Keeping an open mind is sometimes a difficult thing. We are enthusiastic about what we feel and transfer that to our opinions about related matters. The enthusiasm is there. But also present is reactive non-thinking.
This kind of ’thinking’ is really not even thinking. It is more reaction. It is basically taking an ‘experience’ and trying to put it in perspective with overused words and concepts. It is often a retro fit, shoving the experience into paradigms and ideas that kinda-sorta fit. It is a quick job of poor self-articulation and storage. There does not appear to be enough time to do more than this quick screen and slot it ‘thing’ we do.
The contemplative part is really missing. It is mostly reactive and based on someone else’s ideas. Was there a thorough questioning of what happened in this experience of ours? Or was there a rush to some kind of judgment just to be able to communicate it to someone else, before we processed it more appropriately?
It is much easier to fit in the experience into already established paradigms and dogma than to carve out a more custom and particular articulation that is closer to what ‘happened’ on the experiential level. This common method of processing information creates an appreciative obstacle to awareness. There is a finality to it. Like there is nothing more to see.
In any event it should not be an abandonment of awareness. Awareness is always the alpha and the omega in any conversation, internal or external.
In any case, whether rushing or contemplating, it is only an approximation. It cannot be the experience. Some processes like poetry, come closest. The intrinsic value of the experience comes first and secondarily, the interpretation/judgment alludes to this value. That is, as much as possible in this forum.
Having stated all the above, Consciousness Is. It cannot be divined by words and distilled into a cup. Similarily, we can not do this adeptly with ‘experience’. The distillation is always less than the full quantity that experience provides. We can only begin to put in some of the elements in a descriptive and selective way.
All this is to say that belief systems are precisely that. They are belief systems. They are not Consciousness, per se. Consciousness does not need a belief system or creed. It Is always.
We may have had a profound religous experience that was life-changing and involved ‘our faith’ but that does not translate to being this great figure that has inspired us. The problem is our own level of un-Beingness and where we are spiritually, is being glossed over in a nano second, especially when fronting salvation. At this point, our spiritual materialism is at it’s height and our awareness is in it’s nadir.
Possibly most often, we are moved deeply to do something, to say something, as a result of some impact to our spirit. The impact is one thing. What we do with it, especially involving others, is another thing that usually needs more scrutiny than it gets. So often we have witnessed ourselves and untold others, making statements about religous deities as if we were the spokespeople for these icons. How many wars were conducted with some godhead presumably fronting legions of soldiers? How quick we all are to make these type of foolish bets.
Why do we “need” to proselytize any more than being an example of living? Do we depend entirely too much on belief systems? How advisable would it be to lock down completely on any experience? Do we have to have this cognitive interpretation to evolve?
Boxing up volumes of Bertrand Russell is possible. Bertrand Russell’s source, as is everyone’s source, is from the seminal ineffable field of the eternal absolute. We cannot box ‘that’ and sell it on Amazon for the Kindle, although it is being tried every day.
We say we love “God”. These words mean nothing when we are incapable of loving only our ‘little selves’ because we cannot even see who we are, past what we ’ think’ we are. We cannot see our own patterns that regularly cause a default on our integrity. We plead guilty to regular failures only to get out of our responsibility to Self. We moderate our failures not with keen awareness but with copouts like “we are only human”. And then we transgress more and more with the same level of non-awareness.
Whoa! That was a little hard on the ego/mind, yes? All ‘that’, was just talk and thought. Who we really are is not affected.
The starting point is the starting point preceding all thought, opinion, ideas, credo, philosophy, names/forms, as well as devotional pledges. Access to the starting point is through all the overlays we put down. Consciousness is consciousness with no need for the clowns of ego/mind.
At a certain point on the proverbial path, the cognition we so laud, is insufficient for probing the depth of our consciousness. All conflicts arise from the mind. The serenity of Self is an inward realization beyond the limitations and confines we ‘think’.
In the vastness of the Moment, there is no argument to Be. It just Is. The overplay of the mind is the delusion and distraction from time and space of Now. All, if not most, of our energies would wisely be directed to Seeing and Being constantly and then ‘doing’ outward activity. The immersion into the Self reduces the amount of distraction from Being the Self.
We do ourselves a ‘solid’ every Moment we are ‘there’ versus in some argument with ourselves or someone else. Be constantly. See always.