Blog Archives

The Planetmates on real love, the “love contract,” adorability in infants, parental “love”: “Love” is often just a swirl of ritualistic craving and trickling satisfaction set in motion by keenly felt but supremely denied hurt.”

waiting-for-superman-movie-postercrppd1

“…the more you re-member yourself, the freer you can be. That is the true “transcendence”: It is one rooted in a re-feeling of and re-membering of the hurts and pains in one’s body that is left over from the past and not a separating away from and a denying of that stored pain … as if one is above body and Nature … and confusing that self-congratulation and ego aggrandizement with enlightenment. 

“To reprise then, your differences from other planetmates, stemming from your relation with your mothers and caregivers as infants, have to do largely with survival value being attached to non-expression of needs. For certainly if it was the excessive neediness of your young that disinclined adults to want them, then if a baby had less of those qualities or seemed to have less they would be less likely to be shunned or abandoned, thus more likely to survive. A dependent young one suppressing its needs would manifest in it crying as little as possible, being as “unfussy” as could be.

“But it was not just seeming to be not a burden that was advantageous. For your adults’ psyche being so much founded on not getting early needs met, you would crave anything holding out hope, however futile, of getting anything resembling that kind of satisfaction in the present. So babies who had other qualities appealing to the adult — such as “cuteness,” smiling more, or anything in the category of “adorability” or being “entertaining” or otherwise attractive to an adult or reminiscent of the satisfaction of those early deprivations — would make that young one more likely to thrive. If a baby was more engaging with you (as your own caregiver had not been with you), if it was happier and more noticing of you (as your parent failed to do), and of course to the extent that it would be as little a burden on you, it would increase the overall amount of vital care it would receive from you, from your fully growns, in general. So, any traits in infants that for the adult caregiver held out the prospect, however dimly, of the fulfillment, through the newborn, of their own early deprivations were to increase in humans through the process of natural selection.

“Since many of those early lacks had to do with being cared for, nurtured — what is commonly called “love” — it was any qualities of the newborn that seemed to hold the prospect of easing those cravings that were desired and thus were to be selected for and become more prevalent over time. So if a child displayed behavior that was at all resembling what a truly nurturing parent would be like, he or she would attract more of that kind of attention in return. If fully growns could see a dim hope, from their own newborns, of getting the nurturing that they did not get from their own parents, they would feel more inclined to extend caring to such of their children and increase their survivability over their children who did not hold out such a hope.

 “This was the unspoken “love contract” that developed between dependent young ones and fully grown attendants: If a child would act less like it had needs and more like it could satisfy needs it was more likely to actually receive some attention to its needs, however inauthentic and agenda-oriented that attention would be. And what you call love is at its inception simply the desperate hope that your infants will eventually grow up to become the parents that you wished you had had, instead of the ones you had, who did not love you sufficiently when you were small.

“So the origins of what you call your unusually strong parental “love” is in this never-acknowledged “love” exchange. This “care contract” explains how your children managed to survive, with everything going against them. However, on your evolution to a purer love—one of Nature and built once again upon feelings of unity with Other and truly feeling along with another, not just in hopes of receiving in return—you would do well to look deeply into the inauthentic nature of what passes for love for you.

“You are, like all of us, capable of true and unconditional loving. Indeed, you have it in you to have that feeling toward all of Nature, toward all of Reality, even. But you cannot achieve that while caught up in and blind to the hidden agendas and self-seeking desperation which mars your love and while braying to the world about your supposed superior capacity for and the supreme purity of your love. What you need to acknowledge, to start, is how what you place on high, use to boost your estimation of yourself over all other living beings, and attribute to divine origins even … how this supposed “love” … is most often just a swirl of ritualistic craving and trickling satisfaction set in motion by keenly felt but supremely denied hurt….”

[More coming…. ]

To see the entire book, to which this will be added eventually (book is two-thirds updated), go to the blog page at http://mladzema.wordpress.com/the-great-reveal-book-6/ … Planetmates: The Great Reveal is also scheduled for print and e-book publication in mid-March, 2014

To purchase any of Michael Adzema’s books, available in print and e-book formats, go to Michael Adzema’s books at Amazon.

Invite you to join me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/sillymickel

friend me on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sillymickel

On love, woundedness, relationships, real healing, real transcendence, and more. What the planetmates say today

reachingfor-something-apocalypseenigmatichand_thumb

“…You wish to turn your infants into the parents you wished you had. You love your children to the extent that they hold out the hope that they will become that — your longed for parents. But, no, you cannot bear the thought that your love is tainted with selfishness this way.

“Still, can you notice how this kind of parental love becomes the template for all that you see to be love? We have described how you have created your gods in the image of your parents in infancy — making them capricious, as your parents were, and yet potentially nurturing (if only you could be a certain way) as you wished they had been. Do you see that you view all your relations, and your love, through the veil of these deprivations?

“You choose your lovers and mates out of these same deprivations: You are drawn to those who are imperfect and capricious in their caring — in a way matching or reminiscent of what you received in childhood and infancy — but you pick them out by seeing in them the behaviors and ways that for you are a hope that you will actually get what you needed long ago. You pick out partners who are imperfect in a way similar to what your parents were, so that you can continue the unreal struggle — which you failed at as an infant — to turn these imperfect people into the kind you really need. This struggle is rooted in an understandable reluctance to accept that what you got was not only less than ideal, but was traumatic. So ever after you try to make those events as if they did not happen — which is an impossible and unreal struggle.

“So, to the extent that your adult partners do not match up with those hopes for them to be what you needed back then (and think about it, how can they? … being both like your parents but you’re thinking they will not be like them) you seek to change them in ways that they will be the end of your lonely years of yearning and unfulfillment. So you see your adult loved ones and partners the same way you see your infants and children: You seem in them what you need and you seek to make of them that which will lead to the healing of those long ago hurts.

“And so you are ever doomed to failure. You cannot change people into who you want, any more than you could your parents. In fact, a characteristic pattern of humans is for you to begin having infants at exactly that point in a relationship with a partner — in a marriage, for example — when one realizes that one is going to fail at turning that person into the longed for parent. It is no coincidence that one’s attention will go, at that point, toward seeing if those long ago hurts can be quelled through an infant instead … or, for some people, through another lover … and thus you have infidelity or serial monogamy.

“In this situation, the spouse does not satisfy, or quell, those pangs emanating from hidden and long ago deprivations, so babies and children are wanted, or another lover. Later, when the child comes up short … and it will because a child cannot be a parent, really (I mean, seriously now) … people often turn to religion to continue the unreal struggle to satisfy those needs. That is why humans often turn to religion later in life, seeking to find in the Phantom deity what they failed to find anywhere else in life. They come to religion after exhausting all possibilities for correcting an injustice which happened long ago.

 “When religion also fails, that is a time when one might possibly be open to hearing us and facing the truth that one cannot make of one’s life whatever one wants. That life is full of pain, disappointment, and injustice.

 “And not that that is right or okay, but simply that it is not that big of a deal: Life is magnificent whichever way it goes. For whether struggling to be free, pushing against limitations, strengthening oneself and alternating between frustration and accomplishment, it is all experience, it is all marvelous adventure.

 “The purpose of life is not the to reach the goal, for it takes many lifetimes to return to divinity. And in the meantime, the goal is not even what would be desired. For the journey is all. And it is in making mistakes that one continues the journey. The imperfections of life are the rails upon which life’s journey rolls along. They are necessary, however much at some point you will want to go beyond them.

 “At any rate, when it comes to seeking satisfaction of early deprivations in others—whether romantic partners, children, or the Phantom in religions—you are doomed to failure. For you cannot remake people. In addition, you cannot satisfy those needs of long ago, not fully, even if you do get in the present what you needed then. You cannot undo a wound by not getting hurt again in the present. These early deprivations are a wound upon which and around which you have built your personality and your entire life plan. It has been cauterized and set long ago. So, you cannot rid yourself of it, and the ache of it, by simply not being further wounded.

 “Certainly, you are better off by not drawing to yourselves, as you will, those who will continually reopen that wound, who will continually mimic the primal events and retrigger the pain. But, like you express in your myth of Prometheus, this is a wound that will never heal; it becomes you; it is the wall you get to push against in life in order to build up your spiritual “muscles.”

 “But, you can at least progress in life beyond the unconscious and tedious re-creation of hurts and re-invigoration of old and hurtful patterns. It is better to not draw to you that which will continually trigger you, but you cannot do that by denying your woundedness. And it is for that reason — in order to stop the cycles of hope and then hurt — that it is better you face and embrace your woundedness. For in denying and repressing it, you are forever doomed to recreating it. By reversing that separation from body and, feeling the body and its aches and pains and urges again, reconnecting with your woundedness, re-member-ing yourself, you have at least the knowing making you capable of choosing something different. In this way you can free yourself.

 “And the more you re-member yourself, the freer you can be. That is the true “transcendence”: It is one rooted in a re-feeling of and re-membering of the hurts and pains in one’s body that is left over from the past and not a separating away from and a denying of that stored pain … as if one is above body and Nature … and confusing that self-congratulation and ego aggrandizement with enlightenment….” 

[More coming…. ]

To see the entire book, to which this will be added eventually (book is two-thirds updated), go to the blog page at http://mladzema.wordpress.com/the-great-reveal-book-6/ … Planetmates: The Great Reveal is also scheduled for print and e-book publication in mid-March, 2014

To purchase any of Michael Adzema’s books, available in print and e-book formats, go to Michael Adzema’s books at Amazon.

Invite you to join me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/sillymickel

friend me on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sillymickel

Unreal love and roots of woundedness … “babies having babies” … parental love. This is what the planetmates reveal today

imagfsdghdgjfes

“So, non-expression of needs became of survival value in a species who were reluctant to care for their young because of their own unmet needs from infancy and childhood. And cuteness and adorability — smiling more as opposed to less, fussing less, being engaging, attentive, and entertaining, connecting more with the eyes — was of survival value for the same reason but also for another. This has to do with what you call love, in particular, parental love.

“Remember, you have an emotionally damaged adult — one who unconsciously seeks the satisfaction of needs left over from childhood in all the activities of his or her life and whose motives and intentions are ever skewed in ways symbolic or reflective of those needs. So, how do you suppose this adult views a tiny, unformed Other (a baby), who is dependent upon them? This adult also sees its newborn through its veil of emotional thirst and deprivation.

“This part is perhaps the hardest for you to see, for it is here that you lay down the gauntlet — here, if nowhere else … and both women and men alike — about your superiority to Nature. If you have been able to agree with us so far, this is the acid test of your ability to view reality and yourself outside of Ego — outside of your emotional deprivations and their consequent overcompensations of self-congratulation. For this apperception of yourself is easily taken as an affront to that which is at the core of — now, even your women’s — ego esteem: That is, the idea of human love, especially parental love, being pure and, again, transcendent, and above and making one superior to a supposedly unfeeling and brutish Nature.

“It is not that humans are not capable of love. You are, of course. But you would not need to defame Nature’s love and to glorify one’s own if your love was as untainted with selfishness and as transcendent as you profess. As we have been detailing (see the 4th Prasad, especially), this congratulation of yourselves on this point serves to offset the basic inferiority you feel in comparison with Nature and its planetmates. But beyond that this vanity about the quality of your love does yeoman’s duty toward helping you to forget and deny the pain and deprivations you yourself endured under the “care” — as infants — of those who were deluded similarly to the way you now yourself cling to being deluded — your own mother and caregivers.

“Having been seen, as infants, through the famished eyes of adult caregivers who noticed in you the traits, behaviors, and characteristics of you that were reminiscent of the satisfaction of their needs, you felt the incredible hurt of not being truly seen: You experienced that your own needs were not going to be attended to — they would not even be noticed — unless they fit in somehow with your parents’ woundedness or could be made to be seen by them, somehow, as potential relief of your parents’ suffering. You experienced that whatever needs were noticed by the Other would be reinterpreted along lines to fit their needs, not your own. Unseen at times and misunderstood at others, you felt most alone, and you carried forward that hurt as central to your construction of an adult personality.

“So, when you yourself had a child, that child would be seen and understood primarily to the extent that and in the ways that your child’s behavior and ways fit with your leftover desires to be seen … in a vicious circle … from generation to generation. Quite simply, your babies would be seen and loved to the extent that they mirrored for you the parents you wished you had. And your children, being unseen and deprived this way, would grow up to be adults who, having their babies, would see and attend to them to the extent they mirrored what they wished you had been like.

“Again, you are babies having babies. You will attend to the needs of your young ones, at least to the minimum needed, if it seems they will fill that huge hole of feeling unloved that you carry from your infancy. You will nurture and foster the thriving of your children, to the extent that it seems they will have the qualities that you wished had been in your caregivers in infancy. And when those characteristics are lacking, you will seek to plant them into your young ones and/or develop them along those lines … lines which are in accordance with the relief of your hurts and the satisfaction of long ago needs. You wish to turn your infants into the parents you wished you had. You love your children to the extent that they hold out the hope that they will become that — your longed for parents. But, no, you cannot bear the thought that your love is tainted with selfishness this way….”

[More coming…. ]

To see the entire book, to which this will be added eventually (book is two-thirds updated), go to the blog page at http://mladzema.wordpress.com/the-great-reveal-book-6/ … Planetmates: The Great Reveal is also scheduled for print and e-book publication in mid-March, 2014

To purchase any of Michael Adzema’s books, available in print and e-book formats, go to Michael Adzema’s books at Amazon.

Invite you to join me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/sillymickel

friend me on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sillymickel

The Planetmates on spirituality and the body’s needs, detachment, helping the higher ups, enslavement, more

see-through-concrete4 (1)

“One is often blocked from the immediate satisfaction of needs, that is true; and that applies to all planetmates, including humans. Being frustrated from satisfaction is one of those exigencies of life and fate which teaches us. What makes you different is your self-denial when there is no need for it. Again you have taken over the determination of your spiritual path. Again you show how you defy the Divine by seeking to control It (just as you sought to control your caregivers as babies), instead of learn from It. Rooted in your infancy and the inadequate and capricious qualities of your care and need satisfaction then, you seek afterward to deny yourself, again, in an unconscious way of seeking divine reward. Your denial, suffering, praying, and self-flagellation — figurative and literal — are ways you seek to bring forth advantage later … they are sad and distant reflections of your baby attempts to influence the Great Mom.

“Hierarchy of Needs

“And they are not just pathetic; they are ineffectual. For it is not in the non-satisfaction of one’s needs that one rises up in life. It is the satisfaction of needs that allows one to go beyond them to higher concerns and “needs.” When one has satisfied one’s needs for food and water, one’s mind and body naturally orient themselves toward the satisfaction of needs and desires for connection and intimacy with others … in community, family, and one-to-one personal and love relations. When one is contented in interaction with community, family, and intimate others, one naturally is drawn to the satisfaction of creative and spiritual urges.

“Certainly one can attempt to pursue relational, creative, and spiritual ends when one is in dire need, and one can, with effort, achieve results. But the product of those endeavors is skewed and diminished by the fact that the entirety of one’s being is not directed toward those ends as — whether one knows it or not, whether it is a conscious or unconscious thing — one’s body and the attendant parts of one’s mind are busy deflecting bodily urges at the same time. One “rises up” not by cutting oneself off from one’s body but by standing solidly upon it.

“So, one’s achievements while in a state of deprivation or distraction are distorted and sometimes counterproductive. For this path of detachment from one’s body and its needs does not lead to spiritual wholeness and connection. Rather, its result is an emotionless, self-obsessed, compassion-less, humorless, and empty state of consciousness and being … cut off from one’s body … which is labeled “transcendent” … but which is simply split from Reality, Nature, God, and Divinity, and which is solitary and supremely defended … and lonely.

“No, one does not transcend body and Nature and become one with God. For God/Divinity is in Nature/Reality. One can rise above body and call it spiritual, but it is simply human Ego that one has glorified. And the God that one worships in doing that is not one that you are made in the image of, it is one that is made in the image of you … with all your faults, narcissism, vanity, cruelties and insensitivities, false accomplishments, and vain adornments.

“So, in humans alone, non-expression of needs would be part of the communication devices developed by your young to achieve (secretly or unconsciously) the satisfaction of those needs. And repression of needs — that is, the attempt, consciously at first, later unconsciously, to not feel them — became a survival skill in relation to humans in your social world, however much of a disadvantage it is in relation to your biological survival, per se, or in relation to your world of Nature. You might repress your needs and get cancer … but they would like you!

“Individual decisions to adopt these ways are not done intentionally, of course. Being required for survival it became part of your set of species traits. Furthermore, developed in infancy, it would result in your species having the only politicians and sales people.

“And it should be clear how well these fit in with and how much more they were reinforced in the sedentary societies with the hierarchical social structures, where non-expression of needs — denial of self, feeling, and personhood — were desired by higher ups in order to support their illusion that their controlling tendencies were of no real harm or consequence to any others: Acting less human and real helped higher ups in their illusion that you were … less feeling and real! Being tough and unfeeling told them, not just that you were manipulatable … for you would take whatever they dished out, but even that you were needing and desiring direction and controlling from them. The more you acted like a robot, the more they felt you were unconscious and unfeeling and needed their help. The more you acted infantile and unthinking, they more they felt you needed their direction and paternalism, lest you die or kill yourselves all off.

“So, these things in infancy contributed to the ability of some of you to enslave others and to make all of you slaves — in ways profound and different from the rest of Nature — in your minds….”

[More coming…. ]

To see the entire book, to which this will be added eventually (book is two-thirds updated), go to the blog page at http://mladzema.wordpress.com/the-great-reveal-book-6/ … Planetmates: The Great Reveal is also scheduled for print and e-book publication in mid-March, 2014

To purchase any of Michael Adzema’s books, available in print and e-book formats, go to Michael Adzema’s books at Amazon.

Invite you to join me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/sillymickel

friend me on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sillymickel

 

Like reading a letter from a wise, old friend….

By M.E.W. on February 5, 2014

I’ve recently finished reading Experience Is Divinity, by Michael Adzema.

If you ever have one of those days (weeks, months?) where it just doesn’t want to fit together, you really can use this.

Find a quiet space, fix a nice big mug of tea, and grab “Experience Is Divinity”.

You almost don’t need to use your brain. You just sort of let it absorb. Every once in a while, you find yourself thinking, ” Why wasn’t that simple thing already in my brain?”

None of Adzema books will lecture you; no heavy handed persuasion. You simply get a sense of his quiet confidence that he has something meaningful and he wants to share it with you. You won’t find psychobabble or cult like preaching; just a sort of, “This is what I think makes a lot of sense”, attitude.

The books sort of distill the most profound realities. You lay the book down, having a sense of simplicity and clarity and the chaos just sort of begins to fit. Nothing is different; it’s more that it’s OK that things are as they are.

More info and to orderExperience Is Divinity: Matter As Metaphor. Return to Grace, Volume 8

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1492932213/ref=dra_a_rv_ff_fx_it_P2000_1000?tag=dradisplay-20

Final Exp Div

To purchase any of Michael Adzema’s books, available in print and e-book formats, go to Michael Adzema’s books at Amazon.

Invite you to join me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/sillymickel

friend me on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sillymickel

Planetmates reveal the truth about human communication, the “games people play,” human “intelligence,” the roots of war, domestic brutality, genocides, and enslavement in self-denial, and more

ego-2 (1)

“Of course, there had to be a combination of both expression of needs as well as non-communication of needs in order to survive. There has to be a combination of unfeelingness-numbness and effusive entertaining adorability. And every baby who survives develops this — it is the major practice of every day of its life — to an at least sufficient degree … sometimes to a masterful level. Amazingly, human babies must learn to both communicate directly as well as to dissemble, to be both responsive as well as repressed. Human babies must learn to direct, but not appear to. They must be charming, but not obtrusive; seen, but not heard. Through this charm and manipulation offensive, these little politicians must bring about the satisfaction of their deep desires and needs, yet appear to be “above” such concerns. Again we see the factors which pushed the twisted consciousness and behavior of humans. Humans have “hidden agendas.” They might say one thing, and the other human must figure out what that human is really meaning … which might be the opposite of that. 

“Some cultures would develop this to an insanely and mind-bendingly elaborate social ritual. “No, thank you, I don’t want any” might mean “Yes. I want. But ask again.” Or “Please, no. Don’t bother” could mean “I wish you would. But I want you to insist on doing it.” The actual meaning might need to be deduced through masterful and intricate discernment of the context of the statement and its tone and manner of inflection, and so much more.

“Indeed, much of the extra communication humans have developed, compared to other planetmates, has to do with this added dimension of confusion. A planetmate might meow or grunt its desire. It is not confusing. It says, “I want.” A human hearing a communication of need must often discern it through a maze of possibilities of what that expression mightmean … other than what is meant on the surface. And much more of language is elaborate convolutions of thought built around and upon such confusion.

“Indeed, much of the extra “intelligence” you humans credit yourselves with — accounting for the extra brain growth, size of head, birth pain, and then extra information processing involved in repression of that pain, in a vicious circle — has to do with this extra mentation involved in dealing with your confusing communications and relationships with each other. Your extra brain growth is because of the extra maze of neural pathways required to keep yourself buffered from remembering your painful past, required to keep you confused, and part of this … an example of this … is just this confusion around communication with each other and the excessive thought processing involved with handling it appropriately, which has its roots in early infantile need deprivation and the mental machinations around it.

“So humans have these, “games people play.” Planetmates sure as hell do not get it. We watch you engaged in all these rituals as if you are beings on opposite sides of a wall, unable to see each other, communicating elaborately and madly with movement and sound — all of which are severely constrained in some places and consequently overdone and dramatized in others. How hard you work. How tiring you seem to us. How complicated your life. How haphazard and inept your connections with each other.

“Meanwhile, Nature implies the idea of everything being interconnected. Needs and satisfaction are two sides of the same coin. By separating them — aching, urges, and wants, on the one hand, and satisfaction, relief, and pleasure, on the other — so far from each other, you widened your separation from all of Nature, made yourself more isolated, and contributed to your being the most suffering of all planetmates. You call this ability a delay of satisfaction, a delay of pleasure, and you tell yourself it makes you superior to Nature. Adorning yourself with this crown of extra control of yourself, you make your dissatisfaction and suffering an accomplishment. But you never notice how this power over is bought at the cost of interaction with — interaction with, your body … engagement with, Nature and reality … connection with, humans and other living beings in harmonious accord.

“This separation of you from satisfaction means you push the world away and retreat into a fortified circle, a command center of the mind, allowing survey and oversight of the experiences of the body, but not immersion in those experiences … not really feeling them. You tell yourself you are free from the urges and pushes of the body, this way; you say that you “are not an animal” or “beast” in having this seeming control of these needs. But you never see or acknowledge how this control is paid for with irrationality and uncontrollable acts afterward, often around other events and behaviors. By this we mean you may control your sexual urges only to end up beating your women and children and going to war. You might play the “heroic,” strong and silent type, or the suffering martyr, but, caught up in your inner suffering, you may not notice those around you needing your assistance … you might be insensitive to their cries of pain … you might run roughshod over their lives and forget that there is life force and divinity in them, as well. Your long history of war, torture, domestic brutality, religious atrocity, rape, enslavement, and genocides should be telling you something about yourself in these regards.

“You want us to be clearer on how you are different from other planetmates regarding the satisfaction of needs? Okay, take one example. In Nature, one of the dog planetmates might get hit or bit and would yelp. Whereas a human might get hit and not cry out. It might repress that need to express pain — and it is a need — because it has learned, in infancy, that to cry out when hurt brings even more hurt later. This failure to respond in the present to the urges … “instincts” … of the body leads to manic mental activity afterward. The repressed need drives extraneous thoughts which keep one enslaved in the mind and separated from experience in Reality. It should be clear how repression of any other biological needs — sex, food, water, freedom of movement, comfort — does the same thing.

“One is often blocked from the immediate satisfaction of needs, that is true; and that applies to all planetmates, including humans. Being frustrated from satisfaction is one of those exigencies of life and fate which teaches us. What makes you different is your self-denial when there is no need for it. Again you have taken over the determination of your spiritual path. Again you show how you defy the Divine by seeking to control It (just as you sought to control your caregivers as babies), instead of learn from It. Rooted in your infancy and the inadequate and capricious qualities of your care and need satisfaction then, you seek afterward to deny yourself, again, in an unconscious way of seeking divine reward. Your denial, suffering, praying, and self-flagellation — figurative and literal — are ways you seek to bring forth advantage later … they are sad and distant reflections of your baby attempts to influence the Great Mom….”

[More coming…. ]

To see the entire book, to which this will be added eventually (book is two-thirds updated), go to the blog page at http://mladzema.wordpress.com/the-great-reveal-book-6/ … Planetmates: The Great Reveal is also scheduled for print and e-book publication in mid-March, 2014

To purchase any of Michael Adzema’s books, available in print and e-book formats, go to Michael Adzema’s books at Amazon.

Invite you to join me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/sillymickel

friend me on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sillymickel

from the Planetmates. On communication in Nature and in humans, Nature’s honesty, bonding, hidden agendas, how babies are like politicians, and more

chronicles-of-narnia-the-lion-the-witch-and-the-wardrobe-the-20051019035132942_640w

“Now, since your adults were disinclined to put in the huge sacrifice required to care for young who were for an exceedingly long time in a dependent state, the survival of your species required the evolution, through natural selection, of certain qualities in babies. This was another crucial point at which your trajectory veered off from the paths of all the rest of us in Nature. It also led to many of the characteristics you humans use to distinguish yourselves from us and put yourselves above us. However progressive and advanced many of these might seem on the surface — especially as viewed by you — you have never considered them in the light of their origins, the hidden intentions embedded in them, or in contrast to their alternatives in Nature … that is, in contrast to a natural or more direct mode or state of being.

“For one thing, many of them contain elements — distinguishing you from all other species — having to do with the repression of needs. How amazingly contradictory! Your species would, under the influence of all the wayward factors affecting your development as fetuses and infants, find survival value incumbent upon the … drumroll here … non-expression of needs! The utter absurdity of such a thing might not be entirely clear. However, think: Everything in Nature requires other things in order to survive and grow. Plants require water, sunshine, nutrients. These either are accessed immediately, are at hand or, as in the mammal and primate planetmates, all of whom require a “parenting” of sorts when young, must be produced and provided by some other. That is, indeed, what is meant by the word parenting: It is the satisfying, by the older, of the needs of the younger and helpless.

“In order to survive and grow, needs must be satisfied. However, in the larger planetmates, there is a gap between felt need and satisfaction of it. In the instances where one requires the assistance of the Other to achieve that satisfaction, this gap is bridged by communication. There must be a message from the needing organism to the providing organism that something is required and when it has to be provided. This communication can be in the form of a cry, a grunt, a body movement. And in Nature, there is no dissembling. Nature is honest, if nothing else: The needing being lets the providing being know when and what should be provided; and so it is done. Everything in Nature is interconnected and is ever interacting and clearly communicating with all about it. From cells to galaxies, atoms to planets, need and satisfaction coincide perfectly: One neuron does not need to persuade the next neuron to be so good as to pass along the electrical impulse.

“Now, humans, on the other hand, as we have been stressing, are the most in need and the most helpless in satisfying those needs in their early lives. And, as we have been detailing, greater amounts of and more elaborate communication is required, consequently, and has become part of the human repertoire.

“But now there is this. Humans have both the greatest and most time-consuming task of parenting of all other planetmates, and this coincides with the greatest amount, overall, of reluctance by caregivers to provide it. So, as we have been saying, something had to happen for your species to not die out from lack of poor parenting. And what happened was a change in your babies, making them different from the rest of the young in Nature.

“We have said how, “babies had better smile.” That is part of it. Yes, babies had to become adorable. There is a maternal instinct, certainly — it is simply at base the caring and unity all planetmates feel with each other, predominantly. But human’s “instinct” is covered up and distorted by all the unique and difficult factors of your coming into the world. Thus, your maternal “instinct” has to be triggered: It needs more help bringing it out and sustaining it.

“This happens in the course of what you call bonding. You are beginning to understand how important it is for the mother and newborn to be with and interacting with each other right after birth and for as much as possible in the crucial days following. It is through that interaction that maternal “instinct” is brought forth; without that crucial time together, most of your mothers never get past the aloofness and entrapment within themselves that your unnatural early experiences put upon you … they never quite feel the “unity” with the newborn which makes the newborn’s needs equivalent to their own and that is the basis for truly caring about satisfying those needs.

“But bonding is facilitated by the qualities, not just of the mother, but of the child. Babies with traits making them likely to be wanted will be more cared for and will thus survive and thus pass along those traits. So, to survive, human babies and newborns, through the process of natural selection, developed qualities to accomplish that. These would be subsumed under the rubrics of “cuteness,” “appeal,” “adorability.” Babies had to be lovable to attract response that would bring satisfaction of its needs.

“But in light of the fact that parenting is such a chore for humans and adult humans are needy themselves, an additional class of traits would develop: Babies would develop traits involving the repression or non-expression of their needs. Non-fussiness, high tolerance for pain and discomfort, numbness, and unfeelingness would be placed under this column. Hence, having needs but either not allowing oneself to acknowledge or react to them or not letting the Other know of them would be an advantage in getting those needs, actually, fulfilled at some point.

“So, in addition to traits of adorability and appeal — cuteness and smiling and laughter — traits that involved non-fussiness, crying less, non-expressiveness, numbness, and unfeelingness on the part of the infant were selected for.

“Of course, there had to be a combination of both expression of needs as well as non-communication of needs in order to survive. There has to be a combination of unfeelingness-numbness and effusive entertaining adorability. And every baby who survives develops this — it is the major practice of every day of its life — to an at least sufficient degree … sometimes to a masterful level. Amazingly, human babies must learn to both communicate directly as well as to dissemble, to be both responsive as well as repressed. Human babies must learn to direct, but not appear to. They must be charming, but not obtrusive; seen, but not heard. Through this charm and manipulation offensive, these little politicians must bring about the satisfaction of their deep desires and needs, yet appear to be “above” such concerns. Again we see the factors which pushed the twisted consciousness and behavior of humans. Humans have “hidden agendas.” They might say one thing, and the other human must figure out what that human is really meaning … which might be the opposite of that….”

 [More coming…. ]

To see the entire book, to which this will be added eventually (book is two-thirds updated), go to the blog page at http://mladzema.wordpress.com/the-great-reveal-book-6/ … Planetmates: The Great Reveal is also scheduled for print and e-book publication in mid-March, 2014

To purchase any of Michael Adzema’s books, available in print and e-book formats, go to Michael Adzema’s books at Amazon.

Invite you to join me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/sillymickel

friend me on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sillymickel

Children a Burden … Unfit Parents: Children Became the Ultimate Repository for the Suffering Resulting from Social Conformity and Its Humiliation, Say Planetmates in the 21st Prasad (updated)

waiting-for-superman-movie-postercrppd_thumb

“You are Babies Raising Babies”: Consumed with Baseless Terrors and Caught up in Relentless Mental Machinations, Humans Are Hardly Fit Care-Givers, According to the Planetmates 

clip_image0012

The Great Reveal from the Planetmates, the Twenty-First Prasad: Children a Burden … Unfit Parents

3655560753_cf314e8db1_thumb

Planetmates Release The Twenty-First Prasad

Fully Growns Hardly Fit Care Givers for Newborns

clip_image002Tree Frog is First Consciousness at The Twenty-First Prasad. Alongside the increasing time of helplessness and dependence of newborns was the increasing reluctance of fully growns to jeopardize their survival for their own newborns.

lion__witch_and_wardrobe_by_bamfi_thumb

The Twenty-First Prasad – Children a Burden

clip_image003imagfdhjkfgesBut the fully growns are at the same time consumed by the controlling, conforming, backwards thinking, and the alien and crazed overstimulation of consciousness that we’ve been describing.user1863_1164423895 In this state they are hardly fit to be good care givers to newborns. Remember that fear for your survival—of deprivation and uncertainty—drives your obsessive controlling and conforming. So there was an increasing tendency, elephantfamily.animal,portraits,animals,life,wild,animal,photos,of,the,year-a6d4a06eb2c7aecbbff4d9b327655963_h (2)as you became more “human,” as we’ve defined you, to not want to add the workers8burden of caring for dependent young ones to your already uncertain state. Alongside the increasing time of helplessness and dependence of newborns was chronicles-of-narnia-the-lion-the-witch-and-the-wardrobe-the-20051019035132942_640wthe increasing reluctance of fully growns to jeopardize their survival for their own newborns. These reluctant feelings did not fully manifest, however, until around the time of ultimate control and crazed beingness that occurred with the switch to sedentary and accumulating-conforming ways.

Paraphrase/Elaboration of the Twenty-First Prasad — by SillyMickel Adzema

imagfsdghdgjfesNow, let us look at childhood from the perspective of your fully growns.

For your adults are not passive actors in these developments. As we have been saying, this is the ultimate and easiest arena of control for humans.
clip_image007Sure enough, your adults consciously and unconsciously foster and constrain the Ego creations of your young ones in the course of their care giving.

You know how you seek to do it consciously. You call it “raising” your children; again, you show how you objectivize the world and how its people look to you like things to be grown for your use and consumption, much like your crops or chickens. More kindly, you view it as “training” them; though you would never acknowledge, however true, that your aim is to mold and force upon them a shape that makes of them just another extension of you … a mini-me. Again, there is that Ego of you. And here you see how your effects on your children begin to become unconscious influences: You affect them in ways of which you are completely oblivious and always and everywhere have vehemently denied. Still, we must tell you, for those who, because of the pressing and intense nature of these times and their unusual sensitivity to the needs of those beyond just themselves, are able to hear it.

_17_1750_WNN3D00ZWhat you are always and everywhere ignorant of is your biological, species-determined inability to give adequate care to those dependent on you. You are, for all the reasons we have been listing, “not quite here,” virtually all of the time.

illuminati-controlYou are distracted and self-obsessed. While responsible for tending the young’s needs,
you are forever distracted by your controlling and conforming obsessions; you are continually derailed and led astray by your backward thinking. You are barely able to focus outside of yourselves, as you are constantly consumed by the alien and crazed, overstimulated consciousness that characterizes you.

yellowsubmarine1968-avi-00006

You cannot help but be poor caregivers, with all these other things going on inside you. For children require attentiveness and focus on their needs, and you are ever self-obsessed, and your minds are busy building walls to buffer reality and bridges over unpleasant Nows to fantastical and ever receding futures of ease.

clip_image009Looking back at the deepest origins of that feverish controlling and fearful conforming we remember that it is rooted in and driven by your underlying — exaggerated and foundationless — fears of death — the supposed end of your beingness.
clip_image010This fear for your survival is made keen by your incessant paranoia of becoming deprived and of facing uncertainty, as you actually did, in most horrifying ways, as infants.

LionWitchWardrobe2_BirminghamSo, the very same deprivations and uncertainty we planetmates embrace as providing the spice and delightful play of life for you are the forces to drive your obsessive controlling. Furthermore, as you became more “human,” you became that much more, not less, fearful of death; you became ever more terrified of an imaginary future containing uncontainable levels of pain of not getting what you want. You became ever more deranged when confronting uncertainty in your present.

So, consumed with baseless terrors and caught up in your relentless mental machinations around them, you cannot bear the thought of adding the burden of children to all that.

Masked_Characters_14Hardly able to focus outside yourselves and lost in a matrix of long-ago schemas of feelings (from infancy and birth)—pushing and pulling you all about regardless of what you are confronted with in the present—you are babies raising babies.

You would like to make up for your inability by having your newborns simply grow up faster and not be such babies for so long. For after all, it is only their neediness that offends you. It drags you down and requires that you leave off some of your activities and thoughts in the efforts of defense and come out of yourself to heed another’s needs. “If only they would cry less”; “If only they would sleep through the night”; “If only they would poop in the right place.”

Forever falling short of filling your needs in the present, as you go about doing that along with attempting to fill the ever present list of imaginary “needs” left over from your past, you cannot be good caregivers for needy others. Put another way, burdened as you are with imaginary struggles, it does not behoove you to attend to another’s real needs.

Uwneglect

Bad enough, all this was when you were nomadic, gatherers and hunters, but all of this was made worse by the switch to sedentary living. For with fixed abodes, inequality of stores, and the resulting social hierarchy came all its requirements to conform increasingly to the demands of a social arena for the satisfaction of one’s needs. Remember that in Nature you enjoyed a relative independence of action in satisfying your basic needs. In Nature, you knew the relative self-assurance that one could always fend for oneself, if need be. 

colobusmokeys-shareamorningkiss-animalportraitsanimalslifewildanimalphotosoftheyear-50afae3b0ebe1

But hierarchy and increased specialization of function—which was a narrowing of the fullness of life experience down to a focus on the aspect of it which could be traded in society for survival—made one dependent on the good will of others for survival. It re-created the state of infantile dependence on one’s care-givers. You were thrust ever, triggered ever, into feelings of helplessness vis-à-vis the Other, which now would include the social matrix within which you were nurtured and fed.

We will leave for later how this, in itself alone, transformed your ideas of Divinity, again … this time it took on more of the qualities of the ones you were most dependent upon—strong men or a man, patriarchal elders, and chiefs—instead of the forces of Nature and its central experience of rebirth. For now it is more important to notice that the major effect this fundamental helplessness in relation to society had upon your feelings and thoughts was the requirement, always, that one’s actions be not just sufficient (for survival) but pleasing (to Other). So, to a consciousness caught up in pushes and pulls left over from early deprivations and trauma in interaction with an inattentive, sometimes harsh, Other (one’s caregiver/parent) was added the pushes and pulls to appeal to, and be approved by, similar unconcerned, careless, sometimes brutal Others in the present, which were one’s higher ups.

illuminati20final-20backgroundonly

This could not help but make it even more difficult to attend to the needs of your young. In the drama of intrigue and chicanery, which erupted out of the necessary interaction for fulfillment of needs with increasingly larger numbers of similarly helpless and equally desperate others in society, you were engaging the majority of the attention and focus you did have. Caught up in the necessary wiles of life left you with little over. The persistent and undeniable needs of children, arising at any time of the day or night, was an unwanted addition to the increasing demands and complexities of daily life.

The result? From the preceding prasads it can easily be guessed what transpired: Children were the lowest in the hierarchy of importance in any society—they were often abandoned or even killed, oftentimes right at birth—for they were the least able to defend themselves and represented the biggest additional outlay of resources and effort of anything coming into an adult’s life. But they were under the most pressure and were the most scapegoated in the hierarchical societies which came with sedentary living.

the-wall-movie-1982-7_thumb2

In ways very similar to the change in the perceptions of women, with hierarchy—that is, with there being controlling and demanding persons ever above one—came incredible pressure to extract from others below oneself amounts of complicity and service equal to what was being demanded from above. It was the unconscious trade-off that men sought for the sacrifice of their energy, time, and self-esteem to those above.

By that we mean that men knew and secretly resented the fact that they needed to put time and effort into the needs and wants of those above them, rather than their own. They felt they could live with that as long as they could balance that suck of energy from them to above with acquisition of unworked for boons from those below. More simply, if you had to suck up to those above you, you could console yourself with the fact that others below you sucked up to you. This was all decided unconsciously, of course. So men used women and controlled them in an amount equal to that which they themselves felt controlled and dominated from above. Men knew they were humiliated and denigrated to an intolerable degree by those above, but they were able to live with that if at other times they also could dominate and bully.

melancholia-film

dirtyhippieAnd, of course, women were always targets for all this scapegoating and abuse. But even further down—and available to be scapegoated even by women—were the children. So, again, children were felt to be both the one excludable variable in life’s burdens as well as the ultimate repository for the suffering brought about by such burdens. They were not wanted and were killed or abandoned, being felt to be additional burdens on psychologically and economically distracted adults. But if they were allowed to live, their needs would be set aside in accordance with the pathetic needs of caregivers who desperately sought dependent underlings (of any kind, women or children, fringe group or subservient class) upon which to balance the injustices of one’s adult life.

clip_image0052

It is no coincidence, either, that women, being the easiest ones to burden, the ultimate societal scapegoats, would have thrust upon them the burden of caregiving that men did not want. Being the child-bearers they were obvious candidates; but these societal pressures that came with sedentary living increased and reinforced that relation. And men were both more anxious as well as more able—more easily beginning with sedentary life—to cut themselves away from any such responsibilities regarding children. However, they heaped extra pressure on women. For the fact that women, being lowest on the totem pole, were the most supervised of all sectors of adults meant that although men would not want to help in child caregiving, they certainly did not want women to be so cavalier about it.

f35ab5e2d1157b333fc1a0cc811791fd

So, women were in the worst situation. Being the repository of the suffering of their men, who themselves were the repository of the misery of the strong men above them, women carried the heaviest burden yet were left with no one below them to pass along the burden of caregiving.

sens-cache-melancholia-lars-von-trier-2011-L-kRqafC

clip_image012Further, this task of attentiveness to children is a complication that just adds to your considerable discomfort around not knowing things, not being able to control things … around uncertainty. For while you sought to control everything about you, your children would be the one major factor upsetting your carefully made plans and throwing the monkey wrench into any laboriously constructed ease you were able to carve out for yourself.

imaghjklgfesSo while your newborns required more, you clip_image013would prefer to give less. Your newborns required ever longer periods in the dependent and helpless state as you changed over time, while
with your increasing fears you felt it risky to focus on a helpless other and away from your attention to warding off present and future imaginary threats.

howls-moving-castle1

clip_image004pepper-spray-ponyThis reluctance to care for your newborns only became truly apparent and blatant after your transition from nomadic ways to sedentary ones, however.
th_familyFor this switch allowed full rein to your mania to
Melancholia-accumulate and control and,
with this increased separation from the natural, a greater state of ordinary madness. You peaked, at this point, as far as your desires for controlling. So the unpredictability brought by newborn others was that much more unappealing.

clip_image014

Continue with The Great Reveal from the Planetmates, the Twenty-Second Prasad: Perinatal Conformity and The Earliest Beauty Contest

Return to The Great Reveal from the Planetmates, the Twentieth Prasad: Obsessive Control — Controlling Your Young

To Read the Entire Book … on-line, free at this time … Go to The Great Reveal from The Planetmates

To purchase any of Michael Adzema’s books, available in print and e-book formats, go to Michael Adzema’s books at Amazon.

Invite you to join me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/sillymickel

friend me on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sillymickel

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Have Western Puritanical Beliefs Infected Transpersonal Psychology? “Crazy” and Transcendent Are Not Opposite as Ego Psychologists Conveniently Proclaim

264472_531957393527850_1992423361_n

The Linear Fallacy and Ken Wilber’s Fall from Grace: Spiritual Growth Is Hardly Linear … You Can’t Put “Enlightenment” on Your To-Do List

Phoenix_by_o_eternal_o-1024x733

The Linear Fallacy

Cybernetic Dreaming

asfadfa220px-Trappist_praying_2007-08-20_dtiEven in the field of transpersonal psychology, for example, there seems an inability to accept such a visceral, energetic, cathartic, “Dionysian,” spiritual path—a “surrendered” one … a shamanistic one. Instead we see a tendency to opt for “Appollonian” head trips, mere relaxation and visualizations, cybernetic ego programming and affirmations, and rational-intellectual metaphoristics—a “controlling” path (cf., Berman, 1986, “Cybernetic Dream”).

Spock Brainiacrobocop13crppd

We hear that one must have an ego before one can lose one … as if we all, from birth, don’t have some kind of ego! We hear that there are “healthy” ego defenses to have … as if all defenses are not in some way the avoidance or distortion of truth.

308157_2704946665925_1324516302_3105340_1023240093_n

Ken Wilber’s Mistake

Interestingly, Ken Wilber—who, along with Stanislav Grof, is considered a fountainhead of modern transpersonal psychology—has been, at different times, on both sides of this development. His change of position from The Spectrum of Consciousness (1977) to The Atman Project (1980) is, in my opinion, regrettable. Obviously, from the analysis presented in this book, Falls from Grace, it is clear that I believe that his stance at the outset, in The Spectrum of Consciousness, is closer to the truth.

levels-of-pain-levels-of-bliss

The Prepersonal and the Transpersonal Are Not Separate

hippiesFurther, I agree with Washburn (1990) that Wilber’s espousal of a prepersonal/transpersonal distinction (Wilber, 1982)—which predicates his change of position—”assumes a major point at issue,” specifically, that “‘pre’ and ‘trans’ states are totally unrelated, and are in fact opposites,” and that Wilber does not establish this position empirically (p. 94). lunch-21_thumbSimilarly, while I regret the use to which Schneider (1987) puts this information, I concur with him that “a careful reading of the case evidence does not—as Wilber . . . would have it—clearly differentiate (prepersonal) psychotics from truly (transpersonal) visionaries” (p. 202).

womb-with-a-view

550124_226157467514637_320813694_n 0037-0 543985_495991753784484_1971385347_n 396024_490745100937290_379859544_n in-loves-image how-can-God-be-devilish-unless-she-forgets-who-she-is-down-rabbit-holenoble-savage

578505_205002759630108_1920849087_n

Ken Wilber’s Pre/Trans Distinction—Does Not Fit with the Evidence

In sum, the operative factor in Wilber’s change of position, which is also a basic building block of all of his later theory—that is to say, the pre/trans distinction—does not fit with the evidence from the spiritual or psychiatric literatures. It certainly does not fit with the evidence of experiential psychotherapy and pre- and perinatal psychology. Finally, as Epstein and Leiff (1981, p. 140) pointed out, neither does his hypothesis appear to fit with the evidence of meditation research.

-Ice-Blue-Red-Fire-Phoenix-Fantasy-Art-Fresh-New-Hd-Wallpaper--graduate-courses-in-university-of-divinity becoming-human-is-universes-trippiest-game-god-forgets-herself

One Returns to the Beginning, Again and Again

As Grof (1985) said concerning Wilber’s pre/trans distinction:

My own observations suggest that, as consciousness evolution proceeds from the centauric to the subtle realms and beyond, it does not follow a linear trajectory, but in a sense enfolds into itself.

0001-achilles-and-chiron417070_223925697737814_1300312747_n

In this process, the individual returns to earlier stages of development, but evaluates them from the point of view of a mature adult. At the same time, he or she becomes consciously aware of certain aspects and qualities of these stages that were implicit, but unrecognized when confronted in the context of linear evolution.

il_fullxfull.362602814_18vc

Thus, the distinction between pre- and trans- has a paradoxical nature; they are neither identical, nor are they completely different from each other. (p. 137)

10256_219569224840128_1534877765_n

Ken Wilber’s Fall from Grace

Indeed why Wilber, while acknowledging Grof at least, would choose not to incorporate the findings of prenatal and perinatal psychology and would opt instead for a Piaget-based theory of development that begins (1) at birth (1980, p. 6) and (2) with the self identified with matter that is defined as lowest consciousness (1980, p. x and p. 7)—a Piaget-based theory that is radically altered by prenatal and perinatal psychology and consciousness research in general (see Grof; Pearce, 1980)—is a mystery in itself. emotionless_spock_by_elfqueen1969-d2yx7rp The Alpha and the Omega Meet By that I mean that (1) Wilber ignores the first nine months of an individual’s life, as if those experiences—which others, and myself in this book, have shown to be all-important—are not only not influential but non-existent!

969662_469583853120342_1714452879_n

By that I also mean that (2) Wilber (1980) claims that at birth the self is identified with matter (p. x and p. 7), which he calls the pleroma and which he states is a gnostic term for the virgo mater or materia prima (p. 20). First of all, my reading of gnosticism does not tell me that the pleroma is a primal matter but rather a primal spiritual source from which all else—specifically, matter—devolves.

12 The Eight Auspicious Symbols infinity-of-god-and-experience_thumb

Gnostic writings tell that, in fact, the creation of matter and the world occurs later, much later in the course of devolution than the “spiritual” pleroma. They tell also that the material universe comes in only with the creation of the inferior god, the Demiurge (the ego); and that it is a flawed creation—one might say it is one that no longer adequately reflects spirit and that it has fallen from grace. (See Robinson, 1988, The Nag Hammadi Library in English)

6aebr84dbijz-niger

“God Is All There Is.”

This may seem a minor point; however, its implications are huge for Wilber’s theory and it indicates exactly where we differ. What I am saying is that, from a particular perspective—one might say a gnostic one—matter is from spirit (or Consciousness), is of the same stuff as spirit (except that it is flawed). That really and truly what we see “out there” is spirit and is no different from what we experience “in here” save that our sensory experience is an imperfect—one might say, reflected or indirect—experience . . . but of the same thing! This is indeed the implication of the new physics and the new psychology. As one song sums it up: “God is all. God is all there is.”

our-natural-self

Now, Wilber knew this in The Spectrum of Consciousness; he espoused this perspective in that book. That he later turned from this radical spiritual perspective on matter; this mystical, Eastern, “new physics,” psychedelic, and Platonic perspective on the material world and sensory experience . . . well, one might say he “fell from grace.” imadgfhfjgjklges_thumb1_thumb75340_461952720518732_919352686_n0012-1468910684_21627a3681_o The Stormy Path to Self As Grof (1985) has exclaimed concerning Wilber:

It is . . . somewhat surprising that he has not taken into consideration a vast amount of data from both ancient and modern sources—data suggesting the paramount psychological significance of prenatal experiences and the trauma of birth. (pp. 135-136)

969250_10200099918047051_2059458534_n pain-is-wisdom-gift-wrapped

Further, concerning Wilber’s theoretical system:

The complexity of embryonic development and of the consecutive stages of biological birth receives no attention in this sophisticated system, which is elaborated in meticulous detail in all other areas. (p. 136)

931340_197382293719198_1944916516_n0019-images-3

You Can’t “Program” Your Way Into Transcendence

It seems that Wilber (1980, 1982), however—as one of the chief proponents of the ego-quest-as-precondition-to-spiritual-quest school of transpersonal thought—has made the mistake of constructing his transpersonal argument within the gravitational field of the Western ego psychologists. Thus it ends up helplessly skewed in that direction. He completely ignores the evidence cross-culturally for the ego weakness that most often characterizes mystical adherents and religious practitioners.

602456_226823130781404_45194563_n

Ken Wilber’s Cop-Out

Hence, Wilber’s overall position is muddied in contradiction. See, for example, A Sociable God. Here Wilber says adolescence includes previous structures:

As the adolescent mind emerges, it destroys the exclusive identity with the body but does not destroy the body itself; it subsumes the body in its own larger mental identity. (1983, p. 104)

homepageNow, compare that with The Spectrum of Consciousness (1977) in which he contends that each stage splits off from and represses previously “owned” realities making them unconscious. There are no two ways to interpret this: In the earlier work, he saw a reduction, or devolution, in consciousness with each subsequent stage in consciousness—exactly the position I espouse in this book. Whereas by the latter work, A Sociable God, he himself has become more conforming with societal beliefs, more “sociable,” and becomes an apologist for the status quo. He begins rationalizing—as people tend to do as they get older and more split off from their real feelings—that it was not “all that” repressed after all when one 0044-legiondefygod300full-2went from one stage to the other of the spectrum. This is the transpersonal psychology equivalent of the older person, tired of the emotional baggage carried from a traumatic childhood, resigning herself to saying that, well, Daddy (or Mommy) actually did love her “in his own way.” The point is this is not about truth anymore. It is about giving up the struggle for truth and conforming to whatever beliefs make life easier … or in Wilber’s case, facilitate one on the career “ladder.”

Transcendent States Require Pre-Egoic Integration

0003-imasgfsgsgsgfsgesAt any rate, I think the integration of Wilber’s work with that of Grof, primal psychology, Masters and Houston, and the new prenatal and perinatal information from various sources helps to clarify some of the confusion resulting from his change of position. [Note 1] My hope also is that my work in this book in integrating all of the above, including Wilber’s schema, goes at least some part of the way toward correcting the misunderstanding that arises from his omissions.

.

.

.

zcjzlcvjzlvcjzlvjh

Note

1. The new prenatal and perinatal information is referenced many times in this book—see especially Chapter One—as well as in publications and conferences of the Association for Pre- and Perinatal Psychology and Health (APPPAH); the writings of Thomas Verny (1981, 1987); the evidence from primal therapy, rebirthing, holotropic breathwork, and psychedelic research—published in places too numerous to mention; and so on.

Continue with Ego Weak Mystics and Shamans: A Supremely Defended Ego Is the Aim of Modern “Sanitized” Spirituality … the “Holy Fools” of Mystical History Would Be Medicated Today

Return to Is the Supernatural Terrifying? The Idea of a Shamanistic, Stormy Spiritual Path Is Too at Odds with Our Religious Anti-Body Culture to Be Easily Accepted

To Read the Entire Book … on-line, free at this time … of which this is an excerpt, Go to Falls from Grace

To purchase any of Michael Adzema’s books, available in print and e-book formats, go to Michael Adzema’s books at Amazon.

Invite you to join me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/sillymickel

friend me on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sillymickel

The Nature of Reality and How Humans Separated from It: In the Tenth Prasad the Planetmates Tell of Being-Awareness-Bliss and How Humans Became Controllers and Killers Instead (updated)

000-0706091045-prehistoric_man_hunting_bears_thumbcomplacent-about-taking-life

When Early Humans Began Killing Planetmates and Eating Flesh, Soon They Were Killing Each Other: The Nature of Existence and How Humans Became So Complacent About Taking Life

jacob-wrestles-the-angel

The Great Reveal from the Planetmates, The Tenth Prasad: Being-Awareness-Bliss and Human’s Descent Into Savagery

beck_nuke

Planetmates Release The Tenth Prasad

You first began your fearful, deluded controlling when you added Planetmate flesh to your former vegetarian diet

Pig was First Consciousness at The Tenth Prasad.

"Your descent into aggression and savagery started here, because when you learned how to kill fellow Planetmates...it was not too long before you began to be able to kill each other."

The Tenth Prasad – Becoming Controlling, Becoming Killers

Rather than the natural state of being, awareness, and bliss, your state of omnipresent fear caused you to be ever more unable to accept the gifts of life and survival on Nature’s terms, which were uncertain, but on the other hand, adventurous and surprising. It is the state we enjoy and find blissful and playful and always interesting. Your fear made you unable to bear the uncertain state. So, being impatient, and therefore unwilling to receive sustenance and nurturing on Nature’s timetable, you first began taking control of when you would be nourished by adding planetmate flesh to your former vegetarian diet.

Your descent into aggression and savagery started here, because when you learned how to kill fellow planetmates, which had not been in your nature prior to the prematurity trauma and your constant adult state of tension, it was not too long before you began to be able to kill each other. Continuing to lose faith in the reality of divine perfection, love, and nurturing, which all other planetmates know without doubt, you thought you needed to compete over resources and sometimes to kill your own to keep from starving, or to keep from being killed. The first was your delusion, the second was your delusion made real among yourselves.

accumulatingthingsdominatingothers-greed2

Video Commentary by SillyMickel Adzema

What follows is a video of a reading of The Tenth Prasad, as received from The Planetmates, with additional explanation, context, and some commentary by SillyMickel Adzema.

The Tenth Prasad from The Planetmates: Part One – Faith vs. Fear, Playful vs. Predictable

dog-in-daisy-field-paintThe issues highlighted in the commentary relate to that of the blissful existence of the Planetmates based on absolute faith in the goodness of Existence contrasted with the fearful one of humans based on mistrust, and of the adventurous, playful lives of the Planetmates compared to the striving for predictability and certainty of humans.

The Tenth Prasad from The Planetmates: Part Two – Descent Into Savagery Begins

This next video is a continuation of the commentary of The Tenth Prasad, as received from The Planetmates. The issues highlighted in this commentary relate to the descent into savagery that began with the switch from a completely vegetarian diet to one that included planetmate flesh and involved hunting and killing. Very importantly this led to the ability to be able to kill other humans as well. This momentous development—its significance and consequences—is elaborated upon.

article-2114122-1223540d000005dc-635_634x410_thumb

Audio Commentary by SillyMickel Adzema

“The Tenth Prasad” Part One – Faith vs. Fear, Playful vs. Predictable – the audiocast

The link above takes you to the audio-only version of Part One of my commentary on The Tenth Prasad, exactly as is in the video. Click on the link to go to the the audio site, or you can listen to it here using the audio player below.

http://ecdn0.hark.com/swfs/player_fb.swf?pid=lwbwkkhdnf
Image of The 10th Prasad. “The Great Reveal” By The Planetmates: Pt 1 – Faith Vs. Fear, Playful Vs. Predictable

“The Tenth Prasad” Part Two – Descent Into Savagery Begins – the audiocast

The link above takes you to the audio-only version of Part Two of my commentary on The Tenth Prasad, exactly as is in the video. Click on the link to go to the the audio site, or you can listen to it here using the audio player below.

http://ecdn0.hark.com/swfs/player_fb.swf?pid=dyzxnwkzdp
Image of Commentary On The 10th Prasad Continued: Descent Into Savagery Begins, By Silly Mickel Adzema

Paraphrase/Elaboration of The Tenth Prasad — by SillyMickel Adzema

More and more your lives were a contrast to our own. While you were consumed with fear and because of that seeking to control events, we have a doubtless faith in the rightness of events and a playful attitude toward the unfolding of events. The natural state of all beings and as far as we can tell the nature of Reality Itself, is Being, Awareness, Bliss. That is to say, all Existence is Beingness. It is all conscious. In your terms you might say that all of Reality is one Being or one Life Form. You can think of it that way, if you wish. The point to grasp is that there is no place where consciousness is not. Even that which you think of as the inanimate Universe is life in a form you simply are unable to perceive. It is beingness. What you call things, and physical, are aspects of Being.

But beyond that all of Reality is Aware. That is to say, it is cognizant of Itself as being conscious. It knows it is part of a greater whole and that it exists in relation to various parts, interacting with them. Indeed, there are as many types of awarenesses as there are possibilities for finding whole and integrated patterns, functioning as a unit, in the Universe. There are as many awarenesses as there are complete systems. Put it this way, your Earth is a system. It is aware of Itself as part of It All and in comparison to and interaction with other planets and celestial beings and forces. Viruses and bacteria and cells that exist in your body are Aware. They have the equivalent of lived “lives” and know they are part of a larger whole and they know of their existence at least in relation to beings alike to them — other cells, bacteria, viruses, and things on that level. Your kidneys and other organs are beings in themselves, interacting in awareness with each other; your nations are a consciousness aware of its participation in a whole and interacting with parts like itself. You of course know you are parts of many larger realities — nation, planet, family, city. Each whole pattern is a configuration of Spirit, in some form or other. And these patterns are overlapping, interacting, and infinite in number. There are an infinite number of “stories” therefore … there are as many as there are integrated, whole patterns … of anything … in the Universe, able to act as a unit, thus creating itself, and interact with other units of its kind, which create the boundaries between beings … however temporary and arbitrary. [Footnote 1]

But is there a problem with that? Does that sound hard or difficult for some reason? You see, here you already have your controlling mania seeping in to cloud your perception. For you cannot comprehend such infinite complexity of existence, for you cannot help but feel someone must manage each one of those systems of awareness. You see everything as needing to be put together, made to operate, and requiring control to keep it functioning properly. You do not have a clue that perfect synchronicity and functioning are the fundamental things of Reality and that your controlling or managing of anything is, in fact, like throwing a monkey wrench into these perfect workings, not aiding or assisting them. Reality is not built up from inanimate, separate objects; it is broken down or diminished from Perfection Itself and Totality … of harmony and synchronicity. Which leads to the next quality of Existence.

All beingness existing, all existence being beingness, all beingness being awareness, and all awareness being conscious of its perfect relation to all and everything and the perfection of the It All, the Universe’s nature is perceived by all beings as Beauty, and the Nature of Experience that is the Universe is Bliss. Indeed, this was your birthright as well. In some of your spiritual awarenesses, you are still able to sense and to know of Reality as being this way. But you struggle, for the most part, blind to this sort of Beauty.


Following from that, all Reality being Bliss — and there being no darkness and light to struggle with each other — there are no dire consequences for any action in the Universe. Hence every action, event, and drama of the Universe is play. Indeed, that is the way we view our existences, our lives — as being play and with no dire consequence whichever way it goes. Hence, we can risk more, in this play; we can be full of play … playful. And part of that play — a part that enhances that play — is the uncertainty of life and its unpredictability. We exist in time, which is another way of saying, we have parts of Reality, parts of our play, that we hide from ourselves so that when we come across them they can contribute to our enjoyment. Inherent in unpredictability is surprise — which can be pleasant or unpleasant. But because perfection is the Nature of It All at some level, we know that unpleasant is simply a part of something larger that is a greater pleasant — Indeed the variability, contrast, and unpredictability of life are what create the Beauty, as we are able to see it. All aspects of life, as they unfold, therefore, are conducive to greater and greater wonder and awe. When not caught up in the drama of the play — and its fluctuations of pleasant-unpleasant, light-dark — we live in such awestruck wonder.

However, your state of ominipresent fear caused you to lose faith in the goodness of Nature/ the Divine as it is. You became increasingly fearful of what would happen in any future time and so spent your time seeking to determine that future through fervid controlling activities in the present, which consumed both your consciousness and became your lived Existence. You turned the play and uncertainty of life into drudgery, for uncertainty being a cause for fear and anxiety, you would need to work incessantly in all present time to store up against so as to fend off any imagined unpleasant in future time. Present time was for you anxious — filled as it was for you with incomplete remnants of past early experience which constantly inserted itself into and colored all your experience. So to contemplate uncertainty about the outcome of events, about the future and what it would hold, in addition to that anxiety, was increasingly more than you could bear, or were willing to take on. The anxious backdrop of your lives, carried through life from your beginnings into it, combined with what we consider the spice of unpredictability, which leads to a feeling of adventurous engagement in life for us, was instead for you a reminder of the pain of birth and its overwhelming sensations — too much at once to bear — and the pain of waiting for satisfaction of needs as an infant. You naturally do not want to be reminded of those feelings, so you began the process of separating yourself from your present experience … putting it out of your mind, becoming less than your self. The feeling that resulted from the combination of past pain coming through in the present and present uncertainty is what you call impatience. It is something you do not and did not want to feel, so you would separate from it, splitting your mind, and so would have no or less feeling rather than an unpleasant one. Sometimes you call that feeling of nothing, caused by your separation from the present, boredom. Believe me, it is something we never feel as life to us is always entrancing, adventurous, surprising, and engaging … at any rate, it is always interesting … never boring.

To repeat, life is uncertain because we do not know the future consequences of our present actions, but we see that as part of the joyous adventure, whereas that fact causes you dread. So our natural state is one of being, awareness, and bliss, and our lives are surprising, playful, and always interesting; whereas yours became one of impatience, defiance toward Nature/ the Divine in all its forms, and set toward fighting imaginary threats in a state of fervid, obsessive controlling of things inside and around you. Our blissful existence, based on absolute faith in the goodness of Existence contrasts with your fearful existence based on mistrust. Our adventurous playful lives are starkly different from your lives of constant working to make life predictable and certain, in the future, through controlling-type activities, in the present.

Now, what came with that impatience and the controlling activities was the unwillingness to accept your sustenance and nurturing on Nature’s terms and on Her timetable. This had the most dire consequences. For with this controlling, wrought of fear, came your propensities for killing and the descent into the savage beings which increasingly became the trait that most characterized and defined what is human.

Impatient with the divine timetable for the satisfaction of needs, in particular, hunger, and more cut off from the felt experience of life … becoming more insensitive to it and to the consequences of your actions … allowed you to begin supplementing your mostly vegetarian diets with planetmate flesh. You could observe other beings in Nature killing and eating each other. It was natural that in your first actions emanating from your anxiety about satisfaction of needs, you would begin doing the same. This lifestyle included hunting … and killing.

In your first reactions to your early pain you had ritual, next you would kill.

The basic needs of physical existence, like sustenance, food, we accept as gifts from God; your crazed state caused you to seek to control this aspect of existence, to make it less certain. Your first attempt to do that involved your adding Planetmate flesh to your former, exclusively vegetarian, diet. You had been happy accepting God’s varied and often surprising gifts through foraging, but now you began what you called “hunting,” as well. This began your descent into aggression and savagery.”

uncertainty_wallpaper_emmaalvarez

Prior to your prematurity trauma it had not been in your nature to kill, let alone eat, flesh that resembled your own — those that you call “animals.” But with your lives of increasing tension and as your continued loss of touch with Real Existence diminished and your lives lived in your substitute world of monochromatic ghostly symbols expanded, you became insensitive enough to the spilling of blood to make life and death decisions over fellow Planetmates. After that, it was not long before you were intruding on God’s domain by making these decisions about each other, as well.

You first began to kill each other out of your fear that there would not be enough sustenance for all — what you call “competition over resources.”
Planetmates know without doubt that they are interwoven with and therefore infinitely loved and sustained by a God who is perfect in His care and nurturing of us in every way, even the tiniest and most insignificant.

d_bbirdcatcatscutefriendship-bfaa427e0efe3de864e63130c3f40e12_h

So your fear of dying through lack of sustenance was your delusion wrought of your crazed, increasingly ghostly existence.

sghsgjhsgjsdjdjd

But as more of you believed it, you created the very real threat of being killed, for that reason, by one of your own kind. So, out of your delusion of scarcity of resources, you created the reality that you would need to kill in order to keep from being killed.

970198_533918363310242_1901413106_n

 

Footnote

1.  Re: Being/Awareness: from Voices of the First Day, p. 49. “ ‘With your mentality, these tall buildings are the result of the dreams and plans of architects, engineers, and builders. But the Aborigine also sees that the stones and bricks themselves have an inner potential — a dreaming to become a structure.’ As much as the builders dreamed and projected the building, so too did the stones dream and project the minds, hands, and activities of the builders.” (and so on from there) … “Why is it not possible … that the essence of consciousness is within the stone.”

Continue with The Great Reveal from the Planetmates, The Eleventh Prasad: “Agrarian Revolution” – Interference in Flora Empire

Return to The Great Reveal from the Planetmates, The Ninth Prasad: Eden and the Fall … Harmony with Nature, Early Humans, Foragers

To Read the Entire Book … on-line, free at this time … Go to The Great Reveal from The Planetmates

To purchase any of Michael Adzema’s books, in print and e-book formats, go to Michael Adzema’s books at Amazon.

Invite you to join me on Twitter:
http://twitter.com/sillymickel

friend me on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sillymickel


 

 

 

 

 

%d bloggers like this: