In the beginning there was only consciousness, and all consciousness was one. Some might label this consciousness ‘God’, but it really doesn’t matter what you call it. God isn’t a man-like figure sat up in heaven on a cloud. God is far bigger than that. The human mind in its present state of limited consciousness cannot really comprehend all of what God is, but consistent thought in this direction will bring many revelations as to who and what we are and the nature of the reality we see around us. If you were to know God fully, your consciousness would be ‘God’, and reality would seem to disappear if only for a moment. To develop spiritually we need to be open to new ideas and concepts for if we do not yet know God then we still have more to learn. If we are closed to new thinking then how can we expect to make progress?
“It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.”
Ancient Greek Philosopher, Scientist and Physician, 384 BC-322 BC
At some point part of this consciousness split off from itself and became two. The singularity which is God remained intact and complete, but now there were two new and opposite concepts in addition. The new concepts are also a part of the whole, but taken individually in isolation they formed something new. This is the trinity, a theme you will find in many belief systems. The Big Bang, or other similar concepts that science has come up with is a physical manifestation, an echo of the creation of duality.
Many belief systems contain the concept of good and evil, but what is good, what is evil, and who decides? Good and evil is a result of duality, and all duality came from the singularity. In balance good and bad is neutral, they becomes one and cancel each other out. As an example you may forget your mobile phone on leaving the house and go back to fetch it. As a result you may miss your train making you late and this you perceive as being bad. However, consider that the train then crashes and the chances are you would have been injured, or possibly even killed. Is the fact that you forgot your phone and missed your train still bad, or was it in fact a good thing? It’s all about context. The same action in a different setting may be perceived in a completely different way.
Taken as whole, reality must be balanced. To create an extreme you must split the extreme off from its whole. All other possibilities must be isolated from it, thereby at the same time creating its opposite. What is the point of ‘good’ fighting ‘evil’, when in actual fact to become whole they must be reconciled? Fighting only serves to keep them apart; we must find ways to join them together.
Different people perceive the same things differently. We are attracted to things that we love, but being different parts of the whole we all love different things. Some people are risk takes, whereas other people prefer to ‘play it safe’. Someone who doesn’t like to take risks may think that jumping out of an aeroplane at 30,000 feet is a stupid idea. It is something that they would hate to do and they would probably prefer not to contemplate it. A risk taker on the other hand might live for the day they get the chance to make their next jump. They love the adrenaline, it makes them feel alive. They would find the life of someone who hates risk to be boring and unfulfilling. We are all very different, but add everything up and we become balanced and whole. We can be balanced as individuals, but even individuals who take things to their most extreme when taken in the context of the whole only serve to complete the balance.
Since we are attracted to things that we love, the way back to reconciliation is to find ways in which to love every part of the whole. We can do this by recognising the role that each part has to play. Rather than seeing something in isolation, see it as part of the whole. Where might it have come from, and what might its future might be?
Maybe you hear about someone who has committed a terrible and violent crime. Is there something in their past which has led them down this path? Might they have learned that violence is a way of keeping themselves safe, or even a way of providing for themselves out of fear of lack? If we had started from the same place with exactly the same experiences can we honestly say that we would not have perpetrated the same crime? We originated from the same source, how could we have failed to arrive at the same point if we had followed the same path? Might that person go on to learn a different way of being, might they learn from their past? Maybe there are resources we can give that person to help them feel more complete, more balanced. We could offer them alternative ways of dealing with situations that bring them the outcome they desire without the need for taking from others by force. No matter how bad someone appears to be, what depths they have sunk to, everyone has the potential to turn their life around in a way that allows reconciliation with the whole. No one is beyond redemption or beyond all hope. Sooner or later everyone will feel compelled to return to the source, it is a natural force that no one part can resist.
©2012 Chris Jones
Permission is given to share this article in full or in part as long as nothing has been changed or altered in any way, credit is given to the writer, and a link to the writer’s website is included.