moment here on earth. Those with a multi-life perspective also do not always draw the consequences of their, at least theoretical, convictions. Yes, both perspectives form the basis of teachings that motivate love between people. Krishnamurti, the great thinker, never dwelled on questions of reincarnation or karma, etc. He only talked about "everyday psychology": Why are we so preoccupied with our petty theories and beliefs, and our own "I"? While in Martinus, for example, this whole vast theoretical worldview also motivates love and understanding between people.
Often, a person's characteristics are best described with opposite pairs. In someone, enthusiasm-melancholy is a distinct personality trait, in another it is humility-pretentiousness, or discretion-outspokenness. He acquires special, over time in-depth, experiences from this. Therefore, it is rarely justified to exclude someone as less knowledgeable in a field, just because they often "fall" or show weaknesses in this regard. He can often have deep knowledge. The project maker may know the whole spectrum, and can talk even about the smooth fashion and melancholy. The at times haughty may know a great deal about humility; The often self-centered possibly knows a lot about love and community.
It is part of the fact that we as humans go into overdrive, and likewise that we experience this. On the one hand, our actions result in meeting others with similar weaknesses, and then we often experience it even deeper than those who do not struggle with this particular problem. The outspoken may be hurt by someone else's forthrightness, while the overly discreet perceives the communion with others as unreal and lonely. On the one hand, you are measured by your excesses, of whatever kind they may be, and try something else, possibly the opposite. (These are two themes: firstly, that you often have the whole spectrum up to date – enthusiasm-melancholy, for example – and that even those who often fall in the sense, become haughty, for example, can know a lot about the psychology of pride and the opposite, humility.) There is also the saying that "you teach others things you need to learn best." In the haughty, for example, over time, a longing for and a curiosity to the contrary grows. It's natural.
"Change your toothbrush often!" That's what it says on the packaging. If this call came from your dentist, that would be one thing, but when it's the toothbrush company that says it! Why do they want me to change my toothbrush often? Taking care of my teeth? Possibly. Because they want to sell more toothbrushes? Probably.
A large part of our attention and the ability to work of our minds is used by advertising. Therefore, it may be important to pay attention to it, which its grounds are, etc. Not to disparage those who work in advertising, but more to strengthen their spiritual resilience — and their awareness of how doing "advertising" is basically a general earthly trait. The world is a world of special interests and party submissions. That others express their perception of things, which may differ from what they believe in – politically or religiously, or about food, music, art, etc. – can be challenging enough. But when it comes to advertising, for example, the relationship is different.
Advertising is rarely an expression of someone's beliefs. Advertising is a message. A message in the world of advertising does not have to be something you believe in yourself, the most important thing is that it is formulated so that the potential buyers believe in it. Such a message is prepared to defend and die for only as long as it generates money. Advertising agencies work for anyone. The advertising man is a mercenary. (His work is reminiscent of that of the lawyer, who also puts his talent entirely in someone's service, with the exception that while the lawyer fights an equal opponent – the prosecutor – the advertising man fights civilians. However, a real struggle is being fought against other advertising men, if shares of the common market – i.e., our time and our assets – and he is thus more like a colonizer.
Yes, advertising is not primarily aimed at helping the consumer to get the most out of their money, but to – to sell gadgets. Good detergent advertising is advertising that causes people to buy a lot of detergent of a certain brand (and thus less of any other brand). The strategy and essence of advertising is to speak to the feeling (or to be more straightforward: to the sex). Here it becomes most obvious, what Martinus says about war etc: that everything is based on the desire to find a partner.
One possible strategy for tricky situations of all kinds should be: praying. But that option doesn't always sign up in consciousness. Even though you are actually in favor of such things. Why doesn't it? Surely it should be at hand when all other possibilities are exhausted? Maybe it's because of a habit? Yes, I'm sure that's part of the explanation. But it also has to do with things like self-image and pride. Unconsciously, one feels that it would be like a capitulation, and that this would probably cause new problems.
We live in a sham world. You shouldn't let yourself be discouraged or upset about it. Just be aware of it and not too much seek its foundation in it. Or in it alone. It is part of the greater, in which our foundation should be.
"YOU WANT TO KILL ME" reads in large black letters on a stone slab next to where I live. Who writes something like that? Either it's an artistic manisfestation, to awaken thoughts, I think, or it's an expression of insanity or blackness. In any case, it's harsh words that hit you.
Martinus writes about pure love, that it is synonymous with a willingness to touch. Where this will does not exist and you hold back – so even in your feelings and thoughts, even with them, you can touch! – there is what you may find as sympathy mixed up with something else.
And Tomas DiLeva said in a recent interview that it is important to try to understand and love also those who you almost experience as your enemies. It's profound! Because if you visualize a scale that goes from "friend" to "enemy", what should you call the intermediate forms? Half-friends? No, if they are not friends of one, then they are rather variants of enemies.
Together with a child, but perhaps even more so with someone who will soon be an adult, it is clear how to act as a channel for new thought material. It feels like a big responsibility, of course, but it feels more like something that just happens. There is one's treatment and one's efforts, but somehow it is the interaction itself that colors off. This also happens between adults, of course; (at least on a thought level) also from younger to older.
Often the metaphor "fertilize" is used (unless this is so much what is happening, that it really deserves to be seen as not only a metaphorical, but an actual description). But you could also say, "Food." You put someone into the world, and constantly new worlds as you go.
To see how much one's expectations, both negative and positive (and overly positive) create one's life, yes, or how one experiences it anyway. It's as if every nasty comment formulated within you finds a way to be realized in reality. I am thinking of the Buddha and his call for all his desires to be extinguished. Is it possible to see life as it is? Perhaps one feels that Martinus is speaking against him, when he actually gives the desire such a central place in his doctrine? He speaks of "the desire", the very desire for experience, and what brings us forward. But he also philosophizes about how our very sympathies and antipathies – our bias – are what make it difficult for us. Desired versus wise-led will and such.
It's probably the least you can ask of yourself: that you are aware that you walk, when you walk, and that you eat when you eat.
Compassion is a force that works into this world. And when it manifests itself through someone, it's really irrational. Why should the strong take into account the weak, the smart to the stupid? When you hear someone claim that aid to those who are sick, the unemployed and the old, people in developing countries, etc., should be reduced, you may need to remind yourself how logical this attitude really is. In fact, it cannot be argued against it. Not even a spiritual worldview, like cosmology, can give reasons for why one should help someone else. (More than on a mechanical level: That everything you do comes back to yourself, etc.) Compassion is a bleeding heart.
The Law of Moses was a humanization of what was going on at the time. People would be made to cease to avenge "until seventh line", and instead limit revenge to the one who was the direct trigger for wrongdoing. "An eye for an eye, tooth for tooth." Then came the real message of love with Christ. That you should "turn the other cheek", "stick your sword in the ski" and so on. And we've been messing with that for 2,000 years now and it's not that easy. But when you fall back on the instinctive, and react automatically, then after all, it is the law of moses that you act from. You don't go all the way back to total paganism. That you would go home to your family and ravage, if you have been mistreated by someone, it feels unjustified. But what if, in Moses' day, they actually had similar problems? They tried steadfastly to punish only those who had been unpleasant to you, but most of the time one could not control one's, but went after his wife and children, cows and pigs, and instructed one's descendants to continue the torment.
There is a French expression, "jamais vu", which is the opposite of the more famous "déjà vu". According to the latter, you experience something that you have not really encountered before. With the former, it is exactly the opposite: the most mundane, ingrained, routines and phenomena one is alienated and amazed at. Donald Duck, who is this figure really, and what does it look like in the city where he lives?
Remember the old artist, who in our faces saw both green and orange, colors no living man would want there. It is the artistic – and the scientific – gaze. To see, really see, what's there.
It's so hard to be human among people, one among equals.
What does it mean to mature and get older? For yourself, inside, you are the same person. And without age.
Idyll. What you may perceive as the permanent resident's insensitivity to idyll. In the middle of the beautiful landscape stand old car wrecks, rusty oil barrels, on the houses quarrelsome plastic roofs. Are you always insensitive in your own environment? As one colleague reflected, when he returned from abroad with hundreds of cards from distant streets and houses: That he has never gone out in Stockholm with his camera. That's weird, isn't it?
It is assumed that there is only reason to look darkly at the future. But you sort.
Questions and answers. There are questions that are so universally human, so big and profound, that you can hardly see them. And you don't dare to stand before them, because it seems so pathetic. But a way of life must be based on the fact that these issues are also facing. Not that you have to find the answers to them. Yes, it may not even be advisable to "seek answers". The answers are so insensitive. And they rarely refer to anything fundamental only. They stand for concepts or phenomena at a higher level than that of being amazed. Our view of "searching", of "answers" and of "questions" is probably largely characterized by the materialistic outlook on life, which has given us so many problems and delusions in general (besides all the good things: refrigerators, computers, etc.)
In order to experience nature, and not only dramatic, extraordinary phenomena, such as colorful sunsets, high mountains and deep valleys, it takes that in some sense you have been silenced in your interior. This is so that nature can operate on you. In fact, it is an apt description. Through the senses we experience and take in, for example, nature, and if it is not calm in there, then what we are to experience must "drown" us so to speak.
The same goes for socializing with others. In order to be able to enjoy the interaction with others, and be happy even with less than admiration, sex, gossip, etc., it must also have been quiet in there. When you're young, you generally own less of that silence, but as you get sharpened. It's also about speed and distance. To move closer, to slow down, so that the individual can stand out from the crowd.
Behind all the creation is care, concentration, seriousness and will, this which in some sense is synonymous with love.
I think of the actor, who told me about his tyrannical figure with such tenderness. After all, he could feel understanding, could see mitigating circumstances, etc. It is the artistic approach at its best, an innerity that is close to love.
Sometimes you hear it said, about someone who has committed a terrible crime: It's no excuse that he has had a bad upbringing. That's true for a lot of people. You can't behave anyway for that. But that's exactly what it is: an explanation and a kind of excuse, right?
It often strikes me that where there is stress, love is lacking. Stress shuts out love. But I don't think that's the whole truth. Some stress is fear, while other stress is merely an uncut, immature desire for exhilation, i.e. the desire to get ahead.
Abundance. The tree in the city that releases thousands of seeds, every year, and perhaps only a single one finds a soil where it can take root and grow.
Why does nature become unnatured? Like the kids when they move away from home, and live on white beans straight out of the can and Coca Cola, having previously been fed at home.
By nature one can only learn about the perfection and aspects of it. Even the lion that hunts and lays down a prey is the highest harmony. Imperfection must go to man and the man-made in order to study. Eventually, it breaks into the man-made world, a force that is in a way irrational. Through it arises a form of nature, yes, which is even more nature than nature itself. There is a mood that is common.
Conscience: It feels far-fetched to try to explain it based on group dynamic, and fundamentally selfish, motives.
The works of fiction that I have read since my teens are no more than twenty in number, and probably no more than fifteen. My schooling is interrupted and my general education has big gaps. Can you write your own book? You write based on what you have. If you don't want to do research, you don't either. You write a book that you can write that you might want to write.
Every human being is a whole, well functioning, who gets up in the morning and goes to bed in the evening, and in between is awake and walking around in his life. Who face special challenges, and that reflect people and events with what she has. Every point of view is valuable. Each look complements our entire picture. Every book is an expression of a whole person.
Tanketabun. We've got fewer shades and we don't see what we're seeing. This is something that has come with materialistic science. There, such a way of conduct – to strangle one's senses – is a kind of guarantee, that one should not believe or claim too much. It is a tool and a filter. But when this then, in the form of the findings of science, spread out to the public and there reshaped consciousness, it has become a real handicap. This taboo puts cotton around the brain. You don't see what you see, it doesn't become conscious (which of course doesn't stop you from acting on it anyway).
Clothes should be worn that you don't wear them.
It is only one path to lasting happiness: to wish for what is happening.
As much as possible for the smallest possible, this attitude that seems quite obvious in business, etc. I wonder why there is a war?
One of the real fallacys is that you think you can hide from your surroundings. In addition to body language, voice mode, etc., there are also other levels where contact and transmission take place. These layers that we usually do not want to be recognized by, but which have previously been given greater importance and perhaps will be treated with greater respect in the future. Now it all happens under the surface, on an unconscious or almost unconscious plane.
It is not immoral or irresponsible not to want to pursue a career. But at least wanting to pursue a career can be. It is also quite humorous. Then you take life too seriously. Or you take it too seriously.
I look at a photograph of a city in a faraway country. It's a streetscape, a crossroads in a fairly small town. A few people and across the intersection a yellow residential building with shops on the street level. Suddenly it's like I'm waking up in the picture. This place exists! People live here. There is a reality for which the image is really just a pale, fleeting – albeit fascinating and infinitely more than nothing at all – expression. That window usually opens someone. On the inside of that window are hooks of some kind. Someone, like me, lives here, just as real and full. There's the photographer. And behind him more of this place, with scents, everyday life, friendships, hopes.
It often strikes me, when I've been indoors for a long time and then goes out, that it's like coming to a completely different world. Even if you have windows to look out through – and you usually do – it's something you can't imagine, a quality that you can hardly generate yourself, which is out there. It doesn't matter if it's rural or urban.
You feel that the world is so big, that there are so many countries to memorize and what is happening there. Yes, maybe there are many, but it's just these, after all. There's no more. There are so many rivers. No more. Same thing with our body. It is extremely complicated, and is discussed in books thick as telephone directories. And yet it's just this, nothing more and nothing else. The ear looks and works just as it does. Five fingers sit on one hand, which sits at the end of a long arm. It's a strange feeling.
No quality seems to me to be more desirable than that of being able to marvel. A life experience, however sophisticated, must rest on a bottom of wonder. Otherwise, what is there is conceit, too fixed structures. Anything can fill you with such an astonishing feeling. Yes, really everything! This has a lot in common with a media experience. And with what is called "love" as well.
Well, all of these things are really the intention of calling this in: to love, nirvana, to become one with the considered, emptiness. However, the word love can give the impression of something too aspirational, performing, while emptiness can seem apathetic, etc. What does that mean? An arm, the little closed hand of a fern plant, slowly opening up? What is it? And further, further and further away from the empty, cold vanemed consciousness. What is this "to see", that something has weight, to walk on the ground? To be amazed, this volatile, hard-to-find balance point, between insanity and madness…
Lilac trees, large, powerful ones that echo. With its peaked bunches, as sumptuously wasteful, like no other tree. For the first time in my life, I have seen them. Otherwise, they have been found in the periphery of the eye, or in its usually rather pale center.
Maybe I'm too young. I rarely think of "the transience of everything", which is the only thing we know for sure about our future. The inevitable death. But rather than take death for granted, as a "constant", I choose life! Perhaps there is no evidence that life goes on. At least no evidence that could convince everyone. At least I haven't found any. Not even one that's enough for myself. I also have no time or strength to find them. But I note that many people talk about this, and have experienced signs, and I leave it enough to be open to the possibility.
The power of love. Whoever can be sensed even in the midst of civilization, in the imperfect, where does it come from? Not many people are happy with the life they live with their jobs. Not many people have a trusting feeling about what is happening. And yet the power of love is there around everything and everyone! No, it's something else. In the same way that we can be pervased by a heartfelt warmth for how children engage in their games and experiences, so we can be filled with such warmth in the face of all people's aspirations.
Our seriousness, our hopes, our attempts to obtain guarantees for life that continue. Even in our godlessness, in our wickedness and in our martyrdom, we are touching and worthy of love. In our vanity, our egoism, yes, somehow even in our cruelty, in our anger. All of this is in some sense childish and can fill us with tenderness and understanding. Where such things as tenderness, care, creative activity, devotion in self-forgetful activity exist, there it is not so difficult to understand how this power of love can be experienced. But even where the opposite is manifested, a great seriousness, a must-have attitude, there is something that is touching and that can awaken our tenderness.
There is something "passive" about love. Passive in the sense that it does not want anything special, which is the one or the supposedly good. He who loves is not there with his own will, or reluctance. But in most cases, you want to or you don't want anything. And in its consequences, there is often not much difference. There is too much power in the "execution", you could say, whether you like it or not. Love is not this.
Love is something that largely "happens", it is very much about making room for it to take place, in conversations and togetherness, for example. That the other should be able to express himself and grow, in one's own heart, where so much else will fit: desire, will this or that, sympathies and antipathies. Love is not heroic in any way. You are like an egg. When you knock yourself enough times against the surroundings, you crack up, and then the soft interior is exposed.
The fact that one has no real experience of one's inner world – not really recognizing its sovereignty – has many consequences, such as an inability to separate the state of mind from external events. To separate psyche and matter. To experience and act with them separately. It should be possible to develop a consciousness, where one can operate with these more (two) independently of each other. Or is it that they should be connected? That when you need to touch, a mental weight should also be mobilized, so that you don't get hurt? But perhaps it can be mobilised in more or less balanced form?
You walk to the bus and feel comfortable. The weather is beautiful and the people you meet are beautiful too. Suddenly you realize that time is short, and you hurry up your steps – and you are eclipsed. Now even the people don't look so nice anymore, the shoes are shaking, cars are stupidly parked, etc. Here you suddenly become a prisoner of your own materialistic worldview, you could say. Because, of course, there is no obvious link between increased stride length, faster heart rate and – a deteriorating mood. These are also deep-lying habits. When you start running, you're even back on the savannah, like a hunted or a chasing animal. Or if you're going to take the lid off a jar, and it's stuck, then you easily get angry. The anger accompanies the greater effort now required. I hurried my steps as I walk, and I get stressed; I snatch the dog's leash, like a marker, but it makes me angry.
Even Martinus can be a test for one's equanimity. He writes here and there about various abuses, depicting them painting and engaging. For example, the big entrepreneur and the materialist are discussed so that it oozes it. "Yes, there it was, on them!" But sometimes I think he's almost going too hard. It can feel like an attack. That's because you read these descriptions on your own, right? It is difficult to experience a force that is free from brutality. When Martinus says of the great entrepreneur that he "swells in admiration of himself and what a kind-hearted person he is, when he gives insignificant gifts", etc., one might think that this is a bellic way and a disapproval of these individuals. You can really see how the person who pronounces something like this is high red on the face, tightens his jaws and almost hisses out every word. But at the same time, word for word, it could also be merely a description of the state of things, something presented with a balanced weight energy.
Run over frog
a thousand happy ants
Is God a personal or impersonal force? Perhaps the "personal" of the God experience lies only in the attitude of the bede's? But in any case, there is something good in relating to God or life as if it were a person, because it helps a set have a real attitude. It's a bit like the difference between being served by a cashier and by an ATM. In the latter case, you just order something to happen, you are not there with the thoughts, perhaps you are also less tolerant of variations and the problems that can arise.
Everyone has the same center. How to look at this? The idea that the self in all of us would be the same – really the same! Isn't that a little creepy feeling? You age but remain in your own experience who you were as a child (when you felt like an adult!). You don't get older inside, but you don't get younger either. With the same seriousness, I did childish things when I was a child, as I do more adult things today. In my own experience of myself, nothing happened. There is something absolutely constant. This inner "I", which never seems to change or age – and which perhaps that is why it feels so extra personal – is it really the same I as everyone else has? I remain faced with this issue. Further reading, by Martinus or anyone else, will probably not be able to add anything. It's not an answer I lack, or even an understanding. It feels like it's good to just be close to this wonder. It can be assumed that this is one of life's truly profound secrets.
There are so many guiding principles: "Don't die" is perhaps the most important, the one that covers the most without losing its substance. That says something relatively precise to quite a few. "Love" is perhaps a concept that embraces more, but it also says less.
Perhaps you can get to a point where you long for religiosity. The spiritual search, well, it is no wonder, may be subject to the same limitations as the scientific one. That everything can be understood, that everything can be formulated, even for others. But you may have to let the world be what it is, and not push it into something it isn't. It may be possible to understand life. But you should let it – and one yourself – be a bit enigmatic anyway. Maybe it's life that's hard to force, maybe it's just our instruments that are blunt. You don't know that, do you?
The fact that science has so many more answers to give than religion is partly because science knows of no other way of dealing. It must structure, subdition, formulate, even where the explanations become far-fetched and hit on the side. One should not be impressed by science just because it speaks with such an adult voice and seems to have answers to everything. Science is a talk mill that loves to hear its own voice.
What do you do when your conscience, or sense of what is intellectually decent, forbids you to push further, but you still feel the urge to be close to life? Perhaps there is only one kind of religiosity. What I am arguing for is not an anti-intellectuality. It is easy to see that a scientific approach, in its financial form, is somewhat higher than an ordinary religiosity. But when all one's sense of what's decent forbids you to push anymore? What remains (unless the questions of life are just a kind of pastime) is then a kind of religiosity. Not wanted, in and of itself, but by necessity.
Your own life is not even your own. The other's life is not entirely the other's. There is a way of experiencing that is different from the usual one, and the "gap" between them is so great that the transition must be described as an "awakening" or an "enlightenment". It is understandable that it is different, but it is easy to interpret a lot of what applies to important things in our current experience of life. That this experience – of enlightenment – should be able to satisfy even these old desires. But this new experience is not this. That's what's not this!
In the Third World, people are starving to death, while our part of the world works pretty well on the whole, with competent people in management positions. But one country – yes, our entire part of the international community – is primitive in allowing all this to continue!
The weapons factory is looking for new engineers for its robotics program. In one image in the ad stands a smiling, suit-clad man and holding a missile proudly and tenderly in his arms. Can the western world's collective insensitivity be better expressed at all? And it's not even meant to be a caricature!
Being politically correct is a state where you not only say what is expected of you, but also experience it that way and think so.
Nations are something other than the sum of their inhabitants. If the law and society internally are the sum of the highest in people, what can be said about foreign policy?
You seek out a wise person to get help with your questions and problems. And afterwards, you discover that nothing or very little of what you had set out to talk about came to light. Why? If you enter a force field, what characterizes this?
In fact, all emotions are beautiful. Even jealousy is beautiful, the anger and displeasure too, well, almost such feelings in particular. Isn't it strange to have them? What do these feelings consist of? They live like little monkeys in your chest, and probably have it pretty boring. Sometimes they jump around, but mostly they sit and peek through the grid, at the outside world.
You buy a record, maybe just for a single song that you know is included, and experience the rest as boring and smooth. But if you then try to live into the music, if you try to feel how you stand there in the audience, how you have those who play and sing in front of you, then the music simply gets better. It's swinging. The songs are small functional wholes. That's how I think it's with people you meet.
Why is it that when you are going to photograph something, such as yourself, in a mirror, you have to set the sharpness to double the distance to the mirror? For example, if you are going to photograph a shadow on the wall, or for that matter: a light reflex, then the sharpness is on the wall? It is not the mirror image you photograph, but what the mirror reflects. And, of course, this is also the case for the eyes. Is that why one feels that one can immerse one in a mirror image – and the feeling of unreality that accompanies this – because the gaze is set to double the distance to the mirror and its surroundings?
With the desire for the perfect, you generate an energy that seems to want to fight back eventually.
Not to rely too much on the expressive power of individual words.
Why do you like to wave to each other when you meet out to the lake? But that there is no corresponding need on the mountain? Perhaps it has to do with the fact that the water is such a fickible element and that you feel that you are completely in its violence. Everything flows, rises and sinks. Greeting each other then becomes an expression of seeking affirmation and security in the only thing that can be fixed, when the material is now so palpably in motion: that is, the spiritual. I think we're going to work in life as a whole as well.
"Give a man a never-ending inspiration, and also a faltering health, and he will probably learn to pray," Kierkegaard writes. Prayer will evolve, not only because you want to "do good in the world" etc., but because you need to be saved from yourself and your own inner being. This maelstrom of dark thoughts and feelings that throws you off balance constantly. It is the animal's death cry in the man-made world. It is a prayer that is far from heroic or contemplative.
To have respect for Martinus, but not necessarily for the cosmological culture.
Do you need the idea of karma? To act on that would not be so nice. That what you did or didn't do would be based on certain calculations. There are at least three variants: the Indian model, which believes that those who suffer to the full should experience the consequences of their actions; partly the more intellectual model, where one realizes that even one's own actions, such as heartlessness, create dark karma for oneself. But then there is also the direct model, according to which one reasoned so that it is not quite easy to live, that you will fall there time and time again, everyone does…
This also has some relevance to the concept of intercession, which today can cause problems. "Is it right to use intercession, if you know that someone is having a hard time, when it is his karma to experience these difficulties?" These brews probably only arise because of our relative insensitivity. Love wants everything, love hopes everything, love believes everything, as it says in the Bible.
There are two types of spiritual teachers: provocateurs and informants. The first ones encourage us to bring out the best inside, to create change, to deal with our lower sides. They often speak from their own deep experience of these conditions. Not infrequently, they also claim that it is possible for each of us to quickly reach their level. The informants (and here Martinus should count) explain why this does not succeed us.
Love is not just "letting go of fear." Rather, it is the fight we should let go of.
When you say that someone is too (a lot) this or that, you apparently have an experience that they should be different. Someone is too intellectual, too eager, too frugal, etc. It is an expression of a kind of judgment. But one can also judge someone as conspicuously intellectual, very eager, distinctly frugal, etc., without this being disapproving of him! People have qualities, both positive and negative, there's nothing strange about that. And how could it be compatible with love not to experience this, to settle for fewer nuances in life?
Martinus highlights Our Father as a perfect prayer. It contains everything a person can ask for and still be in touch with life. But at the same time, prayer should also develop into the most intimate relationship. If you heard someone use a language like in Our Father, when he was talking to a friend, how would you interpret this? Would you really think this was a close, intimate relationship? It is certainly possible to also recite prayers as a kind of mantra, or as mathematical formulas.
Love is letting go of the fight. Love opens doors. It opens doors to the hearts of others, and it opens doors to one's own deeper knowledge, which is long kept out of the reach of oneself.
How does prayer relate to affirmations and visualizations? One can probably achieve a lot with these last techniques – the idea is creation – more honest relationships, a better job, etc., if you gather your awareness around these issues. Addressing such a desire to God, or concentrating thoughtfully in the form of a visualization, "on your own," may not matter much.
Where prayer may be of great importance, in the work of finding a balance in oneself, is to process, for example, a dark conscience. Yes, this certainly also applies to the stresses you face "from the outside", but even more so that of one's own darkness, that which rises from the interior. Here we enter the area that is special to prayer, namely that it is able to seek togetherness or comfort (unlike affirmations or the like, which are more like creation, building activities, yes, or a kind of "mail order procedure").
Most likely, as we become fed up on our own inner anxieties, egoism and impatience, we will seek comfort – unconditional comfort. And this one cannot probably find in oneself (since this very experience of standing alone in life is a common denominator not only in different forms of spiritual unhappiness, such as depression and martyrdom, but also in certain kinds of pleasure or happiness, e.g., self-honorability, feelings of superiority, etc.). Here is what the Son of God returns to the Father, and is prepared to take the simplest job. It is a child-parent relationship that is increasingly established. In difficult times, like the child, we will seek our Father's hand.
It is mentioned in the book "Martinus as we husker ham", that Martinus should have said: "I do not understand how people dare to spare prayer". Dare? Here it is probably not primarily concrete, physical dangers that are intended, that one would risk ending up in if one does not pray, but possibly more mental ones. The prayer "Do Your will" is certainly not something you just put there at the end, a kind of "prayer suffix", something you use to, so to speak, "tie the bag together". It is accompanied by the greatest joy and relief.
I think at a time point you will be very tired. Tired of his vain attempts to portray his own life (even if it has been successful). There is a lot that can be achieved with affirmations, etc. All creation and re-creation can actually be sorted into this concept. But when you no longer know what to do? The poor person normally wants to be rich. But the rich who "have everything" and yet feel unsatisfied and unhappy, what will he long for?
You long for money for the freedom and mobility they are perceived to bring. But when you have money, you may find that there is another kind of mobility that is actually more desirable: mobility in the mental. I think it is with this fatigue that one begins to seriously imagine what this means: that we are all part of Deity. It takes getting tired enough of the many (and into the last more sophisticated and "mixed up") varieties, to be able to stop and just be happy for what is. Any quest to achieve a "self-color", repels this experience, which in the deepest sense is a mystical experience.
Fixed thought structures should be dissolved. Perhaps one sometimes imagines that as one becomes more and more familiar with Martinus' thoughts, one's security in these areas also increases? I think that is mostly a misconception. The security you can feel derives a lot of your power from the old.
If you have long and strongly desired something, and then it happens to you as you have longed, then you can interpret it in at least three ways: First, that it is a "prayer response". They have sent out their conscious or unconscious prayers and God has now fulfilled them. One can also imagine that the strong images you had in your interior have been a kind of predation about something that would happen. A third option is that these strong target images have turned into fixed thought structures that have actually created one's reality. A fourth option, in the end, would be chance then. Although there is no arbitrariness in life, it may be that the connections that led to an event are completely different from those you think you see.
A real-life story: When I was in first grade, I thought a lot about how I could capture the girls' interest. I fantasized about how to climb a tree that stood on the edge of the schoolyard, then I would fall down and be found by these girls, who would carry me back to the school building in a small procession! One beautiful winter's day, I went out to walk with one of these girls, and her dog, in the woods. We walked high up on a mountain ridge next to a precipice. There was such a swallow over the precipice. I wanted to impress her a little bit, so I went close to the edge, and suddenly I slipped away. It was loud and when I hit the ground I lost consciousness. When I get there, someone carries me through the woods, and the girl walks by and worries. My dream had come true!
Such fixed thought structures and desires of which consciousness is so full, even where the goals seem "bright", will be perceived as more and more troublesome. Prayer will more and more become our refuge from these mental chains, away from ourselves.
Today, there are probably quite a few who have passed through the most severe forms of suffering. What is left for these people to deal with – shades of what Martinus calls "the longest living idol" – may seem to be trifles from the outside. But with a mind becoming increasingly sensitive, these inconveniences are palpable and go deep. And we will seek relief, without there being a coquette in this. The much-crowded land with one's own person, its own delimited destiny, its own well-being… These are strong, ancient structures, which will be what torment us to the last, and from which no relief is given but prayer (and as cure and repentance). To mentally set one's consciousness to, for example, "Ske Your will" will be perceived as a favor, a precious invitation. It's like lifting the boiling pot from the stove for a while. It's empty life without God.
So far, prayer is largely "affirmative," you might say. Prayer as a form. But one can certainly achieve both one or the other, of material and other benefits, through prayer. But in cases where one's prayers here are "answered", it is probably more to blamed the creative power of thought than that of prayer. Asking for a car and then getting a car is hardly a testimony to what can be done with the help of prayer. If we could see our lives from above, we would probably see how this is constantly what is happening: that our dreams and "prayers" are fulfilled as time goes on. And in the spiritual world, such a thing happens simultaneously, if Martinus is to be believed. You can use a full parking lot with cars, if you want.
The great merits of prayer lie in the field of the psyche, rather than on the material. Prayer is the "cry of death", when we seek and need God. Everything else can be attributed either to lovemaking or thought-making. Prayer is — both in its most primitive and in its most perfect form — a cry of death. Why do we find it so hard to pray? An important reason is that we are still doing quite well on our own (which, of course, we do not, but it does not yet plague us) if we are to assess the situation ourselves. God is not yet important to us. He will only be when we give up our "decision-making power". Until then, we are obscuring God with our own body. "My thumb is as big as the sun," someone said.
When it comes to praying for others, I don't think you should exaggerate the importance of the prayer format. The active "substance" is love, the real concern. It is as with medications: they are often available both as a tablet and in liquid form, depending on what suits the person and the situation best. But it is not the format that possibly benefits, but what the format carries out. Doing it in the form of a prayer can help us focus. But one can imagine the possibility that intercession also distracts, and also that it obscures a lack of love in oneself, so that one cannot discover it for yourself. To touch someone, whether with your hand, with words or a thought, or in prayer form, is all similar. The power and strength of prayer lies primarily in the fact that it can be a help to oneself.
One can thank you for waking up to a new morning, even though martinus cosmology, for example, has made it likely that you have an infinite number of "mornings" to look forward to. After all, being able to exist is more than anyone can ask for. It's a mystery.
We say we want to learn to pray, but that's not true. What ensperses us is not pure prayer, but a mix of pleasant things in our dreams. Same thing with love. The great teachers in the field of life art (of whom I also hold Krishnamurti high) would probably describe our situation as such that we really enjoy our lovelessness and our godlessness. And they are probably absolutely right.
Prayer is as little as love an ability that depends on our will (unlike, for example, the ability to sail or play bridge). The fact that we have difficulty praying is not only because we have not trained enough. What is lacking is also experiences of a deeper nature. We learn about love by experiencing the consequences of a loveless act. Prayer, and the love of God, we learn by experiencing, well, what? Perhaps it is the consequences of separation, of the meacity of egoism, the lack of community, the castle that egoism builds for us, that teaches us this? (And then it is not only about the discomfort, but also about the discomfort at the pleasure: satiety.) Putting love and prayer together can teach us something about prayer, and it can teach us something further about love. There is the old saying, attributed to Socrates, that "I am so wise, for I know that I know nothing." This is an important ingredient of both love and prayer: not knowing "too strongly."
It is no less loving to question something than to think you know. What will our path to a self-experience of cosmology look like? Will we be able to assert these mindsets with greater and greater pathos, until one day our baptism of fire takes place as the final confirmation?
That our memory capacity would decrease is often explained by intuition growing and making memory superfluous (except that there is an automatic in it). But there is also a moral dimension to this: The impaired memory ability goes hand in hand with an increased willingness not to remember, a willingness not to hold on.
Everyone longs for the light. Light and darkness change in the cycle, sure, but light is the basic theme after all. The order, yes, the love behind everything. It is only for a relatively short period that the individual experiences unconsciousness, and even shorter is the period of spiritual difficulties.
Love is a universal language and language that works at all times and at all stages. Even in the relatively short period when we use our dawning consciousness in the service of egoism and manslaughter, love is something that we are illuminated by and which we withdraw from.
You have to look at the light in everyone. If there is a consciousness, then there is a dawning light. If there is not yet a consciousness, as in the animals, then the original light is there, irresistible. See how everyone is illuminated by the presence of a loving being! (And the ones who have the most difficulty for it may be the ones who are really close to it.) Everyone loves the one who loves.
"If God didn't exist, we'd have to invent Him," he said. And I think that's true. The need to be able to seek support from and amount to something greater than oneself is fundamental. Just as the psychologist has his tutor, and the priest has his bishop who has his archbishop, so man needs his god. The message of love is often emphasized as a common denominator of the major world religion, but also the concept of God itself is such a trait that unites. There is something bigger than yourself. Materialism is a small parenthesis in the evolution of the soul.
It is quite possible to have a fairly great insight into these laws, and to be fascinated by them, to argue from them and also be able to inspire others with them, but lack substantially in compassion.
It is said that love is letting go of fear. But at the bottom there is no fear. At the bottom is the struggle, the one who has a thousand faces. Fear is overlaid the struggle and the struggle is what lingers the longest. When one claims that fear is what lies deepest, is it not unproblematic to explain why it seems so difficult to bring about lasting change in oneself? The answer to why it is so difficult to achieve change is, if Martinus is to be believed, that the struggle, after all, gives us a multitude of things that we still find pleasant and therefore do not want to be without.
There is in every situation, in every meeting and every moment of a meeting, an energy combination that is more in harmony with the life laws than everyone else. To manifest it is to do "God's will," or it is to take the consequences of the question: "What would Christ have done?"
"Giving your life for others" doesn't sound so happy.
What can you say about love without diminishing it? Love is the only real eternal machine. It takes no time, no place, no power, it becomes a plus at every stage.
Love is a force that goes in two directions. When you feel a motivation to live more peacefully, to let go of the struggle, to be the people and life closer, and you focus on this, then love comes to meet.
You will perhaps also experience a special security, when you start to pay attention to loading each gesture with a content. They coordinate their forces. You know you're doing what's possible. Often one can experience an unease, or a feeling of alienation towards life and oneself, due to a lack of consistency between the external nature of the gesture and the content you load it with. It's like reading and talking on the phone at the same time. This also generates a willingness to fight. You feel that it's something you don't have full control over, that it's something that runs freely. You feel uncomfortable, like when you've done a bad job.
The question is, can you feel two emotions at the same time: Can you love someone, and at the same time be angry with them?
The desire for an ability, such as understanding or love, is very similar to the ability itself. Not only the act, but also the regret you feel when you acted wrongly (or did not act at all), tells you a lot about you as a person.
To process their thoughts by writing is to provide them with a measure of intelligence energy, which is not infrequently what is missing them. You can go through what has happened, and things that belong to the future, and you do not become as easily a prey for your feelings and moods.
How can angels break into this world and connect with us? Yes, in fact, we are only with a very small part of ourselves attached to this physical world. Perhaps you can liken it to standing on your knees on a jetty, bending over and dipping your face disc into the water. Almost all of you are still in the world above!
There are really no difficult topics to write or lecture on. It's all about not setting the bar higher than being able to cross it. "Reincarnation", for example. Martinus could talk about this at a high level. For him, this was not difficult. But if you're going to give a talk on that topic yourself, then it can feel really difficult. It's supposed to feel hard! You can't go on like Martinus. How could you emulate him?
You start from scratch, with your question about this concept. Looking for the foundation of what is universally human, what one shares with most others. One tries to preserve some kind of intellectual honesty, a difference between one's own and others' knowledge in the field. Everyone has experienced what it's like not to be able to live up to the abilities you've pretended to own. Horrendous!
How does karma actually work? You are annoyed by someone's behavior, such as putting your feet on the seat in front of you in the train. But what in that example is your own karma? Ok, let's assume it has to do with our own recklessness or thoughtlessness. Having experienced such thoughtlessness through others, we become more considerate, we sharpen up, and as we come less and less into contact with the ruthlessness of others. People do better. Or is it simply that such behavior will no longer be offended? But is karma set against our experience, really? Or is it just a reflection of our actions?
It is interesting, and it has consequences for what we call "intercession". Here is a relationship that is a bit awkward: If someone has had a heavy experience, for example, suffered from a severe illness, and mourns this deeply, what can intercession do for that person? Martinus says that you can never free someone from an experience that they have to do — i.e., that person's karma — but you can always pray for him to preserve his courage. What is karma in this case? Isn't the spiritual experience also karma, and if so, is it right to wish that someone might be freed from such things?
But perhaps it should be seen that karma is essentially the external circumstances and not how we experience them? Or maybe it's both. Yes, it probably is both. Things always tend to be both.
There's someone for everyone. In my work, I see a lot of people passing by. And the vast majority seem to have met someone to like and where the feelings were mutual. Couples about couples live in life. One function of infatnation is that through the other one one actually gets an opportunity to love oneself, to glorify oneself. In addition to all the beauty that belongs to the future and the true human, there is this aspect.
Love is often referred to as an irrational force in our lives, which "affects" us and is impossible to predict. But at least in part, it's pretty predictable. Every human being seems to have a certain value in the market, and one rarely falls in love with his own level, which only shows that on an unconscious level one chooses who to fall in love with (or at least who not to fall in love with). That people get together as part of a social strategy, because you also work well together, that's one thing. You share values, interests and life goals. But that you actually also fall in love with such a (unconscious) strategy, that's more where I wanted to go.
A valuable feature is being able to retreat when conditions change. Not to push too hard, not to tie up too much energy in the individual.
When you take a step back, you may ask yourself: What is the key for? What does the water chute stand for? Dog? Hair? Umbrella? Insurance company? Knife, fork and spoon? The symbolism of various diseases and disabilities? Almanac? Backpack? One can meditate on a healthy and a wilted leaf, which are objects that Rudolf Steiner recommends. Or the 12 basics, according to Martinus. (Or why not "God" which was the exercise that triggered Martinus' baptism of fire.) But you can also face basically anything: mailbox, light bulb, tape roll, etc.
Take a step back: What is "a potted plant"? What is "an umbrella", "a wallet", "a mirror" or "a spice jar"? This wonder has both a sensible and a moral dimension. Both real love and real intelligence presuppose this. To be alienated from things is not to "construct", or to make one's way. It is a rapprochement with the real.
There are abstract concepts: "freedom", "time" e.g. There are human qualities, like "curious", and you can try to know people's characters. There are further things – yes, like "spice shelf", "tippex" etc. By abstracting what you encounter, one can come to distinguish basic features that connect different things, characteristics, etc. with each other. These are probably not only poetic constructions, but it shows something real and essential in life. Martinus talks about how everything is "topics". Each association of people has as well as its own charge.
Sweets in large quantities are obviously not good for us in. But one can take comfort in the fact that everyone seems to like it: from young children drinking their sweet breast milk, to the people of the future who, according to several sources, will feed largely on fruit. Someone who had traveled in the marshes in Florida told me that they even fed the crocodiles with marching moth moth!
The other day I came out of a tobacconist shop with a piece of chocolate in my fist. Then I bumped into a woman I hadn't seen in probably ten years. We talked about sweets. She had recently visited an alternative doctor for his ailments, and these he had quickly related to just too high sugar consumption: "If you continue like this, you will die", he had said briefly. So she passed that on to me. Sometimes such a meeting is just what you need.
Perhaps in every moment there is room for a touch of free will? It is the edge of the foot on the smooth surface.
Just where the stone plinth of the house met the asphalt of the street, with all its weight, on this day a dandelion had wedged itself up. With its disheveled head, it met one of the first days of spring. How hard it would have been to get to where it was! How much had it longed for. That day I saw a lot of dandelions.
Did you know that of the tennis ball, squash ball and badminton ball, the latter – funny bird and chief's head – is flying fastest?
This thing of marveling is also close to humor, which is often to see things from new, unexpected directions. The artistic gaze is also close, as is the scientific approach – finding solutions – and ingenuity.
Love and its almost forms: It's like separating black socks from blue. It is believed that one has made the right choice, until life, in the form of a trouser leg, convinces one to the contrary.
You can get a little suspicious. That it should be so easy, like taking an aspect of human life, picking out its opposite, pitting them against each other – and with this saying something apt about our situation. But it works!
"Tell me what you're laughing at and I'll tell you who you are!" I imagine that in laughter a person appears very honestly. It is more difficult to indiste from a person's taste for literature, clothing, etc., as such choices are more dictated or at least influenced by what is prevailing fashion. Who you want to give the impression of being. But like body language and, for example, handwriting, it is difficult to add a sense of humor. By the way, why would such a thing be done? You have your own sense of humor that lighten your life. Perhaps you could start from the series page in, for example, a morning newspaper and in this have an excellent test form?
The world is largely dominated by the notion that very little can be said about a man's interior from his actions and his appearance. This is perhaps a view that we have taken over from science. If one only avoids the most superficial interpretation – according to which everything neatly and harmoniously is associated with all good qualities, and the equivalent of what is full or discordant – then it is actually possible to read life as a book. "On the fruit you can feel the tree," he said. The rapid movement speaks of at least one aspect of – speed – of the rise! The disheveled head stands get some aspect of disorder, spontaneity, etc.
The train whizzes through the tunnel. A young girl sits with her puppy on her lap. It hangs with its big head over her shoulder, sometimes it gnaws and then she comforts it, sometimes it showers her with wet kisses. It's like a picture of the Madonna with the baby. What brings pets into our lives? They are like flowers. Without them, our stay here would be so much harder to endure. In some sense, they testify to us of perfection, of the existence that we are currently furthest from being able to experience. We are adults and preoccupied with serious life. There is so much we have to worry about and worry about. They help us never to completely lose sight of paradise.
The animal is given "a home", we say, but in fact it is probably our "homesickness" that is strongest, and that is what makes us seek the company of animals. How bland and miserable life could feel, if we did not have access to what animals convey – and awaken with us: playfulness, devotion, trust, wonder. They give us their lightness and their light. They complement us in our one-sidedness and incomprehension, not with any better "understanding" than our own, but with so many other qualities that could well be summed up as: life.
Creating a happy destiny is so much a matter of prioritizing. It is to make yourself aware of their needs and to try to meet them. To breathe, not to be anested, etc. While it is certainly misleading to think of our psyche as a machine, this psyche contains a great deal of automation. This ability we can get to serve ourselves, through a procedure that is not so different from programming a computer. And if we do not exploit this ability in ourselves — for example, to establish good habits through so-called affirmations — then it is likely that we are nevertheless guided by much such automaticity in our actions.
In order to be able to stand "new", fearless and open, it is necessary to find what has been able to neutralize / weigh up both energies from outside and from within. Is it the case that all the energies that come to us are our own?
Love doesn't just "affect" us. You fall in love when you want to fall in love when you need to fall in love.
There are things that we find pleasant, and which we have long experienced as pleasant, but as time as we become aware of how some of these pleasures are intimately linked to a lot of things that we find unpleasant. Then it becomes natural to avoid or seek to subdue ourselves in the pursuit and experience of these pleasant things. With the perceived kinship, it also becomes easier and easier to refrain from these forms of pleasure.
That our world is facing major upheavals, which will intervene in the individual's life and everyday life in many ways, one can imagine. Not "stone on stone" will remain, as it says in the Bible. Just here at work, when I went to get food, I passed two dark-skinned men, both dressed in turbans and blue body veils, who conversed with each other in Finnish.
One should throw his sorrows at God, it has been said, with what about success?
There is always a better path. From every violation of the laws of life there is a retreat that is possible. From every stage of every crime, there is a possible way out
What is "a garbage can", "an envelope", "a package"?
Destiny lines: Shiny backs of fish in shoals, which can be seen right on the water's surface.
Often I feel as if my life is being controlled, that I am held back or released on, by an intelligence greater than my own. But that there is still something going on inside myself, and that the concept of "The Inner Master" feels appropriate. What would this correspond to in Martinus cosmology?
First, you are enthusiastic and determined about a project. You feel free and strong when you think about it. I guess you're in love. Then you get tired and try to pull out of it somehow. Maybe it can be done, maybe it will be relatively painless. Then you're back, seemingly where you stood from the beginning, but you feel as happy and free as ever before! Who said life was suffering?
Love requires silence. Love requires movement. It is as if each situation required a unique approach, a rather appropriate "counter-pressure", in order for the internal balance to be maintained. Sometimes less, sometimes more. And it is not the backlash itself that determines whether the treatment will be happy for oneself and the surroundings, but the interaction. Here it can be said that mobility makes it possible to remain in balance. Stillness requires mobility, because the environment is changing, diverse.
In the aspirational souls I meet – the christ's view. He sits there, radiating great trust and small claims. His eyes are dark, almost black. Golden and shiny is his fur.
Copyright Stefan Hellsten