Posts Tagged ‘eternal’

The Eternal Rules: Learn them, live them, & rule your world

June 25, 2014

The Eternal Rules: Learn them, live them, & rule your world


Things change. Patterns begin and then end. Why? Because the Eternal creates changing forms and patterns, such as distinct words and distinct sounds.

In other words, the Eternal is what rules. The Eternal rules.

Eternal rules and changing rules

Consider that there are rules that eventually change as well as rules that are eternal. The rules that are eternal could be presumed to guide the changing of the “temporary” rules.

However, some assertions may be presented indicating that there could exist a fundamental randomness or disorder. Isn’t that absurd on its face?

Order is self-evident

Language involves order. So does everything else.

The ability to recognize order is self-evident. Further, there are occasions in which a particular observer may not identify any particular order. Or, past patterns may be presumed to apply to a new case. Such initial interpretations may be imprecise, leading to confusion, which simply means an awareness that a prior presumption is inconsistent with present experience.

Confusion is a normal part of the learning process. Those who attempt to avoid any experience of confusion may also be delaying their biggest opportunities to learn.

What are The Eternal Rules?

#1 The rule of respect     

Respect all rules. Whether or not you recognize any particular rule, the rules still rule. However precisely or imprecisely you understand a rule, it still rules. However much you scream and shout and have heroic tantrums or shed tears about the rules, the rules still rule. (Of course, that is no reason not to occasionally test any alleged “rules,” right?)

The rule of attention   We only notice things to which we give attention.
The rule of interpretation   Interpretation is a creative, imaginative act in which “whatever we notice” is filtered through what we perceive to be the rules. What we notice is creatively re-organized by what we perceive to be “the rules of how life works.” In other words, our values organize our interpretation of whatever we notice. Our values interpret what we notice and then categorize and label “what is happening.”

The rule of experience    What we experience is our interpretation of what we notice. (What we experience is however we relate to what we notice.)



The rule of response    All actions are responsive to an experience.



The rule of action       Actions are what produce results. (Actions rule results)

#2 The rule of perception     Your perception of “what the rules are” will organize your interpretations, then your experience of your interpretations, then your responses to your experience of your interpretations, and finally the results produced by your responses to your experience of your interpretations. In short, what you perceive to be “the rules of how life works” could be important. It could be so important that some people might want to encourage certain perceptions of what the rules could be (or even discourage certain perceptions of what the rules could be).
#3 The rule of action       Actions are what produce results. (Actions rule results)

#4 The rule of response    All actions are responsive to an experience.

#5 The rule of experience    What we experience is our interpretation of what we notice.

#6  The rule of interpretation   Interpretation is a creative, imaginative act in which whatever we notice is filtered through what we perceive to be “the rules of how life works.” In other words,  our values organize our interpretation of whatever we notice.

#7 The rule of attention   We only notice things to which we give attention.

#8  The rule of capacity   We only can focus our attention in accord with our capacity for sensory impressions.
#9 The rule of language   Language has the single purpose of influence. Language rules over (or organizes) attention, which rules over what we notice. Further, language has special influence over the process of interpretation, which is a fundamentally linguistic process. Guided by language, our interpretations rule or organize our experiences (for all that we ever experience is our interpretations of what we notice, not what we notice itself).  Still guided by language, our interpretive experiences rule our response to those interpretive experiences. Further guided by language, our responses to our interpreted experiences produce our results.

#10 The rule of influence     The most profound changes only result from the developing of one’s capacity for language. Through improved logical acuity and improved linguistic flexibility, not only can new patterns of organizing attention arise, but the momentum of past interpretations can collapse, resulting in the arising of what may seem to be a rather shocking phenomenon that some call “the rebirth of curiosity.”

#11 Did I mention yet that “things can change” (and indeed may have done so already)?

#37 Please disregard any ridiculous speculations that I’m not very good at math… as far as you know.

#4,962,351 The rule of The Eternal

Everything that begins also ends, except of course for anything that is eternal.



parody: blame exhausts the naive

March 18, 2012
The exhaustion of blame?
Get Behind Me Satan

Image via Wikipedia

To all of my formerly favorite ladies (i.e. past romantic partners), I blamed you for ruining the perfect relationship that I pretended to have with you. You sucked at pretending. You should have been more pretensive and naive, you know, like me. Plus, you should not have been so truthful. You owed it to me to be a better liar, yes, so that our relationship would save my life from hell and be my bridge to heaven. I had a perfect plan for my own personal salvation, and then you personally failed me. You were such a huge disappointment, Plus, you personally are still Satan incarnate, yes, every single one of you. You betrayed me. Well, at least I was quite embarrassed at how things went with you.
To all the people that have lost any amount of net worth (prosperity) by not heeding my clear and repeated warnings about real estate markets and stock markets, I blamed you for not staying as wealthy as you were, by which I mean… not getting much more wealthy with me, by which I really mean… not making me wealthy. No, you are not Satan, but you sure did remind me of her a lot. You betrayed yourself. Plus, you should have been much smarter and responsible, you know, like me.
Actually, maybe I have been just a little pretensive, slightly idiotic and marginally irresponsible. That’s like being only slightly pregnant. So, what I really mean by this is that I have been investing– over and over and over again- in blame. See how conscious I am now?
Yes, I invested exactly how I did in various romantic relationships and various business prospects and opportunities, and now I appreciate learning through them with you, so thank you. I completely forgive you for being the way you obviously should not have been- well, at least, I am open to you earning my generous forgiveness from me eventually.
However, as for all that investing in blame: I admit that it was irresponsible and idiotic of me. I really should not have been so pretensive, idiotic and irresponsible… and naive. I’m totally to blame for that- totally.
The Fountain of Eternal Life in downtown Cleve...

The Fountain of Eternal Life in downtown Cleveland, Ohio, with 200 Public Square in the background (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I mean: it’s just horrible how I was to me. Plus, I totally blame myself for blaming myself.

I was way too self-destructive. I was way too negative. I really should not have been so much like I have been. Plus, I should really stop being so hard on myself, you know, hypothetically. I should really stop judging me, you know, someday. That reminds me: I’m really stating to remind me of Satan, huh?
By the way, to all the beliefs I have had about how life should be different from how it is, I blamed you for me believing in you. You are the reasons that I have been addicted to all that drama. Plus, I can’t wait to get rid of you so I can get to heaven, you know, soon.
What? Do I still believe that this is hell? Are you kidding me? Of course this is hell! Just look around, seriously.
Here is proof. Ready? Okay, everywhere you look, there is another Satan, there is more evil, there are new things being how they obviously should not be. Am I right or what?
Oh, and people are so ashamed and resentful and way way way too negative. Life is fundamentally annoying. I had a perfect life basically right up until my life started.

That’s right. Everything was perfect until that one thing happened… and you know the thing that I am talking about- or at least you should. Anyway, as I was saying… before anything happened to me, then obviously nothing bad had ever happened to me because

The Great Satan (by Latuff).

Image via Wikipedia

nothing at all had happened to me.

Back then, hell did not even exist. Hell is when life seems to happen to me. Wherever I am, there is hell- kind of like my own shadow,- can you hear what I am saying?
Who I am is a collection of beliefs of how life should be, how I should be, how I actually am, you know- as distinct from how I am obviously not. Hell is the linguistic separation of everything into these two inherent fundamental unquestionable categories: me over here and my life over there.

All I am saying is that my life is hell. I’m perfect. My life, though… it’s hell. If it wasn’t for how amazing I am, I probably would not

This Is Not Happening
Image via Wikipedia

have even survived this long, you know, with my life happening to me like that.

But I know that I should not be proud. I should be humble. Basically, I should be how I should be, you know what I’m saying? Plus, I should not be so much like how I should not be- obviously!
It’s a very serious problem. I’m working on it.
I’m thinking that I should have me fixed by sometime next week; yeah, let’s go with Tuesday at noon (local time). I sure hope though that I do not disappoint me again. That would really suck, huh?
So, my life is what seems to be a series of problems happening to me. Living does not require me to be here at all. However, clearly, obviously, living is here, aren’t we?
When I personally am not here, living just keeps going on by itself, you know, like it always has been. When the personal identity is absent- or, we could say, when the ego dies (or matures?) – then eternal life is happening already, which would make sense for anything that we might call eternal. If eternity has not already started, then that would just be silly.
However eternal life is not happening at any particular time. Also, eternal life is not happening to anyone in particular. When no one is here, eternal life is obviously happening the only time it ever always is: right now.
Typing happens. Reading happens. Scrolling the window down the webpage happens. Then something else happens… anything else, one thing at a time.
Living happens. Living just happens however it is actually happening, whenever it does, wherever it does, even perhaps sometimes as an identity that identifies itself in opposition to life itself and says “life is happening to me.” At least, that is certainly possible.
So, no one is here, except of course if someone suddenly shows up. I sure hope that doesn’t happen to any of us, though. That would just be hell, you know, hypothetically. We really should take some serious precautions to avoid that.
And when you read the word “precautions,” I know what you were thinking, because I know that you have a dirty mind. You read the word “precautions” and then you immediately thought: condoms.
That is not what I typed, though. Would you please PLEASE stop being so presumptive and… and, you know, dramatic! It’s totally making my perfect life hell.

Image via Wikipedia

You do know that everything would be totally heaven if it just wasn’t for you showing up all uninvited like this, right? You’re Satan. Plus, as if that were not bad enough, you have a very dirty mind.
I wish, you know.. basically you should just lighten up! Everything would be fine then, you know, soon.
The above was published in the first hours of December 4, 2009, as a culmination of sorts of this “happening” of September 9, 2009:

Soon (Bridge to Heaven)


Related articles

the birth of the eternal

December 22, 2011

The development of language and the death of the mortal

Perhaps language developed a long time ago. Then, perhaps a particular pattern in language was later formed and then continued for a while, like for instance this sentence, which only exists in language, but then suddenly and permanently stopped.
Now, the beginning and ending of something in language is just how language works. Sentences begin and end. Words begin and end. Sounds and shapes of letters and other linguistic symbols like numbers or punctuation marks are all distinct, isolated bits that have boundaries and beginnings and endings.

So, the fact that one thing ends and then another thing begins is really just a contrivance in language. Language makes up categorical boundaries and then names the two categories as distinct, like day and night. But are day and night really isolated (or “opposites”)? Does one end and then the other begins? Is there ever a time when there is neither day nor night?
For instance, we can say that day ends and night begins. However, day and night are a single cycle that language divides in to a pair, refering to a categorical distinction between the shifting positional relationship between the sun and a particular location on a particular planet.

Thus, day does not actually end. Day just moves. More precisely, the earth is turning and that turning puts different locations of the surface of the earth in the place called day (facing the sun).
Again, day and night are technically not times. They are just relationships between the rotating of the planet and the light of the sun.

So, in a particular place, language can refer to the ending (in time) of the day (as a time). However, day just ends for that place at dusk. Day actually continues, as dusk at one horizon (longitude) is dawn at another horizon (longitude).
Day and night are eternal, but various places move in and out of day and night cyclically. However, language can refer to the ending or beginning of day. As a convenience in language, the phrase “the end of the day” is quite useful. However, that does not make it true in any absolute sense.
Day and night are not isolated. They are not opposites. They are just categorical distinctions in language. Day does not replace night and night does not replace day. The planet just rotates to face the day (the sun) with one section of the planet and to face another section of planet away from the sun (toward the night or “toward the stars” where they are visible without being outshined by the sun).

A visit to the polar regions of this planet (like North of the Arctic circle) reveals that, in fact, there are places on this planet that do not conform to the popular notions of day and night. In those places, there is no such thing (functionally) as day and night. Those “times” of facing toward the sun or away from it are called “summer” and “winter.”
Still, there are cyclic 24-hour variations during the two annual seasons of winter and summer in which the specific brightness of the sun varies. However, those variations are more like the variation between dusk and midnight. Further, in those regions, we could say that there are only two seasons and no such thing as day and night. Or, we could say that one annual cycle of seasons is equal to one cycle of the day and night “of the Gods.”

Along the equator of the earth, there are day and night, but no seasons. At the poles of the earth, there are two seasons, but no day and night.
So, day and night and the seasons are not times. They are relationships of place. Most fundamentally, they are words in language.

Look around you. Is it day or night where you are? What season are you at?
You are not in daytime or in winter. You are at daytime and at winter. They are places. Winter in the northern hemisphere of the earth is simultaneous with summer in the southern hemisphere of the earth. Day in America is night in Asia. There is no beginning and no end to day and night or seasons, except in language. Those relationships of place are eternal.
Now, I am not especially interested in any of that and you might not be either. However, there is a relevance to bringing all of that to attention.
The relevance is that you and I are conveniences in language. Just as day is not really a time, but a relationship, there is really no such thing as you or I, except as relationships in language.
Likewise, there is no hand without a larger organism to grow it. There is no earthling without an earth and sun to produce it. There is no sun at all… except in language.

Consider: what is the boundary of the sun? Is the sun far away in space? Have you ever said “I am going out in to the sun now?” Have you ever said “let’s close the curtains to keep the sun out of here?”
The sun is a formation in language. The sun does not exist outside of language. The sun does not have a discrete physical boundary or location.
We can say that all of the planets are “in the sun” or we can say that all of the planets revolve around the sun distant from it. Because “sun” is just a word, either use of the word is useful.
We can think of the sun as a place (distant from a particular observer) or as a process. We can refer to the sun as a measurable distinction in heat, or in light, or in various forms of invisible radiation such as infrared or ultraviolet, including radio waves, sound waves, microwaves, X-rays, and so on.

Ultimately, sun is a linguistic unit that we can say corresponds to various sensory capacities of various organs of various creatures. Plants have photovoltaic capacities to convert sunlight to energy. Of course, sunlight is already energy, so that is a rather weird thing to say, but again it is a useful construction in language.
The sun lives through it’s various parts, including various planets and the life of those planets (or on those planets). Of course, all of those words are also just categories in language.
I can consider myself a unit operating within an organ of the sun that is labeled “humanity” (as distinct from the organ or organic system called vegetation). Just as the brain has no functionality without the other nerves, there is no real functional boundary between my nerve cells, my organs, my organism, the earth on which my organism (and the linguistic subcategories of me) rely, and even the sun and the rest of the living universe.

Categorical distinctions in language are just linguistic conveniences. Seasons do not really begin and end. They are linguistic labels for distinct aspects of a single cycle. We could divide the annual cycle in to 4 seasons or 2 or any other number. The complete cycle itself is fundamental to seasons, not the particular number of verbal categories in to which we divide the cycle. The number of linguistic divisions is merely arbitrary.
We could divide the annual cycle in to 4 parts or in to 12. If we divide them in to 12 and call those months, it is silly to say that 12 is the right number of divisions and 4 is the wrong number of divisions. The divisions are just linguistic distinctions. They have no inherent reality except as linguistic units that correspond to a single cyclic pattern of time and of place.

More specifically, while the cycle of day and night is obvious from the equator, and the cycle of the seasons is obvious from temperate latitudes of the earth, neither of those is especially useful at the polar regions. So, people who traveled the entire planet (perhaps including the poles), may have found it useful to divide the annual cycle in to 12 units, roughly correlating to lunar cycles.
So, instead of using day or winter to mark the varying relationship between the sun and a particular place on the planet, the language of months (or zodiac signs) add a third element. Through the course of the year (which is just a pattern in language), the sun’s position relative to the earth can be measured against a set of star groups or constellations.
Alternatively, the annual cycle can be marked by the stellar backdrop at which the moon is full (directly opposite of the sun from the viewpoint of the earth). The moon makes twelve cycles of lunation phase each year, with one phase beginning in each of the twelve zodiac constellations.

However, one may ask, is it better to divide the annual cycle in 12 or in to 4 or what? Again, that question is actually a rather odd formation in language. Dividing something in to 4 linguistic units or 12 (or 365) is for different purposes. Each purpose has it’s own number of categorical divisions.
So, there are four equal parts of each year as well as 12 nearly equal parts as well as about 365 equal parts. All of those divisions in symbolic language are valid and useful.

And here is where it gets really interesting. To divide life in to individual units of linguistic identity (“I”) is one valid, useful operation in language. However, fundamentally, “I” does not exist any more than summer or June, which are just arbitrary words or units in language. “I” is just a categorical distinction, a relationship, a convenience.
Recognize the operation of language as “I,” which recognizing is the death of the mortal (which, technically, never really existed anyway except as a label in language). You are not really an isolated ego of linguistic alienation. You do not really exist.

Language is simply operating. Language claims the categories of humanity and non-humanity, left and right, mortal and immortal, “I” and “not I.” Just as “left” cannot die because left is just a unit in language, the same is true of sun and day and “I.”
The eternal cannot be born. The eternal is always here.
To recognize that you are the eternal movement of language can be called “the birth of the eternal.” Though a useful phrase in language, it is also nonsense, but so is “the death of the mortal,” there is no mortal outside of language.

Language is simply operating. The sun is not even shining. Language makes up that there is a sun and a witness of the sun and that it’s shining light and so then language says “I am over here and I see the sun shining, which is way over there.”
No! I am the sun.
Language declares the life of the sun. Language declares the life of the mortal. Without language, there is no sun and no mortal.

The sun does not give life to the earth and the earth does not give life to the earthling. Language divides one thing in to 4 or 12 or 365. Language may CLAIM that the sun gives life to the earth, but from where? Are the sun and the earth really isolated? Outside of language, what is the boundary between the sun and the earth?
What is the boundary between the front of a piece of paper, the back of that same piece of paper, and the edges of the paper? Front, back, and edges are just distinctions in language. Paper is also just a distinction in language.
When language notices the operating of language, that can be called the birth of the eternal, the death of the mortal, the creation of life, and the developing of language. Further, once language notices the operating of language, language may or may not stop claiming to be something other than language.

Language may say “I am worried about surviving and I am even more afraid of dying.” Language may say almost anything, though of course language cannot actually say anything, because if I know one thing for sure, I know that there is no such thing as language. There is just me, and I cannot be language becasue I say that I am not language. I am over here and language is way over there and I can notice it happening, like happening to me. Language controls me and victimizes me and tricks me in to pretending that there is a devil and that I am not language and that language does not even really exist.
By the way, if there is one thing that I know for sure, it is that God is omnipotent and the creator of all things, which is why God is terrified that the devil might defeat the influence of language and ruin everything. I mean, what if the devil makes a time machine and goes back in time and stops God from making up the devil? Then what?!?!

%d bloggers like this: