Hi Thomas and All,
Thanks for your reply. I have enjoyed your relaxed style of
contemplation. To me primary is akin to dominant. And the dominant
experience is mine – if I can keep my awareness awake. The magical
however seems to reside on a different plane, where mine is no longer
separate or separable.
Best wishes,
Robert
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 1:13 AM, Thomas Bryson <tb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dear Michael,
I would agree with you that 'primary' is an artifact of logical thought. It
is a conceptual abstraction, appropriate in some contexts, irrelevant in
others. Appropriate when it points a client away from a secondary repeating
pattern of behavior into feeling the primary emotion that is hidden
underneath. Irrelevant perhaps from the view from Beyond.
When the question 'what is primary' is asked and one doesn't seek an answer
to the question, the question functions to open a space. Even though the term
primary may have a limited context where it is appropriate, the asking can
still function as a koan, as a step beyond knowing.
Whether the Beyond is called holomovement, a non-local, a-temporal network or
morphic field, the Beyond stays beyond cognition and is resistant to our
efforts to grasp it.
By occupying the space that is opened by any good question and one does not
collapse the possibilities through conceptual thinking, a deeper meeting
between observer and observed can take place - a meeting where you and I can
recognize that what is looking out my eyes is precisely the same as what is
looking out your eyes. Even though what is actually looking remains
ungraspable.
Rather than thinking that something 'goes out the eyes' as in the classical
model, it seems to me more like a local recognition of the non-local reality.
My view is that through the recognition of oneness of consciousness, spirit
or whatever it is, that there is actually increased freedom for
individuation. That is perhaps one of the delicious paradoxes we find in
systemic thinking and practice.
Alone. All One.
Thomas Bryson
