Back in the states...
Posted on Aug 12th, 2008
by
Alan
what to say?
I used to really quite dislike the biblical story of Job. but it is true, the way the universe moves is not really for us always to know.
And the reasons things happen may not be the reasons we thought.
For me, Barbados is over. It was...
And ultimately very much different from what I had expected. As was the relationship that brought me there. I blame no one and nothing.
Blame is useless.
There's beauty everywhere...
And while I ran, headlong, into a situation that ultimately was very ill-fitting, it was simply to be so: my victory, here, will be the continued ability to live full-out, to continue, as I have, to live what I believe.
A
I used to really quite dislike the biblical story of Job. but it is true, the way the universe moves is not really for us always to know.
And the reasons things happen may not be the reasons we thought.
For me, Barbados is over. It was...
And ultimately very much different from what I had expected. As was the relationship that brought me there. I blame no one and nothing.
Blame is useless.
There's beauty everywhere...
And while I ran, headlong, into a situation that ultimately was very ill-fitting, it was simply to be so: my victory, here, will be the continued ability to live full-out, to continue, as I have, to live what I believe.
A
Things that do not happen when a gay person hits on straight ones
Posted on Jun 29th, 2008
by
Alan
I read an article just now about a gay-rights parade in a foreign country... another situation where homosexuality in that nation is outlawed, meaning, gay sex carries a ten year sentence, and gigantic social stigmas. It's like this so many places...
It's so sad to me that in so many of our nations, we judge based on this... to me, any homophobia is basically one group saying to another: 'look, you have to love exactly who we love and how we say you should love them. Or else.' It's ridiculous.
Think of it: how silly that we hurt or stigmatize others for loving who they want to?????? How can love ever, ever be a bad thing?
It comes down to fear, I guess. So I thought I'd share some stories. I, shockingly, a straight fellow, have had gay friends! I know, I know. How did I manage? Well, it was easy... I just treated them like human beings, albeit human beings who, like many other people I've known, really liked things that I had no interest in. With my particular friends, these things included: the movie "dreamgirls," Madonna albums, the search for the perfect, or 'face-giving,' pair of boots, use of the phrase "gives face" in general, and, OK, to be obvious about it, sex with other men.
But wait! My story gets even more shocking.... see, I've gone all the way into the territory the homophobe fears. Some of the gay people I knew-- prepared to be shocked, if you are afraid of such people-- developed crushes on me.
I couldn't tell you why. I suppose, in their words, they found me 'hot.' That was ok. I did not mind them finding me hot. They found me hot, I reiterated my preference for internal sexual organs, and that was that. It was all good. They appeared not to have any mind-control ability that would allow their finding me hot to make it impossible for me to avoid gay sex.
Now, however, I see some usefulness in this occurrence... for perhaps I can alert the world that indeed, some things do not happen (in my experience, at least) when a gay man hits on a straight one.
The gay person whips out his/her genitals and screams "halleluja!" (or something else)
Ok, now, I'm guessing on this as a fear of the homophobe...but I don't think it happens much, and it never did to me. The larger point is: cultural rules of engagement do not vanish when gay meets straight. One has no need to fear this happening.
The Straight person suddenly becomes gay against their will.
Science has noticed sexual preference is not contagious. In fact, the very continued existence of homosexuality proves this, because frankly, considering how often it has been persecuted, I don't think it would have survived if preference could be passed on like a flu virus. I think gay people in the countries where it's illegal, for example, would be busy catching 'straightness' in order to live their lives free of persecution. Makes you think, doesn't it?
The Straight person becomes "gay by association"
Ok, yes, walking around new york with male friends wearing tight pants and fabulous boots did make people wonder about me occasionally. Fortunately I was big enough not to give a damn. And it's not like I had a scarlet 'G' branded into my forehead... and if anything it got me quite close to many women who were my friends' friends. For the uber-straight male, in fact-- not that this was me-- having gay male friends can be quite a bonus.
Aliens come down to earth to torture and kill the straight man and his friends and his family for breaking the intergalactic accords known as the Grhlfgbackat agreement.
Ok... seriously, WHAT THE FUCK????? Why can't we allow people to love who they want to love, and be happy for them?????????????? What's wrong with it? Variety is the spice of life, people. My wish for the future is the day when we stop being scared of our differences.
It's so sad to me that in so many of our nations, we judge based on this... to me, any homophobia is basically one group saying to another: 'look, you have to love exactly who we love and how we say you should love them. Or else.' It's ridiculous.
Think of it: how silly that we hurt or stigmatize others for loving who they want to?????? How can love ever, ever be a bad thing?
It comes down to fear, I guess. So I thought I'd share some stories. I, shockingly, a straight fellow, have had gay friends! I know, I know. How did I manage? Well, it was easy... I just treated them like human beings, albeit human beings who, like many other people I've known, really liked things that I had no interest in. With my particular friends, these things included: the movie "dreamgirls," Madonna albums, the search for the perfect, or 'face-giving,' pair of boots, use of the phrase "gives face" in general, and, OK, to be obvious about it, sex with other men.
But wait! My story gets even more shocking.... see, I've gone all the way into the territory the homophobe fears. Some of the gay people I knew-- prepared to be shocked, if you are afraid of such people-- developed crushes on me.
I couldn't tell you why. I suppose, in their words, they found me 'hot.' That was ok. I did not mind them finding me hot. They found me hot, I reiterated my preference for internal sexual organs, and that was that. It was all good. They appeared not to have any mind-control ability that would allow their finding me hot to make it impossible for me to avoid gay sex.
Now, however, I see some usefulness in this occurrence... for perhaps I can alert the world that indeed, some things do not happen (in my experience, at least) when a gay man hits on a straight one.
The gay person whips out his/her genitals and screams "halleluja!" (or something else)
Ok, now, I'm guessing on this as a fear of the homophobe...but I don't think it happens much, and it never did to me. The larger point is: cultural rules of engagement do not vanish when gay meets straight. One has no need to fear this happening.
The Straight person suddenly becomes gay against their will.
Science has noticed sexual preference is not contagious. In fact, the very continued existence of homosexuality proves this, because frankly, considering how often it has been persecuted, I don't think it would have survived if preference could be passed on like a flu virus. I think gay people in the countries where it's illegal, for example, would be busy catching 'straightness' in order to live their lives free of persecution. Makes you think, doesn't it?
The Straight person becomes "gay by association"
Ok, yes, walking around new york with male friends wearing tight pants and fabulous boots did make people wonder about me occasionally. Fortunately I was big enough not to give a damn. And it's not like I had a scarlet 'G' branded into my forehead... and if anything it got me quite close to many women who were my friends' friends. For the uber-straight male, in fact-- not that this was me-- having gay male friends can be quite a bonus.
Aliens come down to earth to torture and kill the straight man and his friends and his family for breaking the intergalactic accords known as the Grhlfgbackat agreement.
Ok... seriously, WHAT THE FUCK????? Why can't we allow people to love who they want to love, and be happy for them?????????????? What's wrong with it? Variety is the spice of life, people. My wish for the future is the day when we stop being scared of our differences.
Random blog: 1.5 movie reviews
Posted on Jun 28th, 2008
by
Alan
These movies are movies I saw in a a drive-in tonight. I am not in the states, which means these films may not even be playing in the states. I'm reviewing them anyway. So there.
Harold and Kumar go to Guantanamo Bay:
Surprisingly funny. My favorite part was the send-up of us governmental policies and activities in recent times. And the send up of... well, hate groups and the like.
The thing that was curious was... for once, this was a movie in which all the negative stereotypes were directed at white people. I hope this doesn't get all controversial in some people's eyes, but that was the biggest thing about the movie to me... and the movie was written by white people, too, or at the very least non-whites with very Caucasian-looking names. Which made me go: "hmmm."
I didn't find the 'stereotypes' cruel. in fact, the movie was to me strangely intelligent despite it's... obvious ridiculousness, because it dealt very nicely with the idea of stereotyping as a theme.
But I wouldn't go watch it with the idea that it's anything but a silly movie. It's a silly movie. Just a better one than I thought it would be, I suppose.
So, the second movie, the 1/2 movie, was ...Sex in the City.
Admittedly, I've never been a fan of the show. I am great friends with some very big fans of the show, and have heard the reasons why it was revolutionary and so loved by it's core audience-- mainly, a need being filled, a story being told that typically has not been told. Much like Harold and Kumar, I suppose, but better and more significant to it's audience, it gave center-stage to a group of people who always got the background. (I hope I got that right)
And yet, I could not find a way to enjoy the experience of this movie. Something about it really disturbed me. Perhaps it was the scene where Carrie pretends to catwalk in clothes she hasn't worn in 20 years while her friends fabulously drink expensive wine. Definitely it was the scene where the women go glamorously bid tens of thousands of dollars on jewelery. Absolutely, the scene where Carrie's boyfriend shows her a room in her house big enough to house a small family, which evidently is to be devoted to her millions of shoes, outfits and accessories. I'm not trying to judge, but frankly,
ick.
Now that I think about it, I suppose I've never been a fan of materialism. When your shoes have more room than many families-- not that I believe in 'shoulds' -- but...
ick.
We left half way through. I really don't care what happens in the second half. I kind of hope some activist fire-bomb our heroine's clothing collection, leaving literature about the joys of non-attachment behind.
Harold and Kumar go to Guantanamo Bay:
Surprisingly funny. My favorite part was the send-up of us governmental policies and activities in recent times. And the send up of... well, hate groups and the like.
The thing that was curious was... for once, this was a movie in which all the negative stereotypes were directed at white people. I hope this doesn't get all controversial in some people's eyes, but that was the biggest thing about the movie to me... and the movie was written by white people, too, or at the very least non-whites with very Caucasian-looking names. Which made me go: "hmmm."
I didn't find the 'stereotypes' cruel. in fact, the movie was to me strangely intelligent despite it's... obvious ridiculousness, because it dealt very nicely with the idea of stereotyping as a theme.
But I wouldn't go watch it with the idea that it's anything but a silly movie. It's a silly movie. Just a better one than I thought it would be, I suppose.
So, the second movie, the 1/2 movie, was ...Sex in the City.
Admittedly, I've never been a fan of the show. I am great friends with some very big fans of the show, and have heard the reasons why it was revolutionary and so loved by it's core audience-- mainly, a need being filled, a story being told that typically has not been told. Much like Harold and Kumar, I suppose, but better and more significant to it's audience, it gave center-stage to a group of people who always got the background. (I hope I got that right)
And yet, I could not find a way to enjoy the experience of this movie. Something about it really disturbed me. Perhaps it was the scene where Carrie pretends to catwalk in clothes she hasn't worn in 20 years while her friends fabulously drink expensive wine. Definitely it was the scene where the women go glamorously bid tens of thousands of dollars on jewelery. Absolutely, the scene where Carrie's boyfriend shows her a room in her house big enough to house a small family, which evidently is to be devoted to her millions of shoes, outfits and accessories. I'm not trying to judge, but frankly,
ick.
Now that I think about it, I suppose I've never been a fan of materialism. When your shoes have more room than many families-- not that I believe in 'shoulds' -- but...
ick.
We left half way through. I really don't care what happens in the second half. I kind of hope some activist fire-bomb our heroine's clothing collection, leaving literature about the joys of non-attachment behind.
Ralph Wiggam: Linear-thought challenged schoolboy, or Zen Master?
Posted on Jun 19th, 2008
by
Alan
Discuss!
"My cat's name is mittens":
is it a humerous non-sequitor, or a Koan of awesome levels of enlightenment?
I want to see responses, people... and I want to see them NOW.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
(Answer to the question I imagine readers asking: "no, I havent' lost it completely at all, thanks for asking. It's just that I've been far to serious on gaia recently. I want to have some fun, damnit. And secretly, I'm hoping Nicole will put this on the God-pod. ... What? What do you mean, it's not god-pod material? Aw... comeone Nicole... what are you, a party-pooper??")
"My cat's name is mittens":
is it a humerous non-sequitor, or a Koan of awesome levels of enlightenment?
I want to see responses, people... and I want to see them NOW.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
(Answer to the question I imagine readers asking: "no, I havent' lost it completely at all, thanks for asking. It's just that I've been far to serious on gaia recently. I want to have some fun, damnit. And secretly, I'm hoping Nicole will put this on the God-pod. ... What? What do you mean, it's not god-pod material? Aw... comeone Nicole... what are you, a party-pooper??")
A usual and unfortunate situation (that likely happened to you)
Posted on Jun 16th, 2008
by
Alan
Child: Why do we have food?
Adult: So we can eat it.
Child: Why?
Adult: Because we need food to live.
Child: Why?
Adult: Because food has energy and we need energy.
Child: Why?
Adult: (Getting weary) Because without it we'll die.
Child: Why?
Adult: I don't know. Stop asking why.
---
Sad situation.... all these questions have answers, and all our people learn to stop asking why... and miss the most important truths of life, often. And, reaching adulthood, have no answers for the next generation's deep 'why's"...
Why do we need food? Because everything that is the material universe is really a dynamic interplay of energies... and we are made out of energy, and all energy is made out of the source. And through living, breathing, thinking, feeling, moving, and loving, we give off energy. That's what we're here for... but balance requires we take in energy also... and all biological energy has it's root in sunlight, the sun... and through the sun, the source itself. Because plants "eat" the sunlight... in a process called photosynthesis, and when any creature eats a plant, it is really seeking that form of source energy the plant has created from sunlight. Thus, we eat biological matter because it's infused with source energy, in a form we can take in, so we can continue to output... in our dynamic interplay of energy.
When was the last time you asked a bunch of whys? An extremely useful exercise... can you imagine growing up in a world where it is not par for the course for a four year old to stump an adult with simple questions?
Adult: So we can eat it.
Child: Why?
Adult: Because we need food to live.
Child: Why?
Adult: Because food has energy and we need energy.
Child: Why?
Adult: (Getting weary) Because without it we'll die.
Child: Why?
Adult: I don't know. Stop asking why.
---
Sad situation.... all these questions have answers, and all our people learn to stop asking why... and miss the most important truths of life, often. And, reaching adulthood, have no answers for the next generation's deep 'why's"...
Why do we need food? Because everything that is the material universe is really a dynamic interplay of energies... and we are made out of energy, and all energy is made out of the source. And through living, breathing, thinking, feeling, moving, and loving, we give off energy. That's what we're here for... but balance requires we take in energy also... and all biological energy has it's root in sunlight, the sun... and through the sun, the source itself. Because plants "eat" the sunlight... in a process called photosynthesis, and when any creature eats a plant, it is really seeking that form of source energy the plant has created from sunlight. Thus, we eat biological matter because it's infused with source energy, in a form we can take in, so we can continue to output... in our dynamic interplay of energy.
When was the last time you asked a bunch of whys? An extremely useful exercise... can you imagine growing up in a world where it is not par for the course for a four year old to stump an adult with simple questions?
What would you like all fathers to know?
Posted on Jun 15th, 2008
by
Alan
This is in Response to the Questions and Reflections for June 15, 2008:
That if you spank your children while you are even the slightest bit angry at them for being 'bad,' you are also teaching them that it is ok to hit other people, but only when you are bigger than them and in a position of authority, convinced of your own rightness. You're probably going to also teach them to submit what they know in their heart to be true to the forces around them that seem more powerful as well-- if you end up spanking when you're angry.
That love is always a better teacher than pain and fear.
That the job of a father is, in major part, to keep a home harmonious... fathers, if you are still married: love your wife, keep her happy. LISTEN to her. When a man stops really listening to a woman he's in love with, no matter how much they love eachother, they are doomed to become strangers. It's only a matter of time.
Caveat to the above, and easy, small example of how it is good for you too: if you listen to her during the rest of the week, probably she's much less likely to try and corner you during your favorite sporting event, and much more likely to agree to wait until it's over if she DOES try to engage in serious discussion while the home team's fighting the good fight. Harmony is all pervasive, and the harmony of your family will become your harmony, if you tend it like a garden.
That children are natural "followers," and that there's only one way to lead, by example. the best thing you can do for your children, is always, simply, the right thing. Make the best decisions you can. Your children can pick up energy, keep yours well-fed and harmoniously humming.
That a small and in ways undefined person is still a person. They are complete. They have tendencies, likes and dislikes as surely as you do. And as you hated it when people tried to mold you as a youth, so they will. You can let them be free, you can let them be them. They'll love you more for it, too.
That there is nothing tying you to the way your parents did things... you can let yourself be free, you can let yourself be you. You'll love you the more for it, too.
That your ego has no place in any interfaces with your child. Their life is about them, not you. Seek no pleasure from their 'accomplishments,' and you will feel no 'pain' in their failures. That pleasure and pain is for them. Seek pleasure in your accomplishment of letting them go to be them, and all will be well. That's what people mean when they talk of loving children unconditionally.
That love is always a better teacher than pain and fear.
That the job of a father is, in major part, to keep a home harmonious... fathers, if you are still married: love your wife, keep her happy. LISTEN to her. When a man stops really listening to a woman he's in love with, no matter how much they love eachother, they are doomed to become strangers. It's only a matter of time.
Caveat to the above, and easy, small example of how it is good for you too: if you listen to her during the rest of the week, probably she's much less likely to try and corner you during your favorite sporting event, and much more likely to agree to wait until it's over if she DOES try to engage in serious discussion while the home team's fighting the good fight. Harmony is all pervasive, and the harmony of your family will become your harmony, if you tend it like a garden.
That children are natural "followers," and that there's only one way to lead, by example. the best thing you can do for your children, is always, simply, the right thing. Make the best decisions you can. Your children can pick up energy, keep yours well-fed and harmoniously humming.
That a small and in ways undefined person is still a person. They are complete. They have tendencies, likes and dislikes as surely as you do. And as you hated it when people tried to mold you as a youth, so they will. You can let them be free, you can let them be them. They'll love you more for it, too.
That there is nothing tying you to the way your parents did things... you can let yourself be free, you can let yourself be you. You'll love you the more for it, too.
That your ego has no place in any interfaces with your child. Their life is about them, not you. Seek no pleasure from their 'accomplishments,' and you will feel no 'pain' in their failures. That pleasure and pain is for them. Seek pleasure in your accomplishment of letting them go to be them, and all will be well. That's what people mean when they talk of loving children unconditionally.
How do you respond to being alone?
Posted on Jun 14th, 2008
by
Alan
This is in Response to the Questions and Reflections for June 14, 2008:
I really don't believe that there's any such thing as being alone for me anymore... I am never alone.
I suppose there are premises to this belief worth mentioning.
1) is that reality is malleable to the point where beliefs CREATE truth, so that what is believed is, at least for a time, true. If, then, I don't believe I am ever alone, I am never alone:
2) I am consciously connected to the oneness of all things, all who have lived and ever lived, the very consciousness of the universe. As such, "alone" is akin to an illusion: a truth that, via belief, I could create, but a disharmonious truth-- one out of line with the source and the universal superconsciousness and the immutable universal principles. One that I would eventually grow out of-- being that it is not a universal principle, but a belief which is a creation of my specific consciousness. The longest such a belief could last is the span of my life, for at my death, my consciousness would return to the oneness of all things.
I suppose there are premises to this belief worth mentioning.
1) is that reality is malleable to the point where beliefs CREATE truth, so that what is believed is, at least for a time, true. If, then, I don't believe I am ever alone, I am never alone:
2) I am consciously connected to the oneness of all things, all who have lived and ever lived, the very consciousness of the universe. As such, "alone" is akin to an illusion: a truth that, via belief, I could create, but a disharmonious truth-- one out of line with the source and the universal superconsciousness and the immutable universal principles. One that I would eventually grow out of-- being that it is not a universal principle, but a belief which is a creation of my specific consciousness. The longest such a belief could last is the span of my life, for at my death, my consciousness would return to the oneness of all things.
Evblog with a breakthrough...
Posted on Jun 13th, 2008
by
Alan
I found something on the internet yesterday... 'proof,' I suppose, of something I remembered from another life. Something incredible...
It was this:
" Another vortex phenomenon case involved a group of young hippies who were camped out inside Stonehenge when the stones were struck by lightning. Witnesses saw them all disappear, leaving only the charred pegs of their tents.[10] I believe that the higher energy vibration of the lightning activated the vortex that Stonehenge had been built to harness, which in turn caused this to happen, and I think that the creators of Stonehenge probably used these effects for travel through space and time."
The whole article was pretty interesting. But this bit, to me, was fascinating... as I have memories of using Stonehenge for exactly that purpose. In fact, for a time I went around searching the Internet for signs that I was accurately remembering... Stonehenge as a gate to the other world. But it is, and I traveled it. In that time, we called it the dawn gate.
So a big breakthrough is there for me... for me. LOA style... if something in harmony with the universe is believed, even if it is far outside of the person's current reality, the belief will create actualization of that reality. Now, I feel a bit closer to the reality of... inter-dimensional travel.
Stonehenge+massive specific energy=travel. I do know this.
It sounds incredible... it is incredible. For my part... I came up with a theory on stonehenge being used for that on my own completely... and found associations with the life I had then and Stonehenge, and later, this. I feel good about it. So nice to find what you know internally in the external world.
The shift is coming, and we are all, all of us who can keep our energy good, going to have access to a beautiful, beautiful place. A place I've dreamed of for what feels like lifetimes.
Right before I found the above evidence, I was researching Merkaba's... merkaba referring, to me, to the conscious interface with our energy fields that can create reality and move us through realities. They say merkabas are the key to inter-dimensional travel.
Now I believe that Stonehenge, with an active merkaba, is like a lock, with an active key.
I feel great. One step closer.
I should say, it is not necessary to go through a place like Stonehenge to 'travel,' I believe. But perhaps it can help. Also, regarding merkabas... there's no need to take my word for it. google it.
In other news, life is great and easy. S. and I have taken to life with ease and harmony these days. We swim in the ocean. We, by living almost thoughtlessly in the now, prepare for the future. Today is a good day.
It was this:
" Another vortex phenomenon case involved a group of young hippies who were camped out inside Stonehenge when the stones were struck by lightning. Witnesses saw them all disappear, leaving only the charred pegs of their tents.[10] I believe that the higher energy vibration of the lightning activated the vortex that Stonehenge had been built to harness, which in turn caused this to happen, and I think that the creators of Stonehenge probably used these effects for travel through space and time."
The whole article was pretty interesting. But this bit, to me, was fascinating... as I have memories of using Stonehenge for exactly that purpose. In fact, for a time I went around searching the Internet for signs that I was accurately remembering... Stonehenge as a gate to the other world. But it is, and I traveled it. In that time, we called it the dawn gate.
So a big breakthrough is there for me... for me. LOA style... if something in harmony with the universe is believed, even if it is far outside of the person's current reality, the belief will create actualization of that reality. Now, I feel a bit closer to the reality of... inter-dimensional travel.
Stonehenge+massive specific energy=travel. I do know this.
It sounds incredible... it is incredible. For my part... I came up with a theory on stonehenge being used for that on my own completely... and found associations with the life I had then and Stonehenge, and later, this. I feel good about it. So nice to find what you know internally in the external world.
The shift is coming, and we are all, all of us who can keep our energy good, going to have access to a beautiful, beautiful place. A place I've dreamed of for what feels like lifetimes.
Right before I found the above evidence, I was researching Merkaba's... merkaba referring, to me, to the conscious interface with our energy fields that can create reality and move us through realities. They say merkabas are the key to inter-dimensional travel.
Now I believe that Stonehenge, with an active merkaba, is like a lock, with an active key.
I feel great. One step closer.
I should say, it is not necessary to go through a place like Stonehenge to 'travel,' I believe. But perhaps it can help. Also, regarding merkabas... there's no need to take my word for it. google it.
In other news, life is great and easy. S. and I have taken to life with ease and harmony these days. We swim in the ocean. We, by living almost thoughtlessly in the now, prepare for the future. Today is a good day.
What sets off your creativity?
Posted on Jun 9th, 2008
by
Alan
This is in Response to the Questions and Reflections for June 09, 2008:
Not to be flippant, but breathing... or having a soul.
Creativity is the fundamental human condition. That's the beauty of our existances, and occasionally the irony of.
We are creative entities. One of the saddest things one can possibly say is heard so often, sometimes with a remorseful little laugh: "Oh, I'm just not creative."
At least, I've heard it often... given that I was always into the arts, when I'd try to tell people ANYONE can do art, anyone, all you need is a soul, I'd often see that sad expression that preceded those sad words: "I am not really creative."
I always too (at least, before "awakening") wanted to scream: 'BULLSHIT!!' when I heard that. But I figured to do so would have been a conversation killer.
The truth is, we are all creative, and we are all creating, in ever second of every minute. Do you want to see your masterpiece?
Look around. You're inside of it.
It is your life.
(If that saddens you to hear... well, that's ok! That only means it's time to take out your reality paintbrushes and start painting on purpose. If you want to know how, I can help a little... shoot me an email if you feel to, creating reality is what you are here to do.)
Creativity is the fundamental human condition. That's the beauty of our existances, and occasionally the irony of.
We are creative entities. One of the saddest things one can possibly say is heard so often, sometimes with a remorseful little laugh: "Oh, I'm just not creative."
At least, I've heard it often... given that I was always into the arts, when I'd try to tell people ANYONE can do art, anyone, all you need is a soul, I'd often see that sad expression that preceded those sad words: "I am not really creative."
I always too (at least, before "awakening") wanted to scream: 'BULLSHIT!!' when I heard that. But I figured to do so would have been a conversation killer.
The truth is, we are all creative, and we are all creating, in ever second of every minute. Do you want to see your masterpiece?
Look around. You're inside of it.
It is your life.
(If that saddens you to hear... well, that's ok! That only means it's time to take out your reality paintbrushes and start painting on purpose. If you want to know how, I can help a little... shoot me an email if you feel to, creating reality is what you are here to do.)
Evblog full of questions
Posted on Jun 8th, 2008
by
Alan
I'm wondering: is it nearly time?
Does the moment approach when those "hiding" amongst us recall to the all our most remembered names?
We do not hide in the sense that we are hiding for fear... frauds or liars... we merely do not dwell on certain information... the most subjective kind, unprovable save by the path we walk, and have always walked. And what we know, and have always known.
But is that to change?
The past is insignificant. Still, if by me and a few of my friends saying: "see who's still here?" we could help bring the day we dream of...
Is it time?
We in this great and noble generation are fulfilling eons of work and dreams...
Does the moment approach when those "hiding" amongst us recall to the all our most remembered names?
We do not hide in the sense that we are hiding for fear... frauds or liars... we merely do not dwell on certain information... the most subjective kind, unprovable save by the path we walk, and have always walked. And what we know, and have always known.
But is that to change?
The past is insignificant. Still, if by me and a few of my friends saying: "see who's still here?" we could help bring the day we dream of...
Is it time?
We in this great and noble generation are fulfilling eons of work and dreams...






