Loving the One by Loving Others

To allow concepts to "incubate" in the Unconscious rather than responding impulsively or impetuously to them is a good and workable idea.

The "world of illusion" is also "real," but it is real in only a secondary or relative way. A mystic who is hit by a bus will likely die; that bus was real even though it was not absolutely real. This is no cop-out or evasion, but a real distinction necessary to understand the ideas behind mysticism.

It is not the state of the dream that affects your emotion if you dream that a beloved friend slits your throat, or a Love-partner betrays you. We can indeed be emotionally affected by the characters in a dream. These apparent dream-characters do indeed affect the emotional states of the dreamer. In fact, often nothing in the dream but the characters affect your emotions. Whether your dream is about Santa Claus, your Aunt Clara, or your next-door neighbor, you are affected by their responses
and behaviors.

The dreamlike nature of the world is one foundation for the mystic's practice of "forgiveness." It is much easier to forgive an injury or insult that has no reality, but is recognized as a kind of dream. In time, the mystic holds nothing against anyone; she is free.

Because we do wake up, we can find total detachment from everything within the dream. That is why enlightenment has also been called "awakening." Nothing in a dream can control our behaviors or reactions. The mystic cultivates an altered state called "detachment," which, blended with Love, creates a positive psychological balance.

To be "detached" from all situations, events, and objects is to know a breath-taking freedom from being enslaved or controlled. So, we work voluntarily to combine this detachment with Love.

Detachment alone, without love, might create nothing but cold, dead cyberzombies.

Nevertheless, dreams do illustrate the point that "unreal" people and situations have the power to affect your emotions and feelings. If, for example, you dream that you are being tormented, pursued, ignored, betrayed,involved in scandal or sex, it can, and almost inevitably will, have an emotional impact. Unreal dreams can have real, even measurable, effects, and denial does not make this fact untrue.

Our ordinary, everyday, practical world is very different, in some rather important ways, from the Mindworld of the mystic. Balance is the challenge of living in both, and not blurring the lines that divide them.

Re the "reality" of ordinary objects such as rocks and trees: Yes, the mystic recognizes them as real, but not as absolutely real. If a huge boulder falls on her, she will recognize that it is certainly real. But, and this is only in the highly abstract Mindworld of the mystic, that boulder has no absolute reality. She (the mystic) is comparable to the physicist, who knows that boulders are made of energic microparticles that contain nothing solid; but the physicist, too, will still be crushed. Material things, as parts of Mind, have a certain reality. The argument of the mystic that they are "illusion" is only that they have no absolute reality in Mind-- they are passing, ephemeral phenomena. To be plain: The world is real, but it is only relatively real; for to be a world, there must be a Mind. (Physicists are starting to define this reality in terms of physics.)
Only Mind is primary or "absolute." One of its most popular assignations among mystics is "the Absolute."

Still, even realizing this, the mystic must also live in the ordinary, everyday, consensual reality. They (we) do not deny the material world, or its reality. We simply interpret it differently, and have different ideas ("revelations," at times) about the pneumopsychological nature of this world.

Deep down, the mystic says, in the profoundest level of the Unconscious, we are already "perfect." In Eastern traditions, this very deep Mind is the "Buddhamind," and, "You are already the Buddha." This deep, unconscious part of your mind is already fully enlightened. Only the conscious mind, manifesting as the ego, is deluded; and it is so, not due to ignorance alone, but also due to the fact that it is the will of the Creator/Dreamer.

The world is a construct of Mind that is designed to lead us to this depth, in which we are already "perfect." But before we can get there, we must turn our attention away from the world. By being so ugly and repulsive, sometimes the world can drive us into introspection and deeper Mind. This is one use that the mystic makes of this world. After going inside many times, she has gnosis or personal, immediate, experiential knowledge of the Lovemind deep within her mind. This Lovemind is the Creator/Dreamer.

But God/Goddess is so very deeply hidden in the profound ocean of the Unconscious that we don't even know that this part of the Mind exists, under normal circumstances. It is only by embracing the Way of discipline, interiority, and Love that the mystic has this gnosis revealed to her. First, most do not know that this Mind exists, and, second, it is challenging to touch it even after you know. But it has an amazing effect on selfimage. It makes you long to become its incarnation, an incarnation of Love Itself. Masters have said that we are the "sons and daughters of God." To expand this analogy, we bear the "genetic" imprint of God (Love). But, of course, this is psychological, not physical.

As mystics, we are called to the long and winding road that will, in time, result in the manifestation of this interior Lovemind. This can occur through teaching, healing, sharing, and many other forms of positive interaction with others. And, in this practical world, the "others" need nothing more than they need abundant compassion or Love.

True, from the abstract, ethereal heights of abstraction, the Mind can "Love only Itself." But, as human beings, we simply do not live in that refined and rarefied atmosphere. Instead, we usually live in droll, unimaginative, ordinary, everyday reality. This is where we must, are forced to, do our living. It is the only "place" or "world" were we can act. So, again, this is a very different world from that very elevated Mindworld of mystical musings. Although mysticism is the truth, it cannot be fully applied in every detail to our normal lives. A physicist might know that everything is made of atoms, and that atoms are made of microparticles such as leptons, hadrons, gluons, quarks, etc. She knows that the "solid" world contains nothing solid; it is all merely energy plus nothing. She knows, and has proved, that this is so. But in the "real," everyday world, this has virtually no practical implication or application.

The one Mind is a similar perspective, except that it does have a few practical advantages. Even though we know that it is true that the whole world is transformed and modified Mind, we live in the "ordinary" world of matter. We live in a realistic world populated by six thousand million human beings, and countless other creatures. This is why the only Way possible for the One fully to love Herself is through us, and we can love Her only by loving "other" creatures. This is Rule Number One, and Rule Number Two is that you cannot break Rule Number One.

Loving "others," say mystics, is the thrill, bliss, joy, and wonder of all existence-- within our present world. "Love,"by definition, often or usually implies love of "another."

This Mind is never "alone," for It is always with Itself, and, in our world, always manifesting as innumerable creatures, all of whom are thirsty and eager for Love. Loneliness might even be a specifically earthly pathology, and the solitude of the Mind is not a negative state, but one of great intrinsic ecstasy. For It is so selfsufficient, so selfcomplete, that Its solitude is a healing and rapturous condition of utter peace. In this state, It knows total contentment, fulfillment, and immeasurable satisfaction. It reaches into us through Love, and it is by Love that we can meld or merge with It-- "bringing down"its bliss into the human mind.

Also, the dream/game of the world is not imposed upon Mind. Mind deliberately, voluntarily "buys into" the dream. For It is completed by cycles of contraction and expansion, like a heartbeat. It "contracts" in the dream, as smaller minds, and expands into its true Self upon awakening.

It loves Its solitude, but It dreamed the great dream in the first place because it was also fun and exciting to be with "others." These others are secondarily "real," just as the boulder is real. Also, isolation, for Mind, is far from an existential tragedy. A Mind "alone" forever, but filled with perfect Love, would be an endless state of ecstasy. It is only because of our nano-experience of human loneliness that we might tend to see this solitude as a "bad" state.

But, back to the heare and now: The Mind experiences explosions of others, by the billions. After these hyperactive cycles, it needs time to rest, and a gentle tranquility, bottomless, settles in, taking eons, and lasting for eons. This is likely followed by yet another creative explosion.

Here is the key to the paradox: To say that the Mind loves only Itself does not imply that It cannot love "others." Indeed, the way that the world is structured, the only Way that It can love Itself is to love others. It loves in and by and through us, and we are the billions. The Way is a fulfilling Way of service; that is why it is not a path of solitudinous hermitism. Some rare examples do withdraw to caves; but the great masterteachers have all been highly involved with teaching and reaching other human beings. They never sought to seal themselves off in a negative solipsism. The mystical path is hypersocial, and friendship is one of the recognized expressions of Love.

So here is an ancillary paradox: The Mind both loses and finds Itself in loving others. It is the essence of the pleasure of the dream that the Mind can do this. The Mind loves loving, and It supremely loves loving others.

This is a core-purpose for the entire dream of the world. The Mind cannot free Itself into full liberation without learning to love others -- and, in time, all others. Yes, the Mind can love Itself without the presence of others, but It prefers to love Itself by loving others. This is Its most joyful, and preferred, way to love. It was for perfecting this art of loving that the game of the world existed in the first place. The dream of the world is dreamed so that Mind can enjoy this delightful experience of loving others.

The "delusion" of "illusion" is deliberate and voluntary. Even the selfcreated amnesia is willed upon Mind, byMind, as part of the wonderful experience. Mind, being indestructible, impervious, and invincible, leaps eagerly into the virtual adventure of the dreamworld.

If you can imagine a Mind suspended forever in void, you will realize that the Mind has to do something. And what minds do very well is dream. We can enjoy dreams with even our nanobrains, but when it comes to a Supermind, "dreaming" takes on entirely new dimensions, literally inconceivable to our three pounds of gray matter. If we find it tough to encompass or imagine ecstatic and utterly satisfying solitude, we find the psychomechanisms of the great dream even more incomprehensible.

Mystics discuss it; but we never claim to know everything about it. Its very colossal hugeness far surpasses the human mind, as Mind fills more worlds than we can contemplate. It is safe to go so far as to say, in fact, that this Megadream is nothing like the dreams that we have at night-- only a nanoscopic and shabby indication. So, any comparison at all between the Megadream and nightdreams is tenuous at best. At worst, they might be irrelevant. But they do at least hint at a tiny concept to aid our understanding.

We might be in a position analogous to amebas trying to understand the mysteries of subatomic physics.

The dream could be more fulfilling if everyone knew and loved everyone else, but that is not essential to this Megadream. In fact, learning to know each other, and then, learning to love each other, is a core-aspect of the dream-- a reason that the dream exists. We are fond of focusing on endings and goals;but the Dreamer is as fond of the processes that lead to, grow into, final results. The only factor necessary to the successful playing of the game, a successful megadream-- is that the individual-- you, or I -- improve in the art of loving. And this is one colossal challenge!

The cultivation of genuine compassion, for a creature as self-centered as human beings can be, is a whale of a task. Here's the uncomfortable catch: If you do not learn to love everyone in the dream, you cannot fully love the Dreamer. If, to use a crude illustration, you love eight out of ten people, you love the Creator only 80%. (Not technically accurate,for there are also other creatures involved). For, of course, everyone in the dream is a part of the Dreamer. Our superchallenge, as mystics, is to love even the stupid and the cruel. My greatest challenge is to love the incompetent and disastrous george bush. But, we must keep in mind that the minimal Love given even to all strangers is to wish for them a good, happy, successful life that contains Love, friendship, and inevitable enlightenment. With a little work and awareness, we can cultivate this minimal Love for everyone. This sincere wish for a good life is the very least that we can do during our earthlives.

The Mind has never, at least in the local Megadream, dreamed into being a world in which everyone loved everyone. This would be like a school that taught only people who had already graduated. Those who do not love need the education, just as the sick need the doctor. The unloving are also
the teachers of the loving "wannabes." They teach us how nonlove states are hells, and how antiagapic behaviors are dysphoric.

In a nightdream, for example, you might have two ladies; let us call them Ishtar and Aphrodite. They do not love each other. But this is just fine. It is the dream's purpose to correct this. But, yes, it is also true that they do not fully love the dreamer until they learn to love each other-- again, with at least the minimal Love. That is what the Megadream is all about-- not being "finished products," but works of art in progress. Earth is not designed for only the loving, as a school is not designed for only the educated.

To "love" an idealized, abstract image of "God" is next to worthless; for if you are not loving yourself and others, your "Love" is nothing but an operation of intellect; it is emotionally dead.

Love, of course, comes in many varieties and types; it also comes in a wide variety of powerlevels. You cannot "love" a dog the way that you "love" your mother; nor can you "love" a Love-prartner the way that you "love" your brother. So, to "love everyone" implies a galaxy-wide spectrum of loves, including the minimal Love described. It would be insanity to expect anyone to "love" everyone with the powerlevel and intensity with wich she loves her special chosen Love-partner. Strangers require a different kind, and powerlevel, of Love.

It is also possible to have a Love for God without loving everyone -- and it might be quite genuine. For karmic, genetic, or other reasons, Love might be limited. The goal is not perfection -- an unreasonable demand. The goal is for each person to find, and to express, her maximum Love -- even the maximum of the "minimal" Love described earlier. But to reach for our best implies Love for even enemies.

When your wife dreams of Santa Claus, if you were to Love her with ideal and complete Love, you would indeed love the Santa of her dreams. But we are not here talking about human dreams. The situation with the Megadream is not always completely comparable in every detail with human dreams. The "rules" might differ a little.

We do not love fear, delusion, or hatred. But nondiscrimination ["loving" evil or destructive acts] is not a valid spiritual goal. The valid goal is to love the being that expresses these negativities. So, the mystic is not called upon to "love" war, greed, child-abuse, etc., but must "love" the perpetrators.

If your wife is a painter, you do not have to love all her paintings. But, if you do truly, fully, completely love her, and everything about her, everything within her-- in the idealized "perfect" Love-- you would indeed love everything that emanated from her. You would love all her paintings. But the weakness of this analogy is that it uses the imperfect Love of human beings as a standard, and so is itself an imperfect illustration of perfect Love. For there is a huge difference between loving something on canvas and loving a human being. Besides, human beings are so imperfect that your task or assignment from the cosmos is never to love everything about anyone. Our goal is to love the Core that dwells within all.

God is always dreaming up interesting and challenging scenarios to challenge and to test our Love. Everyone loves butterflies and rainbows, but almost no one loves spiders and snakes. When we see them objectively, as biological wonders, it is easier to love them. But that does not imply that, every time I see a snake, I must go kiss it on the mouth! Again, levels and kinds of Love!:) But I can wish it no harm, cause it no harm, and wish it a happy life.

If your wife becomes ill, there is no logical implication at all that you must love the illness. You simply love your wife within the illness. With illness, you do not stop loving your beloved. In fact, illness is one of those challenges that test Love and faith. Can real Love really permit the nightmarish tragedies of our world? In most cases, karma is the explanation, and it serves Love.

Loving a woman, or agod, in a healthy way does not imply that you "collect their used kleenexes." (I sense that this was a deliberate absurdity on your part to show how foolish that you thought the whole concept to be.) Universal Love has been embraced by some of the most luminous and beautiful minds in history. Of course, we are all free to second-guess even life's greatest discoveries. But if we become too skeptical or cynical about Love, we must pay a terrible price.

Can you love and be critical? Certainly; constructive criticism can be a real expression of Love. You can with confidence criticize other people, and dogs or cats. But this is not precisely analogous to criticizing the Mind Itself. A human criticism of the Mind of Love is more akin to an ant criticizing a professor of philosophy. Criticism of Love tends to put a wall between you and Love, and so, is hadeogenic. So, your Love-relationship with Love is not accurately comparable, in every detail, with your Love-relationships with others.

To sum up, to be perfectly clear: The mystic lives in two overlapping but separate worlds simultaneously: Much of her timenergy is spent in the ordinary, everyday world of multiplicity. Here, she loves others. This is largely the world of action. Her other world is the Mindworld of meditation and ideas. In this world, there is only the One, without a second. The latter is the only reality, but her life in the ordinary world is not pretense; she is, after all, part human. Neither is her life in the Mindworld a lie; she is, after all, mind -- all mind. The challenge of practical spirituality is the balancing of the two; meanwhile, her assignment is to bring as much Love into the everyday world as possible, by loving "others."