Fragmentation as Life

This world is a direct result of the actions we have taken through fragmentation. It is a result of what we believe, and how we have acted upon those beliefs. If a virus spread throughout the population of the earth, resulting in the loss of belief, would fragmentation continue to exist in human beings? If there were no beliefs, could fragmentation continue to be sustained?

12 thoughts on “Fragmentation as Life”

  1. I know what you mean, but we’re talking about Krisna and co. Blue skin as they don’t need to breathe for prana. That said, they had growing and learning to do. But they did not forget their divinity through birth.

    There are many memories there but are only remembered when I scroll back. In this case I scrolled back to the appropriate time and looked to see if there was a related memory. I would not say they are “my memories” – they are simply memories that have some association – they follow a thread back from the present. They are not facts but I have occasionally looked up some verifiable detail and found it accurate. It is simply information which is occasionally interesting or relevant. For the most part, it has no value.

    No charge anymore, although originally they arose related to a charge so were often dramatic.

    I know what you man about an individual. In a discussion after a talk this evening, someone mentioned that they felt like a probe, their body/mind moving through the world. This was meaningless for me. ‘Body’ is an object in the field of perception. There are memories there, but it’s more like a library than a possession now. A card catalog.

    Memory is very curious though. Recently, I saw a memory arise, then saw the mind begin to edit it, imagine something better. I have also observed a thread of the past being released, causing the past itself to change. Revisionist history, it all is.

    On your second paragraph question, both. Experiencing is not being.

  2. Davidya,

    It is interesting to consider, because if one is, so called, “born enlightened,” they would not be enlightened. We have ideas of enlightenment, but a child in that situation would not. Do you know what I mean?

    People always say, “I know what it is, but I can’t get it,” or, “I listen to all of these gurus, and I know what it is supposed to be, but I can’t do it.” Well, is it they know it and can’t do it, or they can’t do it because they know it?

    I have to take your word for what comes before. I have no memory of feeling separate, or some sense of that individuality. There are the memories, but they don’t seem to be used in the same way anymore. There is no charge (if that is the right word) attached to them.

    My understanding of the old Vedic texts is that in a golden age, one still goes through ego formation but it is not dominant so may not be fracturing.

    Ah, that is it. Without fragmentation. Whether it has happened or not, I do not know. It is supposition either way. And I am doubtful that it would come about due to some genetic factor, as it must be available to all, at any given time.

    We both were born, and seem to have grown up in the average way, all experiences aside. I have the memories of what may have happened. I am sure there was someone, involved in these things. There must have been this hyper-attached individual in there somewhere. But while the memories of events may be, the memory of the individual has gone.

    I remember all sorts of things, but i do not know how I remember them. It is frustrating to sit and try to remember the remembering.

  3. Is it necessary? It does not seem to be. But I don’t know anyone who has not.
    The only example I can think of is old stories of avatars who were born enlightened. My understanding of the old Vedic texts is that in a golden age, one still goes through ego formation but it is not dominant so may not be fracturing. It is said that awakening cannot be supported by a growing nervous system so awakening flowers in the late teens/ early 20’s. So far, I only know one person who has fully awoken in his 20’s.

    hmm – if I go into deep memory for such a time, there was a sense of being separate for a time, a sense of becoming individual, but it had a character of being an illusion. There was actually odd games used at a certain age to make the experience clear so it could be moved past. It soon passed. It was a very small period of time in the larger picture as lives were much longer then. But I know how you feel about such things (laughs)

  4. Davidya,

    I see what you mean by the word “natural.” But it is not inevitable. That might be a better word to use in this case.

    Whether something exists or seems to happen repeatedly means nothing. One cannot expect it to continue.

    Is there a small or big relationship? Within fragmentation, can there be relationship at all?

    Thus, it is a natural process for the ego to arise, to draw the person away from mother and family.

    But is it necessary? If one did not occur, would the other not occur? Why is it necessary? I am not asking whether it happens or not. Rather, is it necessary?

  5. Takuin
    As the experience of fragmentation exists, it must be natural. If we look at a concrete example, we can see what takes place. When a baby is born, it does not differentiate itself from mother. Over time, it begins to see itself as increasingly separate. Then individuality arises and the ‘terrible two’s’. (laughs) An effort to break away. A similar cycle happens in the teen years with a breaking away from ‘family’. But note that as we step out of unity, we step into a relationship with a larger world. Breaking the small relationship allows a bigger relationship. Fragmentation occurs in the breaking away. Thus, it is a natural process for the ego to arise, to draw the person away from mother and family. The issue is in getting stuck there. The process is left incomplete – a stage of disintegration not followed by a new level of higher integration. Thus the effects of fear, and so forth.

    Most humans kind of stalled out at that level of development. But now, things are stepping up a notch (or so) (or so) ;-)

  6. Eric,

    Not necessarily the perceived world, but the fragmentation responsible for the separation of humanity. The mine and yours; my religion, my country, my politician, my belief, versus yours; or anything that may keep us in this seemingly continual state of defense.

    We live within these fragments, and this is responsible for great suffering in the world. I was asking, without the beliefs to drive that separation, what would happen?

    The perceived world, as you have pointed out, exists only in the mind. Some also call it the phenomenal world. This perceived world is an active perception with the interpreter; someone seeing and judging, evaluating and projecting. But this active participant is essentially blind to the world as it is.

    The world, as it is, is untouchable. Our thoughts about it are insignificant. This is the world we place our thoughts and fantasies on top of, perhaps out of some need to feel control in an otherwise uncontrollable life. But when our attempts to control fail, and they inevitably do, our “world” seems to fall apart.

    But please, do not take my word for it. :)

    Anyhoo that’s my belief. And since it is all predicated on suffering I can only say BRING ON THAT VIRUS!

    Haha. That is good. But of course, the virus would remove that belief. So what would you do then?

  7. Are you asking if there were no beliefs would this perceived world be sustained? If this world is a product of ones belief in separation (read fragmentation) then how could it? Perhaps I don’t understand the question, but to me it’s like asking “could this house of bricks stand if there were no such things as bricks”.

    I have been taught, and one experience has shown me that, this perceived world is only inside the one mind being projected onto a field of thought. The illusion is sustained through the belief in it’s being real and suffering, which nurtures the ego, sustains that belief in it’s reality. Did that make sense or is it just a circular argument?

    Anyhoo that’s my belief. And since it is all predicated on suffering I can only say BRING ON THAT VIRUS!

  8. Davidya,

    Ah, I see what you are saying. But a question arises. Do you think fragmentation is a natural state? (And I am not saying you implied it is from your comment.)

    If the fragmentation is there, with no doing on our part, then it must be a natural part of the organism. If there are no ideas of what goes where, good and bad, right and wrong, should and should not, higher and lower, and yet still there is fragmentation, it should be a natural phenomena.

    It must be questioned. If we look into this world, with all of the division from every possible angle, it is easy for one to see it and say, “Yes, humanity is this way and there is no escape. It is human nature.” But why do we have to accept it?

    I can look and see that this is going on. It is easy to see. It is factual. But that really means nothing to me. It is too unreasonable to accept that this idiocy has to continue; that it must be a natural part of life.

    It may go on. And that is fine. But I can see no reason for it to continue. It is completely un-natural in the sense we are speaking.

    It may continue forever, but there is no room for it here. I think you understand what I am trying to say. (And again, I am not implying that you feel this way.) I am just not prepared to say fragmentation is a natural part of this organism.

  9. I think fragmentation is not the result of beliefs but rather beliefs are the result of fragmentation. When the world seems fractured, mind tries to stitch it together. Further beliefs may then be loaded on top to give this impression.

    However, when awareness opens sufficiently, then those old beliefs no longer serve and it is time to clear them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>