zoofence.com

Here’s an interesting thought. The age difference between a child of 5 and another who is 15, is three times, right? In five year’s time, the first will be 10, and the second 20. The difference between their ages is now two times. In ten years, the first will be 20 and the other 30; the difference between them becomes a third. Finally, when the younger is 60 and the elder is 70, the difference will have become so minimal as to be almost irrelevant. At that point, they are essentially the same age; certainly in the same age group.

If my math is right, the question arises: Is there a cosmic point to it?

Perhaps it’s got something to do with the more time we spend “in time” (the older we get) the more like everything else “in time” we become. That is, at our birth, virtually everyone else is significantly, noticeably older, or more timely, than we are. But the more time we spend in time, the less the difference between us and others becomes. And the greater is the difference between us and others who are newly born or just reborn themselves.

If that’s some of what it is about, then perhaps a good course is to be re-born or born anew as often as possible so that we are in time or are of time for as short periods as possible, and thus always, consistently as unlike as possible any of the things that are in time and of time. If that makes any sense (and maybe it doesn't), then I suppose what it means is that we should identify as little as possible with any of the “stuff” that makes up our bodily identity. Having said that, I cannot think of a single True Teacher whom I have encountered who does not urge precisely that.

And if this is true of time, probably it is true of space as well. The more we identify with things that occupy space (land, houses, cars, stereos, clothes, and so on, as well as the things that occupy both space and time, like jobs, destinies, beliefs, value systems, and the like) the more like them we become. Maybe some of that is okay (beliefs, for example) but maybe not. Maybe anything we carry in our minds (as opposed to anything we are) is baggage, and therefore aging.

As long as we are living bodily lives, we need to be some age in time. If so, perhaps the best age is 1. If we can stay there always, every “thing” else will grow in distance from us. Focus on 1, focus on the One; stay there. Maybe that’s one of the explanations for the root mono- meaning “one” or “single” in words like monk and monastic.

Obviously in the preceding paragraph, I don’t mean age 1 as in “goo goo, ga ga”. But I think I do mean age 1, as in release, let go, surrender ... simplify, simplify.

In the words of the Gospels Teacher, “Unless you become like children …”.

Maybe anything we carry in our minds (as opposed to anything we are) is baggage, and therefore aging.

How about this as a measure or standard to determine what is "stuff" and what is real: Does it (whatever it is) distinguish me from other people? Does it make me different, make me feel or seem special (particularly to me)? Is it inclusive or is it exclusive? If it's the latter, it is probably separative, or, as ihavesayso put it, probably a "label", and therefore mental baggage.

Does that work?

Yeap, that works.

I think that when we start out being a seeker we feel different from other people. In my case it conitinued like that for a long time. But then it happened that I feel less different from otehrs, although i thinkthat to otehrs I seem more different. It;s a paradox.

Here is the way that Nietsche said it. "Those who are seen dancing are thought to be insane by those who cannot hear the music. "

Neo - nice quote from Nietsche. I really liked that.

I think feeling different is a sign of uncertainty with one's reality - a kind of existential discomfort with being alive. Perhaps it is the sense of contraction that we all experience as a physical being - the mere activity of muscles contracting so that we don't fly apart? (No kidding....!)

When I feel most at union with life, and others, is when I am not thinking, only being with others, whatever the circumstances. The mind is the trouble-maker - but it is also the observer that gets so much pleasure out of observing and commenting on that observance, you know? It is a conundrum - how to have a mind, and yet not to be its slave.