The YIN MIND

______________________________________________

Dear Companions in truth seeking

[Letter to a publishing company]

By now SJG and I have been able to read more
in the journals and journal express.
We find the number of similar or identical statements of principles
concordant with the teachings we have accrued to be constantly increasing.
This produces a natural resonance and reverberation.

We are attracted by your practices of publishing the described deficiencies,
discontinuities, and disbalances to be an evidence of intent and integrity.

There are some issues, however, that concern us.
There are some policies that disappoint us.
There are some teachings we feel are critically inconsistent.

1) Appeal to authority versus a description and distribution of consequences
and the way things work.
Control or dominance of one being over another rather than inducing trust,
complementary being and complementary doing, yielding a oneness.
We are all of God in some essential ways.
To say I need you, here, now, is an appeal to authority
rather than an appeal to common purpose and common commitment.
To use terms which minimize, diminish or put anyone down
is of the same flavour.
To mock anyone, ever, is to judge them.
We dare not judge ourselves.

Appeal to authority diminishes the responsibility of those
who are subject to authority.
Each of us has a God presence.
We seek those practices of mindfulness and liberation
which welcome a greater divine presence.
We should foster admiration, appreciation and approval,
not regret, resentment and remorse.

2) Anything we give our attention to, we exchange energy with.
Your documents will say, “you are not your body”, “you are your attention”.
Because we are submerged in a reality with those who are making
and have made a commitment to control and dominate others,
we can see this practice arises from fear and certain beliefs.
Those who want to control or dominate others
are afraid of what they would experience if they didn’t.

They have isolated and defined self: this is me, this is not me,
this is mine, this is not mine.
They then furnish the isolated and defined self.

Property rights are a symptom of this.
A practice of law, which elevates property rights above human rights
is a symptom of this.
The more you keep track of who and what you are, the less you are.
This is because you bound the flow to and from the self.

Attention is developed awareness.
How do we navigate our mindfulness, our life, our experience,
our inspiration and our care.
Skilful giving is a part of both our inspiration and our care.
We receive an abundance of opportunity, when we use the opportunities we have
to grow, to change, to live, to evolve.
We receive fewer and fewer opportunities when we use the flow of opportunity
to eliminate the need to grow, to change, to live, to evolve.
That means we must offer opportunity to those who use it
and withhold opportunity from those who don’t.

We don’t steer off the icebergs, we seek the clear water.
We seek the nourishing flow.
“Not” doesn’t work in the associative intelligence of the subconsciousness.
We cannot hold in our minds what it is we don’t want in our minds.

We all are learner / teachers.
This kind of statement is what is attractive in The RA Material; The Law of One.

Vulnerability comes from aversions and attachments (to the partial)
versus connection to the whole.

We determine all of what we experience.
We determine this by that to which we give our attention
and that from which we withhold our attention.
Training in meditation and mindfulness is the only means
of becoming aware of when and how we shape our experience.
Our experience is the explicit residue of the deficiency in our mindfulness.
Our lives should be graceful, flowing, easy, joyful.

If there are differences between us, we need to submit to one another
what we are taking into account.
Either may be taking into account something the other isn’t.

3) We must care about the Global context of our lives.
We have free will because of the delay in consequences
made possible by the obstructions of time and space sequencing.
We enjoy our free will. We like the delay in consequences.
However, there is the hazard that the delay in consequences
is viewed as the non-existence of consequences.
This causes moral failure.

If we get anyone to improve their behaviour
by means of control or domination – even the power of public media,
are they doing what they should because they understand the consequences?

copyright 2011, 2014, ECOhealth / Eve Revere