I Ate The One Who Cared Enough Not To
First a story.
Partaking of the riches we place before us we tend to lean back in our chairs as if in an afterthought all the while digesting our humble beginnings and determining that yes indeed, we have overcome fate to the point where we are in control of not just our destinies but of others as well. It has become good to be and be called, the Master. Bowing before us, all worship in with but the highest regard for our well being. We have become the ruling elite with which all men are bound in sorrow. To our delight we take refuge in the fact of our very existence. Who could not be so overwhelmed with awe that they would not honor our every means of presence? Born are those of worthy means and so must be bound by ours until death do us part whereupon others of like statue are groomed, trained and entertained. In the cycle of pheasant sufferage we do suffer and gladly extend the hand of torment to lessen the pain felt by all. In this acceptance we find comfort and satisfaction.
I think that about sums up the 'ruling elite'. Not all men are created equal but the potential is certainly there. Perhaps one day the dogs will stop running with the pack and become of true stature all on their own, as their own. Weakness is exemplified in many ways and so the pack huddles together in sheer horror.
Strength in all it's forms, has absolutely no bearing whatsoever in demonstrating Man's nature. Whereas grown ups demonstrate a well balanced maturity which permeates the entire being, child's play is for children.
In this way a manifested being is considered to undergo a series of progressive steps whereby the outlook evolves according to a predefined methodology. Perhaps not quite a 'methodology' but it is close. Presupposing this perspective requires that a hierarchy be imposed and thereby be examined. From where to where is the question that can be asked.
Is it really a games condition where players, pieces and referees take part? What about the game managers? In an attempt to explain away one's ideology the danger is that like a virus it can penetrate and infect those susceptible, but in order to be open to such outside influence one must be actively looking for such even if in a contrary way.
From whence does a progression come into existence. Is it by bursting bubble or gentle persuasion. Who or what is there at that moment to either accept or reject such offers? The physical universe is but one of many forms within which attentive beings partake. Can this be considered to be like a carnival where experiencers can come and go as they please enjoying the various offerings, each with particular remedies? Does this reveal the base purpose of experiential interaction? Why do we experience and for what end? What is the methodology employed in order to entreat participation? In volunteering for such endeavors are we not then free to disembark?
There can be so many questions with the subject matter being so vast and intertwined which is why one particular subject matter cannot resolve on it's own, it must be acclimated to it's brethren and that totality just happens to fall short of conviction. Experiential interactions require limitation and in such restriction resolution is impossible. Stepping outside it's boundaries becomes another matter entirely.
Where does that leave us? In cracking the door of perception there must come a time where the origination becomes unglued from it's determination. Even though the fear of loss requires firmly held beliefs it doesn't mean that it becomes impossible for such since all of this hinges on not ideology but of that which moves behind the outward interaction, expressing it's existence. To express is to demonstrate existence but both require the boundaries of limitation in which to do so.
So if you are really wanting to 'know yourself' all you have to do is to let go of from where you are coming from. If the source of yourself is moved doesn't that mean you will have no idea of what I am talking about?