|
Re: Get active..Sean said Aug 19, 2006, 3:36 AM: |
||
|
Hi Ann ! I would agree that there will be many “little things” to mark the next change but perhaps what will be a challenge are those very “little things”. Quinn prompted us with Ishmael to think differently although most felt at the end that it was a ‘tease” as they were looking for his “plan” or solution like you referenced in this thread. I find it amusing to review ishmael.org and still find readers asking Quinn that same question regarding his agenda or “plan”. It is a very natural next step as we are all so embraced by “Mother Culture” and truly looking for a way out. Quinn puts that task back on us–as it only can be. Still, the challenge remains to discover those “little things” and enough of them so they can make a difference in our life. If my life is changed by these things and your life is changed by these things then one by one that will “turn the plane around”. There needs to be enough of us DOING these small things to create the momentum though…otherwise it will end up being yet another groupthink effort or temporary movement in the culture.Like the 60’s… I think that is why so many readers of Quinns material DO end up looking to him for an answer–SOME answer. Because there isn’t currently a compelling answer that seems to satisfy people. A BIG idea would satisfy..a small idea doesn’t seem revolutionary enough. I wonder sometimes if Quinn doesn’t know either…;) His analogy of the industrial revolution or other events of significant change in our world is true to a point–they began with hundreds of small changes–BUT, and this is where I empathize with his readers– those small changes were EXTREMELY compelling. Yes, there wasn’t a huge GM plant that suddenly was thought up and created to develop thousands of motor vehicles overnight but even the smallest little clothing manufactering shop at the dawn of the industrial movement was a marvel to watch in action and satisfied a need at that time for jobs with little to no skills. Sure, these many small companies and their changes birthed the industrial revolution without any “plan” but the very small companies themselves were revolutionary and compelling. Nobody had a plan for the internet either–it grew from millions of small ideas but again the small ideas themselves were so revolutionary ( e-mail, Amazon, AOL) and compelling that “the movement” grew incredibly and changed the world–as all real revolutions do. We need nothing less than that to turn things around. I do belong to a CSA and I also run my own business so that I can hunt/gather ;) with as much freedom as possible but that still isn’t IT for me. My other post suggests a co-op business model for the world that might create the momentum but THAT doesn’t quite feel like it is IT. There needs to be something that draws people to the tribe for tribes sake–something compelling…on the smaller level . THEN when all these smaller revloutionary ideas emerge the Cultural Revolution will begin…IMHO….:) PS How wonderful to meet the Quinns, Ann ! |
|||
|
Re: Get active..Thea said Aug 21, 2006, 10:26 AM: |
||
|
Perhaps you're both correct. There can't possibly be one THING to do. In that respect, we can agree that every small decision is tantamount to saving the world. |
|||
|
|
Re: Get active..Sean said Aug 21, 2006, 3:56 PM: |
||
|
Thea, Oh, I fully agree….I wasn’t attempting to disagree with Ann at all. I was just to trying to wrap my mind around exactly WHAT small things could be true global catalysts for change. I guess I am just impatient for change–SOME change. I have been trying to live intentionally myself for many years now and although I recognize that “my change” will certainly help I do feel a compelling need to help co-create something revolutionary. That is what draws me to Zaadz–Passion and an authentic desire to make a tangible difference. I am willing to do my part but I just need to find the vision to do something beyond–or in addition to personal changes.After you have felt that you are doing “your thing” personally it seems the next step is to somehow spread the word–as Ishmael did with his ad looking for students. I am attracted to Zaadz as I recognize within myself the desire to do this from the model of conscious capitalism.It just feels like the next step to use that medium to build bridges….but again, HOW? Quinn leave sthat for us to figure out for ourselves–which is what I assume this pod also attempts to nurture. Ishmael imploring us that ” you are inventive peoples, so invent!” What can we invent? I hope more actively join/post to this pod as I really appreciate the “Ishmael approach” to the state of affairs we find ourselves. Namaste and thanks for creating this pod Thea. Deep Bow… Sean |
|||
|
Re: Get active..Drake said Aug 22, 2006, 10:53 AM: |
||
|
I have been very fortunate in that I was introduced to ishmael when I was in high school and very impressionable, since then I have been actively attempting to effect personal change in my life while always trying to keep in mind the question: |
|||
|
|
Re: Get active..Thea said Aug 22, 2006, 10:24 AM: |
||
|
Your post made me think of a topic I was just discussing today regarding 'consentual reality' . As you said, we're all making small personal changes, but sometimes it just doesn't seem like enough. |
|||
|
Re: Get active..Ann said Aug 23, 2006, 7:58 PM: |
||
|
As for 'reality'….you're right…most of the 6.2 billion of us have heads buried…. |
|||
|
|
Re: Get active..Sean said Aug 24, 2006, 3:35 PM: |
||
|
Hey Ann, Thanks for being here. I understand what you mean about the “religion myth” as the Taker’s have certainly rallied around that and as Quinn explains, it is this deep seated (“seeded” too!) belief structure that is ultimately what needs to be abondened if we truly expect real change to occur. My personal struggle is that although I agree that this “religion myth” is the underlying source of ‘Mother Culture” I also recognize another story under these “myths” that I feel does deserve some merit ( the evolution of consciousness). I am not sure throwing the baby ( the world religions) out with the bath water ( consciousness) is the way to go–And I am not suggesting that you mean to do that either- I think that Quinn exposed a piece of the problem but there are other levels of human development to consider. I don’t have much use for the old testament or much of what the other authors report in the new testament but I do think that jesus himself taught a revolution that is in alignment with what we are discussing here in this pod. Perhaps that is part of an answer to your question–rather than breaking the walls of that tradition instead we use the words of their master to help ease some into an awareness of the change we all need to embrace. Often I feel a bit like “Fr. Jared” in the Story of B where I am facing the reality of the truth of our history but also see another evolution in human consciousness that must also be part of our growth. I can’t seem to accept an atheistic/agnostic approach that Quinn tempts me into consider…Our story isn’t just an anthropological/biology story is it? What about our gift of consciousness? Is that not that gift a hologram of the universe and therefore in perfect alignment with the universal story? One of the aspects of Quinn’s stories that I am conflicted with is that on the one hand he details the authentic and true development of all other species on this earth but doesn’t seem to recognize ( to me) that our taker/leaver paths have also “evolved” from the same impulse that all other life evolved from.Are we then fundamentality flawed as homo sapiens and that all other species are in alignment with the world as it was designed? We posses an awesome gift of “the story” that was gifted to us no differently than the other species received their gifts. Is it then our fault we ended up like this? Is this evolution tainted then? And if so, why just us? Is this homo sapien evolutionary development of being conscious and recognizing history via a story a gift or a curse? The answer I tell myself is that it is not the gift itself but how we use it. However, from a deeper level I try to understand how it is that ANY development–including the taker development could have even evolved so disfunctionally. I don’t know of any other species that developed with an inherant flaw like this–which always brings me back to the conclusion that things are today the way that they are supposed to be–for right Now–at this point in our development. We aren’t done yet–I hope. Of course we are never “done” from an evolutionary point of view but to label us as “gone bad” is hard for me to reconcile with the concept of evolution in general. Do any of us know of another species “gone bad”. Does nature ever “go bad”? Are we not part of nature–even now in this present dysfunctional state ? I tend to not reflect on this as I generally focus on what to do and what to believe that will bring about positive change but still the thought lingers–especially as as I re-read Quinn’s material. Digging deep here and revealing some personal soul searching to initiate a dialogue on Truth and all of this– Very interested on your thoughts as well as the others on this… |
|||
|
|
Re: Get active..Ann said Aug 25, 2006, 10:29 AM: |
||
|
Sean, |
|||
|
|
Re: Get active..Sean said Aug 26, 2006, 1:28 PM: |
||
|
Ann, In re-reading my post I guess I did give the impression of defending the “taker religion” but that was certainly not my intent. At the risk of rambling too much on this one thread let me try again to formulate my position for any further clarification/wisdom you (or the others) might provide to help me work out this thorny issue of mine. Although I agree that Quinn is not suggesting he is an athiest/agnotic–he is very clear he is an Animist–but I think his personal definition of Animism lacks a recognition or acceptance of the current evolution of consciousness.He seems to imply an almost purely spiritual-anthropological approach to life–surely in recognition of our web of life, but in Quinn’s world it seems nothing is needed except for this “spiritual” approach to all of life. Well no, that’s not quite right either…it isn’t that he doesn’t believe that consciousness evolves but more that the specific current teachings of the”flowering of human consciousness” is not recognized for it’s merits. Take for instance the following quote from Quinn from his website: ” I’m afraid that terms like “universal consciousness” and “soul of the universe” merely make me shrug.” I can’t just shrug like Daniel–and I wonder why?–I am compelled to look deeper into it and explore what new understandings will help to expand my journey back to the Source. I suppose this is the entire point for me–and evidently many others from the amount of questions relevant to this on his website.Perhaps it is Quinn’s lack of alignment with any of the new consciousness teachings that makes some of us wonder how he fits these teachings into his worldview. There is an implication by his lack of recognition that they are not relevant or necessary. I totally believe that the salvationist approach that all of the world religions espouse is harmful and are antagonistic to a whole, fully embraced life of communion with all species that we need today. To return to a “leaver lifestyle” is truly what we need to do–and is our natural place in alignment with our species. That is what spoke so deep to me in Quinn’s work. What I am trying to work out–and I am undoubtedly still struggling to break loose from Mother Culture’s arms–is how Quinn reconciles his teachings with Wilbur or Tolle’s teachings.Or why he does not. I personally can find reconciliation between the Animist mind and the modern teachings of enlightenment- Both are indeed the same but it seems that Alan Watts or Eckart Tolle are speaking to a deeper, currently evolved development–the “flowering of human consciousness” as some reference it. I am sure I could find today a true leaver human in some remote area of our world and although I would expect to experience a more evolved ‘spiritual being” and a connection to all of life with this individual, I would also guess that this individual might ( but it is not guaranteed) have not grown to a higher conscious development pointed to by Tolle, Watts, Wilbur etc… Some early Native American tribes were surely “leavers” but they also embraced a ‘spirituality” that although fully embraced all of life also appear to not be where some of the more “enlightened minds” are today.Admittedly they were far more “evolved” than all of the world religions today but the deep “present moment awareness/enlightenment” that some of our enlightened teachers share doesn’t seem to have expressed itself with them–as a culture. That comment runs the risk of critique as many would argue they indeed possessed this level of “enlightenment”. But I am speaking more to the current mass consciousness changes and flowering that it points to. The understanding of manifesting our future (ala the “What the Bleep” movie) or the Era 3 mind/body studies that have pushed our current understanding of metaphysics.It is this philosophical/scientific development that I am trying to find a place for within Quinn’s world. I can reconcile it–but why Quinn is conspicuously silent and adamently opposes any alignment with it-pro or con–is what I am currently attempting to understand. It is out of my respect for his work that causes me some pause in my own understanding regarding these matters. Perhaps the real question isn’t all the above but WHY he does not reference these other developments as viable evolved expressions in conjunction with his Animist world. I hope that this helps clarify my questioning…I suppose I am still like Jared or Ishmael’s student–recognizing the Truth but trying to understand it fully within my world. Thanks for the time…and patience helping this learner. |
|||
|
|
Re: Get active..Ann said Aug 28, 2006, 9:39 AM: |
||
|
Interesting writing…. |
|||
|
|
Re: Get active..Sean said Aug 30, 2006, 4:14 PM: |
||
|
Okay Ann, I must apologize for so poorly trying to explain the essence of my question here. I am an artist and find myself better suited to conceptual communication rather than the written word–sorry about the “interesting writing”–I am struggling a bit here to express myself articulately…I hope you see this as being personally revealing and honest rather than rambling. At the risk of beating this thread to death, I am going to give it a final attempt to explain my question better….Perhaps I am just not listening–I will try that some more. I WANT to get this as I deeply respect the thinking of Quinn and your obvious experience in his work. We can agree that there are advances of evolution on the physical level… Not better or worse–just degrees of evolving. Animals, trees and all so called “nature” live in harmony with the whole–and certainly could be defined as “successful animists”. Our human species has also evolved. Shirin explains in “The Story of B” to Jared that our ancestors developed the ability to construct “The Story”–the knowledge of the past with a presumption of the future- I WAS, I AM , I WILL BE– i.e. consciousness. This type of thinking has perhaps not arrived/evolved for other species…yet. Not good or bad–no level of perfection here- and NOT salvationistic. Perhaps algae is more “evolved” on a deeper, animist level. No matter, we humans are evolved to where we are with conscious, thinking minds. Evolved science/spiritual teachings provide us with another mirror into recognizing a new ( “evolved?”) understanding of what it is to be “one with the source”. Surely we should already know this for what else are we really? Animists certainly get this. But it seems to me that our evolved human ability of consciousness is more and more revealed to us and offers us additional means to connect. The tools Tolle provides us ( ways of living in conscious presence) or that Era 3 medicine provides us ( manifesting health or deliberate creation of our own future) or the lessons of chi and the energy centers of the body etc– all examples of an expanded consciousness– seem to be beneficial and “evolved” human tools that are appropriate for human animists to employ. The “shrug” of Quinn to these evolved tools is what perplexes me. It seems to me to be an easy reconciliation to promote animism as the foundational approach with an equal acceptance of utilizing these new tools of consciousness to the betterment of our species and the entire ecological environment of which we share. So after all this verbiage I have two questions: 1. Is Quinn saying that Animism is enough and that these new “tools” are unnecessary? That would certainly simplify matters for those of us like myself that are drawn to digging as deep as I can to live a fully integral life by reading/living/practicing these other tools. 2. If I find myself very ill should I use the evolved consciousness tools of energy bodywork, chi or the “What the Bleep” “reality manifestation” understandings to regain my health? Will animism provide the same healing? Aren’t these new “tools” simply another aspect to an animist approach? Not a salvationistic approach of lack or the need for something. Simply a new skill no different than an upright human with the new ability to climb an apple tree to get more food where the prior ancesters lacked this additional food producing approach after the apples on the ground were gone ( apologies to anthropologists everywhere)–Bad analogy but I think you get my point…;) An additional helpful tool rather than a merely a “shrug”. |
|||
|
|
Re: Get active..Ann said Aug 30, 2006, 7:43 PM: |
||
|
Sean, ann |
|||
|
|
Re: Get active..Sean said Sep 1, 2006, 3:12 PM: |
||
|
Um, I think my other post was much easier to find an answer..;)
ME: Evolved science/spiritual teachings provide us with another mirror into recognizing a new ( “evolved?”) understanding of what it is to be “one with the source”. YOU: Okay…, tell me what evolved science/spiritual teachings tell us..this might be where i’m losing you… Yeah, I see that…what I mean is that primal peoples did not know yet about chakras or the powers of the mind to manifest the future or yoga as a mindful discipline or chi/energy centers or Tolle’s tools to consciously to live in the Now–or substitute any of the more recent ( 5000 years) developments in any area of metaphysics. ( Now Ann don’t lose me with definitions here..I am truly not trying to make these “newer” evolutions of consciousness “better” –just as an opposable thumb on one level is no “better” than a claw–it just offers NEW opportunities and in the case of evolution more adaptable tools) ME: The “shrug” of Quinn to these evolved tools is what perplexes me. It seems to me to be an easy reconciliation to promote animism as the foundational approach with an equal acceptance of utilizing these new tools of consciousness to the betterment of our species and the entire ecological environment of which we share. YOU: Again, I”m going to come back to ‘utlizing these tools of consciousness’….do you mean meditating, tai chi, etc? All these force us to ‘recognize the energy field’….good thing…but I still think we are making this all so much more complicated than it has to be. The energy field/force of love is always present–these tools help us remember what we’ve forgotten over the last 10,000 years.These tools are a piece of the Great Remembering…..a slow return to a deep consciousness that may have been present so long ago Ahhh, this is exactly where we are diverging….You see these new “tools” ( meditating, tai chi, Tolle stuff ) as a “remembering” to what we had where as I feel they are evolved developments of consciousness. This is the total crux of our discussion–and the entire point of my question and perplexment with Quinn’s lack of acceptance of this area of “evolution”. THIS is it so let me stop and spend time here on just this– Tolle spends a considerable time discussing consciousness “below thought”–those in the animal, plant etc. kingdoms. He is very clear to explain that their development is perfect as it is for them at their level of evolution in their species–and actually far more “evolved” than those humans among us who blindly go through life with their salvationistic or non-animistic approach. I can totally believe that an animist 12,000 years ago was fully aware of their energy body ( if you don’t believe in chakras just humor me for this simplified example) and to a certain extent used this knowledge. However, like all aspects that evolve today, we have become aware of further aspects to the energy body. The colors, the seven physically located areas, the unique strengths and weaknesses of these particular areas. This new–evolved–knowledge has the opportunity to provide more efficient targeted solutions to “an energy body issue” perhaps. If we can agree and believe that our ability to communicate has evolved from simple methods of the first primal peoples to a wider, new style involving music and singing and poetry that expresses things that might have been difficult to express as primal people than why is it hard to believe that our “connection” to the entire bio species has also evolved through new consciousness awareness and those tools? Rather than offer additional lengthy analogies or explanations let me try to bluntly hit it–
I see consciousness as an aspect that evolves no differently than a wing evolved for the species “bird”. Let’s pretend that ALL spiritual teachings of all sorts today are mere remembering of the past—Does that still mean that this past connection is unable to evolve into further expressions? Finally…. You: But I will ask you…when you wrote before ‘soul of the universe’…WHAT DO YOU MEAN WHEN YOU SAY THAT….??? Through our prior posts I believe we are talking about the same thing. My phrase, “Soul of the Universe” is just another way of describing the conscious connection to all there is– animate and inanimate. All are One. The “I” of the Universe. Perhaps Quinn isn’t saying that these other “new” human aspects/tools are wrong to use–just not tools he chooses to use. That is fine–and I can understand that. It is his insinuation that they are not needed (for all) that has had me perplexed. I am attracted to simplicity as much as Quinn but if I were a hawk I would not prefer the vision of a perfectly functioning human eye to my evolved “hawk eye” if it could assist me in other ways while in this physical form. Thanks for taking the time to explore all this with me Ann…:) Sean |
|||
|
|
Re: Get active..Ann said Sep 1, 2006, 7:54 PM: |
||
|
Again, I”m going to respond to your paragraphs… Tolle spends a considerable time discussing consciousness “below thought”-those in the animal, plant etc. kingdoms. He is very clear to explain that their development is perfect as it is for them at their level of evolution in their species-and actually far more “evolved” than those humans among us who blindly go through life with their salvationistic or non-animistic approach. Okay, and frankly, I'd say 90% of the humans on this planet aren't much evolved–my cats are far beyond them :)
Rather than offer additional lengthy analogies or explanations let me try to bluntly hit it- ann |
|||
|
|
Re: Get active..Ann said Aug 23, 2006, 7:54 PM: |
||
|
Hi, |
|||
