From a recent comment, which brought up some curiosity about it for myself:

No wonder gnostics are so alone, individual in their work.

It is true that any path of growing and waking up is alone work. It is something we have to do for ourselves. And it is an individual path as well, partly since our knots - in their configuration and emphasis - is particular to us.

Yet there is another side to it too.

Often, we can find teachers and groups that share our interest and aim. It is usually not a complete match, but that is a good thing since it brings it back to us. We are not able to mindlessly absorb and follow the group, since our own path has partly universal dynamics and is partly individual.

And while there may be periods where we do experience it as a lonesome path, the growing and waking up itself tends to invite in a great sense of belonging as well. Of finding in ourselves what we see in others - the wider world as a mirror for what is right here now. And of all as the play of awakeness itself.

We find (see, feel, appreciate) a shared humanity right here, which invites in a deepening connection with those we meet as a human being in the world. We find in ourselves what we see in the wider world. And we find all as this awakeness itself, untouched by the mental field overlay of I-Other.

here are several ways we can discover that there is no Other. There are lots of others, of course, in a conventional sense, but also not in a few different ways.

First, I can notice that how I relate is how I relate to anything happening within experience, including myself, others, the wider world, life and God. Said more accurately, how this human self relates, is how it relates to others, life and itself. The I-Other boundary is there in a practical sense - as this human self and the rest of the world - but not in terms of this human self being able to relate to others or life in a way different from how it relates to itself.

Then, I can notice that the wider world is a mirror for me. Whatever characteristics and dynamics I see in the wider world mirrors what is right here. I cannot find anything in others that I don’t find right here now. Here too, the I-Other boundary is there in a practical sense, but not in terms of seeing something in the wider world and not also seeing and feeling it right here.

Finally, noticing what I really am - that which states and experience happens within, to and as - I find that there is no Other. It is all awareness itself taking different forms. The conventional I-Other boundary is still there, noticed as a mental field creation and having a practical function. But there is no I-Other inherent in what is.

In each of these cases, there is a difference between just noticing this and working with it occasionally, and seeing and feeling it more thoroughly, getting more familiar with it through returning to it over and over, and take the consequences of it in daily life.

How does this human self relate to itself and the world, within this context? What does it mean for this human self? How does it look, in daily life?  How does it look, in this specific situation?

Noticing all of this as awareness itself, what does that mean for how this human self relates to itself and the wider world? How does it live its life within the context of all as awareness itself?

(more…)

What are some of the functions of gossip?

Whether gossip happens in our own minds, between people, or in the media, I can find at least two main functions of gossip.

In an evolutionary perspective, it seems that it makes sense for people to exchange information about others. When we do, and to the extent it is accurate, we have a better idea of what is going on, and that is often helpful. Even when it is not accurate, it serves to create a sense of intimacy among those who share gossip.

Gossip also serves an important function in terms of projections. We get familiar with a characteristic or dynamic in somebody else, and - if we are receptive to it - can then get familiar with it in ourselves.

There are also a couple of other projection-related functions of gossip.

(more…)

Few things are as interesting as UFOs.

Not because of what they may or may not be, although that can be interesting enough, but because of what they say about us.

The world is our mirror. Whatever we see out there is something we recognize from in here.

And in the absence of real data about UFOs, they become a blank slate for us to fill in with our imagination. UFOs become the perfect all-purpose projection object. A nice ready-made rorschach test. Just as it is with other things we may not know much about, like crop circles, ghosts, reincarnation, awakening, other cultures, or whatever it may be.

We get to fill it in with what is alive here now, but doesn’t quite fit our self image, so we put it out on UFOs - or something else - instead. They will save us. They will eat us alive. They represent a galactic brotherhood.

Can I find each of those qualities in myself? Yes, very much so. And if I get really familiar with it here, UFOs are suddenly not so interesting anymore, at least not as saviors or man-hunters or an evolved brotherhood or whatever else it may be.

We also get to see how we relate to unknowns. Are we OK with it? Fine with acknowledging that we don’t know, and that there are many possible explanations for it? (Without closing the door on any of them.)

Or do we right away cling to a story about it, telling ourselves and others that this story - somehow, magically - is true? Do we tell ourselves they really are aliens? Angels? Beings from another dimension?

Or do we tell ourselves it is all bogus, delusions, fantasies, daydreams, wishful thinking?

In each case, we cling to a story as if it was true, even in the absence of real data. In both cases, we find something to believe in just because we want to, because it is - somehow - more comforting that way.

And finally, how do we deal with it in the real world?

It is a world-wide phenomenon, so why doesn’t it yield more serious research?

Why do scientists shun the subject? Are they are afraid of being associated with crackpots? Do they let fear get in their way of research that would reap insights into psychology and sociology, and possibly other areas?

If so, what does that say about science?

I was fortunate enough to see the new Milarepa movie tonight, made by Neten Chokling who was one of the actors in The Cup and assisted with Travelers and Magicians.

Since I have been exploring the early part of the chain behind “deluded” actions lately, that was one of the things that came up for me.

Especially, how, when we unravel what is behind motivations, the ones stemming from a sense of an I with an Other, we find first fear, and then love.

In his case, fear of losing his mother (she threatened with committing suicide if he didn’t take revenge on the village), fear of what may become of him (they had lost their family fortune), fear of not getting his girl (he was poor, she more affluent). When I look for myself, I find that these types of fears are often behind ill considered actions, and also reactivity and reactive emotions. (Anger, frustration, despair.)

And going behind that fear, there is love. In his case, love for his mother, his father, his sister, himself. Love for those he included in his circle of us, which probably shrank due to how his family was treated by most others in the village.

And of course, behind the fear and reactivity, we find beliefs. A sense of being a separate self, beliefs in justice, in wanting a good life, and so on.

And mixed in with it all, pure innocence. Pure innocence in believing certain thoughts, just because most people around do it. Pure innocence in acting from fear, because this fear is inevitable when we take ourselves to be an I with an Other. Pure innocence in this fear taking the form of anger, hate, despair and wanting revenge, because that is inevitable when we resist the experience of fear, and also when it gets mixed up in typical beliefs. Pure innocence in the love that is behind it all, because that love is what we are. Pure innocence in filtering that love through a boundary of us and them, because that is inevitable when there is a sense of a separate I. Pure innocence in where that boundary falls, because that comes from culture, family and where we are in terms of maturity.

The story, as any other story, is a mirror for myself. Can I find what I see in Milarepa, his path, and in the people around him, in myself?

Where do I find the confusion? Being caught up in a sense of a separate self, and everything that comes from that? Where do I find the turning point? The situation or situations where I went far enough in acting from confusion, reactivity and beliefs that it stunned me, invited me to see if there is another way.

And in the sequel, which is about his training and awakening process, where do I build up stone towers just to have to dismantle them again, or having them dismantled for me?

In what ways is it true that she is me, and I am them…?

It is true at the level of our human self. Whatever I see in others is what I know from myself. Any quality, characteristic, dynamic, behavior that I see in someone else, is something I recognize from myself. And not just from the past, but right here now. It is something that is shared human. And beyond that, I wouldn’t recognize it in them if I didn’t know it from myself.

We are in the same boat.

And it is true at the level of what we are, as awakeness. When awakeness notices itself, it also recognizes everything arising as itself. Those people over there, and this human self right here, and everything else, is awakeness itself. Awakeness recognizes itself showing up as those humans and this human and whatever else is happening.

Both of these are at play simultaneously.

Whatever I see in others is something I can find, if I look, in this human self. And if I take the time to become familiar with it here, it can become a part of the active repertoire of this human self. It can live more actively from the fullness and richness of who it already is, and is becoming.

And if I find myself as awakeness, then everything arising - including those human selves over there and this one right here - is awakeness itself. Already, inherently, absent of an I with an Other.

I am still feeling that all of this is life 101 and getting pretty monomaniacal, obvious and predictable… which is partly why nothing new has come up here for some days.

The general maps are pretty predictable, but when I look, I still find that looking at how it all plays out in real life is not so obvious and predictable, so there is still some interest there. And it is always real life that sparks both the looking into what is happening here and now, and also generates the impulse to take it to maps…

For instance, I listened to a story about Laika, the first Earth being to orbit the planet, and how the world reacted with outrage of letting a poor innocent dog die in space.

The irony here is of course that nearly all of these outraged people happily eat meat from animals whose living conditions are often awful and are bred only to be killed and eaten, and use products tested on animals under equally awful conditions.

It is a given that these inconsistencies happen. We easily compartmentalize our lives, and see patterns in one area that we are blind for in other areas.

But what gets more interesting is to take a closer look at how, specifically, it happens in my own life, and in my own culture. Where do I find patterns that are OK for me in one area, and are an outrage to me in other areas?

And how does this happen right here and now?

Well, I judge those folks for being inconsistent, while doing the exact same thing myself. I judge them and don’t see my own inconsistency, in that moment. I see myself as right and them as wrong, just as they do, and I do exactly what I only see in others, just as they do. We are all in the same boat here.

WH’s speedlinking for today has a link to a post on why so many focus on refuting Wilber (although the post itself seems to have vanished.)

When I saw that brief description of the post, what immediately came to mind is KW’s personality. His writings reflects a personality that invites, if not begs, people to tear him (and his theories) down a few notches. Whenever a particular identity and image is held onto and presented as strongly as in KW’s case (of being macho, smart and hip), it invites others to punch holes in it and tear it town. It is quite beautiful in a way, although can get ugly as well: if he doesn’t do it himself, others will do it for him, reminding him of his own task.

I am not saying that he is not macho, smart and hip. He is very much all of those, and genuinely so. There is just a very strong air of it being a particular image as well, and one that he spends a great deal of energy building up and presenting. And that draws some people to tear it down as flies are drawn to honey.

There are of course other aspects to all of this as well: inaccuracies in how he presents the views of others (it seems that he sometimes almost deliberately misrepresents the views of others), the way he puts down people criticizing or questioning his theories and models (sometimes harshly and with little compassion), his status as one of the most brilliant thinkers of our times (which in itself is reason enough for some to focus on punching some holes there), how he has a God-like status among some (again, a good reason for some to bring him down a few notches), and probably genuine holes in the theories and models themselves.

So in a way, it may all be part of a natural compensating process. He strongly holds onto a certain image so others want to deflate it, showing that it is only an image. He misrepresents certain views of others, so others naturally react. He puts others down, and this attitude is then mirrored back at him. Some of his followers are a little too enamored by him, so certain folks want to show that he is not quite the god some make him into.

It is all a natural, inevitable, process. One that is beautiful in the way everything is a perfect mirror, inviting us all to see in ourselves what we would rather not see. And one that also can get quite ugly through our resistance to this process.

If I hold onto a certain image, others will try to deflate it. This is an invitation to myself to see how I am holding onto the image, and let go of it. If I resist, it gets ugly and everything only intensifies.

There is a reason this happens with Ken Wilber, and not people like Dalai Lama, or Douglas Harding, or Adyashanti. And it goes beyond just his role as innovator and theory builder. In their cases, there is no resistance, so no need to punch holes in their image or theories, and no need to pull them down a few notches. In KW’s case, there is resistance, and this invites attacks.

To me, it is not so difficult to image someone developing the exact same theories and models as KW, but with no identification with a particular identity, and no resistance. In this case, there will still be questions and criticism of his work, but it will (mostly) happen in a far more uneventful and less dramatic way. And probably with more of a sense of partnership and collaboration, at least from his side, than of advesarial positions.

That is not to say that it would be better that way. When we are attached to a particular identity, then drama is good. It helps us see our identifications. And it even helps develop the theories, although sometimes in less comfortable ways.

The outer mirrors the inner in many different ways.

Big Mind

First, as Big Mind the outer mirror the inner in that everything arising is awake emptiness and form, absent of I. It is all Big Mind perceiving itself. And since there isn’t an I and Other, there isn’t any outside and inside, and no real mirroring going on. It is immediate. Whatever arises is Spirit arising as and to itself.

Individual level

Then, there is the mirroring at our individual soul and human levels.

At our human level, there is a psychological mirroring. Whatever qualities and characteristics I see out there is also in here, in my own life. I recognize it out there because I know it from my own life.

At our soul level, the physical universe mirrors aspects of essence or of subtle energies. The blackness out there mirrors the fertile blackness of Spirit as it appears when filtered through the belly center. The luminosity out there, of the sun, stars and any other source of light, mirrors the inner luminosity of Spirit filtered through the head center.

At the level of essence, there is a direct experience of blackness, luminosity and so on. It is what is closest to immediate experience, and the words are not used as psychological metaphors as they are on the psychological level.

Three aspects

Each of these are equally important, they each fill out the picture.

Whatever arises is awake emptiness and form, Spirit arising to and as itself.

Whatever arises out there are reflections of psychological qualities in here.

And what arises out there mirrors aspects of essence and subtle energies which can be directly experienced in here.

mirroring the beauty of inner space. Take some time… can you find it in yourself? You recognize the beauty of there, because it is right there in you as well, as a closer reflection of this outer beauty than you can imagine. (And any ugliness as well, but that is for another time.)

More here at Best Space Images of 2006, Space.com

Snippet from the previous post, which in turn was a snippet and comment on the post before…

Two aspects of One Taste: emptiness and form, and within form

There is the One Taste of emptiness and form, of all as awake emptiness and form.

There is the One Taste within form, of the wider world of form as a mirror for my human self.

The three centers: seeing, feeling and loving

There is the seeing, feeling and loving of it all as Spirit, and of the wider world of form as a mirror for my human self.

Deepening into

And there is the deepening into it.

Even if a part of me is somewhat embarrassed, I can’t help looking forward to this movie with a good deal of enthusiasm: Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan, scheduled for release in November.

Besides being very funny (to some of us), the exchanges in the movie is a good example of Spiral Dynamics orange (scientific, rational, early world-centric) or higher making fun of blue (traditionalist, ethnocentric) or lower, while also exposing the prejudices we are all holding onto in various ways.

When I see the prejudices exposed by people in the movie, I see a mirror of my own myself. I do the same, although it may look different on the surface. I even do it here now: I relate to these racist and homophobiacs as they relate to people of other ethnicities and sexual orientations. When I go into beliefs about them, I see them as wrong, sometimes as subhuman, as someone who needs a good lesson.

Here is the second trailer.

During the Breema intensive in Oakland, I ran out of t-shirts and went down to a second hand clothing store to find a couple to tie me over until I had an opportunity to use a washer & dryer. Among these was a black one with a mix of Russian and English words, saying Night Watch 6-26-06 on the back. I thought that whatever it refers to, it probably fits, and was curious about what it would be. After all, the world is my mirror - reminding me of what is already right here.

Looking it up in an idle moment today, I found that Night Watch is a Russian science-fiction movie, and the date refers to the release date of the computer game.

Living among normal are the ‘Others’, who possess various supernatural powers. They are divided up into the forces of light and the forces of dark, who signed a truce several centuries ago to end a devastating battle. Ever since, the forces of light govern the day while the night belongs to their dark opponents. In modern day Moscow, the dark Others roam the night as vampires and other evil nightmares, while a “Night Watch” of light forces (among them Anton, a kind of seer and the movie’s main character) try to control them and limit their outrages. [source]

And yes, that indeed fits. According to conventional views, and really any view that divide the world into “good” and “bad”, I can find both of those in me - and it is often hidden, often masked by politeness. Which ones govern fluctuates, as day follows night follows day. Nothing new there. The movie is, as any movie, a portrait of me. (How clearly and thoroughly I see it and allows that seeing to inform my life is another matter.)

The night watch itself mirrors shadow work, including in the form of inquiry - which is catharsis, shadow work, and insight meditation rolled into one.

I find a room in the basement, and in it a machine. It brings a cat companion of mine, which died a few years ago, back to life. It is slightly surprising at first, and I see that just about anything else can be brought back - or into - life as well. I explore how to use the room and machine in a more conscious and predictable way, and find that a clear intention is the key.

This dream is similar to Solaris, the science fiction novel by Stanislav Lem (and movie by Tarkovsky) where an extraterrestrial ocean brings people from cosmonauts’ past - apparently - back to life. There was a similar image and atmosphere in the dream.

The day before, I had a deepening discovery relating to projections. I was in the bodywork intensive, noticed I seemed very tired, and saw how my mind went to lunch break and the opportunity for taking a nap then - even if this was early in the morning session. I noticed the sense of relaxation and rejuvenation was present, although placed by thoughts into the future, and decided to look for it right here instead. By noticing the same quality of relaxation and rest right here, I was able to bring a sense of being refreshed to my experience. What I was looking for was right there, in the present.

The “new” discovery was how immediate the projected material is, and how easy it is to contact it right here. It is already noticed right here, before being projected onto “other” such as past, future, others, so the only task is to notice it again, right here.

1. A quality arises and is noticed.
2. A thought is added to the quality, appearing to place it onto “other” - past, future, other. This most likely happens when the quality being here does not fit with a particular identity or a worldview.
3. I can notice this projection, and re-find the quality right here.

This seems to be exactly what is reflected in the dream.

1. The cat is alive in my memory and the qualities associated with him (innocence, open hearted, curious, courageous) are right here.
2. A story is added to these qualities placing them on him and in the past. He is dead, so the qualities are projected back into the past, appearing there only. (A “there” which is really here, and always is.)
3. I notice this process as it happens, and see the qualities right here. He is brought back to life, in the sense that the qualities I associate with him are seen right here, alive. I can find them alive right now, in my own experience and life.

This is just another reminder that anything I see “out there” is alive right here right now. The world is my mirror.

The world is my mirror. At my human level, everything I see out there - any quality I see in any human, animal, plant, fictional character, dreams, landscape, universe - is also in here. And as Big Mind, everything is I as soon as it arises.

eBuddha is exploring some of the apparent flaws of Ken Wilber, and it reminded me of how any teacher and/or pundit also are mirrors for ourselves.

I project out our insights, clarity, brilliance, compassion, awakening and so on onto the teacher, and can familiarize myself with them there. As with any other quality, it is often easier to first see them out there.

And since no person is going to live up to my idealized stories about them, they are bound to do something to shatter my illusion. Again, whatever I see in them reflects something in myself. They help me see my own shadow side.

So as with anything else, I become familiar with myself through the other, and am invited to see in myself what I see in the other.

It the teacher mirrors a conscious and healthy approach to his or her own shadow, then the process can be gradual and less painful. But if not, or if the teacher consciously sometimes use a strategy to ruffle feathers (as seems to be the case may be with Ken Wilber here) it may be a shock to his or her followers.

This is where we get to see (a) if what the teacher manifest - typically something that goes against norms - is something we are familiar with in ourselves and have found some peace with, and if not, then (b) if we recognize the signs of a shadow projection (”that is not me!”) and know how to work with it.

The world is my mirror - whether I find myself as human beings and/or as Big Mind.

As a human being, whatever I see out there reflect myself in here.

And as Big Mind, everything arising is me.

Resistance to what is

When I resist this, there is pain. It is the signal that I am excluding in my mind something that is inherently a part of what is and myself.

And resistance comes up when I attach to a thought, as any thought by necessity is different from and more limited than what is.

In other words, when I attach to a thought, I immediately create an exclusive identity, which has to be painful as it conflicts with my nature which is beyond and including any and all polarities.

What is - free from descriptions

What is is - and I am - inherently beyond and including existence and nonexistence, spirit and matter, formless and form, seer and seen, awakened and deluded, living and nonliving, life and death, culture and nature, mind and body, right and wrong, and so on.

What is is - and I am - inherently free from all this. Any name describe me, yet I am free from any name.

Mechanisms of pain

As a human being, the pain comes in many ways.

It comes from a limited repertoire. I am invited to bring out more of my qualities, yet don’t because I am not familiar with them yet or exclude them through holding onto a limited identity.

The pain is also there due to a sense of separation. I see qualities out there and not in here, and the other way around. I see myself as a separate entity. I see myself as variously better and/or worse than what I see out there. I get caught up in seeking something and avoiding other things, in my internal and external life. I get caught up in blind identifications. I get caught up in struggle.

Not seeing in myself what I see out there gives rise to pain in innumerable ways.

At the level of Big Mind, the pain simply comes from separation - from the appearance of I and Other in the field of what is, inherently absent of any I or Other.

Befriending

So no wonder we have found many ways to help ourselves heal this split in our experience of what is, this fictional life bringing about pain.

• Being with
  The simplest approach is to just be with whatever is happening. I just ask myself Can I be with what I am experiencing right now? I am with whatever is happening, including the impulse to resist and push something away. And in that way, I befriend whatever is happening. The ficitional boundary between this particular form of I and Other dissolve.

• Welcoming in
  Going a little furhter, I can actively embrace and welcome in whatever is arising. I see them as lost children wanting attention and warmth, and provide it for them.

• Inquiry
  Then there are the many forms of inquiry, including The Work. Here, I examine attachments to thoughts and allow them to unravel - and the resistance with them. What appeared as an Other and a disturbance (or worse) is now revealed as a friend. What arises may be the same (or not) but the charge went out of it.

• Process Work
  In Process Work, I unravel the process behind whatever is happening in the external or internal world. I follow the bread crumbs, and find the gift behind it. In this way too, anything happening becomes a friend - an invitation into exploring aspects of the world and myself that is new to me, and allowing boundaries to dissolve.

• Giving it over to the divine
  And I can give it over to the divine. That is where it is anyway, so I am really just giving over my experience of myself as an individual separate doer. Everything is living its own life anyway, and this is another reminder.

• Asking for it to resolve
  As a more active version of the previous one, I can ask for resolution in whatever way it needs to resolve.

  I may also ask to see whatever I need to see for it to resolve. I may ask for whatever in me that needs to unravel to unravel. I may ask for harvesting of whatever gifts and nutrients are in it.

  I see that holding an intention in this way - precise and open ended at the same time - creates a sense of a field within which this unraveling can take place.

The deepening experience of I am you (and you are I) comes from both the Absolute and the Relative levels.

Absolute

From the Absolute, I am literally you and the other way around. Everything is Big Mind, Buddha Mind, God, Spirit forming itself into the myriads of forms. Everything is emptiness dancing.

When there is a glimpse or realization of selflessness, there is no I or Other anymore. Everything just is, absent of any inherent I. And when there is no I, there is no Other. It is all just movements within the same ocean, distinctions within a seamless whole.

I - as Big Mind functioning through this human self, is you - as Big Mind functioning through that human self.

As Big Mind, everything and everybody becomes a mirror for myself. I reflect myself in everybody and everything. I fall in love with myself in everybody and everything. I get to know myself through everybody and everything.

This deepens as there is more familiarity with myself as Big Mind. It deepens as there is more familiarity with everything absent of any “I” anywhere.

Relative

From the Relative - the Absolute with an overlay of abstractions - I am also you.

I am a human being, and in myself I can find anything I see in you. You are a mirror for myself.

As a human being, everybody and everything is a mirror for myself. Anything I see in everybody and everything is also here in me. I can find any quality out there, also in here. I see it out there, exactly because I recognize it from in here.

This deepens as I become more familiar with seeing in myself what I see in you. It deepens as I continue to explore, notice, and live this. For me, it especially deepens through inquiry. It becomes more and more clear - in a very down to earth way - that I am you. Everything I see in you is also here in me.

During the dreamwork class at the Process Work center today, I was reminded of the many connections between PW, my own experiences and worldview, and the many other approached I am interested in - including the Big Mind process and Byron Katie’s inquiry, in addition to Buddhism, Zen, Taoism, shamanism, and so on.

Process Work & Big Mind process

Arny Mindell talked about the small me and big me several times, which has a close correspondence to Big Mind and the human self in the Big Mind process. I can see how he is on the edge of radical nonduality in his views, radical selflessness, radical absence of any fixed identity, playing at the edge of it before taking the plunge.

World as a mirror

I was also reminded of how I - since my teens - have seen the world and dreams: Both are there as mirrors for myself. Every quality I see “out there” - in the world, in others, in the universe, in stories, in dreams and so on - are also “in here”. As a human being, I can find in myself everything I see out there. And as Big Mind, there is no separate “I” - there is just one field, all I.

Every situation, be it in waking life or in dreams, are there to help me see this. To first expand my conscious identity, and then see how any identity is limited, limiting and just a belief in an abstraction. Every situation is here, inviting me to realize what already is - the absence of any separate I.

As my identity expands, my repertoire expands as well and I become more fluid in my life. But it is still limited, there is still a belief in abstractions, there is still I and Other, there is still the belief in the idea of “I”. There is still a resistance to what is, although it may appear subtle. There is still a delusion, still a mistaken identity. Still stuckness. Still suffering.

When the belief in the idea of “I” falls away, in the realization of selflessness and Ground awakening, the last bit of resistance falls away with it. Everything happens, revealed as without any inherent I anywhere.

Whenever I listen to Bush talk about terrorists, I cannot help having a story of how perfectly he is describing himself and the policies of his administration.

And of course, in that, I also see how I describe myself. I can find everything I see in him in myself - it may just show up in different ways and in different areas of life.

The world is my mirror.

As we explore projections and also Big Mind, there seems to be a deepening sense of it all being only for me, and only for you, and only for each of us.

Projections

In working with projections, I see that the whole world is there for me to recognize what is in myself. Something is in me, I am not aware of it yet, I project it out on something in the wider world, I see it there and can familiarize myself with it there, and can then see it in myself as well.

The world is my mirror, and everything happens just for me - inviting me to see in myself what I see out there.

Big Mind

As Big Mind, we see that this is literally true. Everything out there not only reflects something in me (a quality or impulse at my human level), it also is me. It is all the play of spirit. It is all me, and it is all for me.

For each of us

Going back to our human level, we see that this is true for each of us. The whole world is there only for each of us.

The whole world is there only for me, for you, for him, for her, for each one of us.

It has a center everywhere, and nowhere.