Prefix: This Thesis was written to be coherent on Fractal -2. Please refer to the Fractal Nature of Truth for a description of Fractal -2 . The contents of this article are not at all coherent with Fractal -1, Fractal Zero, or Fractal One.
The Pandemic of INSincerity
A how to manual for the protect & preservation of our children’s sincerity.
To protect children from the tyranny of their parent’s (twisted) love.
Dedicated to our beloved Khayla.
If we were to solve all the problems in the world,
yet did not rout out the pandemic of insincerity,
we would have solved nothing.
If the pandemic of insincerity were somehow routed out,
the bulk of humanity’s problems
would soon thereafter vanish.
Insincerity is the “root cause” of most of our problems.
The bulk of our problems (collectively as well as individually)
are but symptoms, that have the same root cause in common:
We all know that,
No amount of fighting the symptoms can ever fix the cause.
Strike at the root! — the root cause of Insincerity
and watch the thorny vines of these Industrial Dark Ages just wither away.
“Just watch!,” as Bhauji would say,
the thorny vines of Kali Yuga just wither away.
And lo and behold,
the New Humanity appearing
like a cool breeze
out of nowhere.
Imagine for a minute that we were able to solve all the problems in the world. Imagine that by some miracle of technology, we were able to resolve all of our socio-economic problem, as well as all of our political & environmental problems. Imagine breakthroughs in technology, allowing us to restore the earth to its former glory, with air & water quality as well as forest & top-soil conditions returned to pre-industrial standards. Even under such favorable conditions, if the Pandemic of Insincerity were not checked, within 50 years or so, we would be right back where we are today, in just as much trouble, if not more — due to hubris.
In this sense, Insincerity, can be said to be, the only disorder humanity as a whole, and indeed the entire planet, is (actually) suffering from.
Is Default Human Nature Sincere?
Human nature refers to the distinguishing characteristics—including ways of thinking, feeling and acting—which humans tend to have naturally, independently of the influence of culture. (wikipedia) To classify Insincerity as a disorder, we must first be able to establish that Insincerity is not a “normal” function of human nature. We must be able to establish Insincerity as a malfunction of human nature. To do this, it is necessary to establish “Sincerity” as an attribute that is default to human nature.
Sincerity is an absolute.
There is no such thing as being partially sincere or partially insincere; nor is there such a thing as being mostly sincere. You are either sincere, or not at all. There are no 50 shades of grey between sincerity and insincerity. All the grey areas that one might imagine to exist in between “absolute” Sincerity and “ice-cold” Insincerity, are nothing but self deceptions perpetrated by Insincerity itself. We will see that Sincerity that is not absolute, is not Sincerity at all, but Insincerity masquerading as Sincerity.
If Insincerity is, indeed, a fundamental part of what we call “human nature”, then Insincerity cannot be classified as a “dysfunction” of human nature but as a part of its proper function. If this is the case, humanity itself is the disease that the planet is suffering from. Fortunately, however, as you will see, Insincerity is a disorder.
All current psychological & sociological models are based on the “assumption” that Human Nature is essentially something that is NOT TO BE TRUSTED. If asked, no psychology professor of any reputable university would admit Insincerity to be a psychological disorder. Academia posits Insincerity to be within the range of healthy human behavior. Insincerity is treated in their models as one of many attributes a healthy human can have. Modern Psychology, does not classify a ruthless wall street mogul as a sick person or “dysfunctional” person, does it? On the contrary, they might even view such a person as a bit of an “eccentric” person that is nonetheless a vastly “accomplished” person, that is more likely to be classified as being above and beyond the normal range of human nature.
Modern Psychology would not “diagnose” a power hungry politician as someone suffering from a severe psychological disorder, now would it?
To them, the ruthlessly ambitious are “special men of determination” that “know what they want”, and “know how to get what they want”. To them, these men are seen as “serious men” who “mean serious business” who “aren’t screwing around” like the lot of us. These men are admired as “exemplary” men, as “fine specimens” deserving of our respect and patronage. Often, these men are seen as the very pinnacle of human achievement, as someone worthy of careful study and emulation. These men would, by no means, be characterized by psychology as profoundly sick individuals dreadfully diseased with dysfunctional ambition— now would they?
Would Modern Psychology diagnose a greedy and dishonest politician as someone suffering from “acute insincerity”? Would modern psychology diagnose Bill, a hypothetical self-made billionaire, who ruthlessly rose to the top of his field, by any and all means necessary, as a severely sick person? No psychologist (if they want to keep their job) would “diagnose” insincerity as a psychological disorder of a catastrophic nature. This is because:
Modern psychology posits Insincerity to be well within the normal range of human nature.
Modern psychology does not posit Sincerity to be integral to human nature as a default trait.
If Sincerity IS indeed,
default to human nature,
then the bulk of modern psychology
is footed on thin ice.
(literally cracking at the seams as we continue)
Every scientist knows that you cannot have a false assumption at the very foundation of your theory, and hope to arrive at the truth. At the root of every scientific theory that ever went completely bust, was a “false assumption” just waiting there to be discovered. All theories are built on “assumptions.” All it takes is just one of these assumptions, or axioms to be false, for the entire theory to crumble like a deck of cards in mere seconds. This is exactly what happened to Newton’s Laws of Motion. The three body problem came along in 1915 and undermined the entire theory with what is now known as “sensitivity to initial conditions.” Newton, unbeknownst to himself, had assumed that the Universe was not a place that was all that “sensitive to initial conditions.” Turns out he was wrong in his assumptions. We’ve since discovered, in fact that the Universe is hyper sensitive to initial conditions. Henri Poincaré’s discovery of chaos being inherent to the system, marked both the beginning of Chaos Theory, as well the death of Newtonian Physics.
Like this, it is from the ashes of a dead theory that a new theory rises to replace it. Lurking beneath the surface of every faulty theory lies false assumptions just waiting to be discovered – like a time bomb booby-trapped to explode upon discovery. When you discover it, it instantly blows up, pulverizing the entire theory into oblivion. The understandable “false assumption” that the earth is stationary has led to countless erroneous theories about the world, has it not? Please pardon my language, but there is actually no better way to say this:
Assumption, is the mother of all screw-ups.
At the root of every false theory, lies at least one “false assumption.”
Only a “false assumption” free theory can lead us to the truth.
Is it really possible that all of academia based their psychological & sociological models on a “false assumption”? Are we to posit that the entire field of psychology may have been heading way off course? Are we to question the authority of our expert psychologists?
Yes, we are.
We must question everything, especially the “default” assumptions.
Remember that the life expectancy for your average theory now-a-days is so low that most theories don’t even live long enough to give birth to children theories, let alone see their grandchildren. The day of theories lasting 100’s of years has long been over.
The false assumption (by almost the entire field of psychology) that Insincerity is not a malfunction of human nature but a part of it’s normal function , I boldly submit to you, is the greatest “false assumption” made by mankind.
How is this even possible? In a very real sense, we “screwed-up” because we were, as it were, insincere in our approach from the very inception. To understand this, lets take a look at Horse Nature.
Case Study: Horse Nature
In a hypothetical world, lets say that you and I decided to learn all we can about horses. Lets say that together with a big team of scientists we did nothing but study all the horses, in all the ranches, in all the world, for the next 300 years. Would we then have an understanding of true horse nature? You’d think we’d understand something about horse nature, wouldn’t you? Yes, we would understand some things about horses, but at an even greater price. Our understanding of horses would be overshadowed by an even greater misunderstanding we “assume” about them.
You can study all the “tamed” horses in the world you want, but this would not inform you of real horse nature. To understand real horse nature we must study horses “as they are” in the wild. (“As they are” = Sincere) Only horses that are free can exhibit “true” or “as they are” horse nature. In fact, no animal, including humans can exhibit their true nature in a state of captivity. When you study gorillas in captivity, what you’re really learning is “captive” gorilla nature, not “free” or “natural,” and therefore “real” gorilla nature. “Real” gorilla nature, I’m afraid, like “real” horse nature cannot be studied on the planet at this time. Even the gorillas in the forests of the Congo, can no longer be said to be exhibiting authentic gorilla behavior. This is because they have been cornered up against a wall (so to speak) in a tiny section of the forest, completely surrounded by deforestation. Furthermore, their numbers have now dwindled down to mere handfuls. This makes the gorillas behave in ways that are not natural to them. They begin to exhibit abnormal, and dysfunctional symptoms. In a very real sense, these gorillas are in a state of “captivity” not unlike their cousins in the zoos. According to primatologists:
”Monkeys have been observed masturbating in captivity but not in the wild.”
“Lots of animals masturbate, but none with the intensity and ejaculation frequency of human males—except when in captivity. ” — Leonard Shlain, MD.
Apparently, zoos with tighter walls produce higher levels of masturbation in their inmates. According to animal researcher Gilbert Van Tassel Hamilton:
“Of all my male monkeys, only Jocko has been observed to masturbate. After a few days confinement, he would masturbate and eat part of his semen. I have reason to believe that he lived under unnatural conditions for many years before I acquired him.”
Notice how “confinement” is the condition for Jacko’s behavior. In fact, it is when an ape is placed in “isolation” or “solitary confinement”, that the frequency of masturbation really begins to rise.
If someone were to conclude that masturbation is a “normal” part of default monkey nature, he’d be wrong. He’d be mistaking monkey nature in captivity for true monkey nature. If there are only 3 pandas left in a tiny bamboo forest in China, and one of them, Spang-Kao, is masturbating — this is not indicative of true panda nature. Instead, it is indicative of panda nature malfunctioning under conditions of “confinement” ,“captivity” and “isolation”. If the scientist observing this phenomenon were to conclude that frequent masturbation was a normal part of panda nature, he’d be so wrong about such a core issue pertaining to panda nature that the rest of his work would be off the mark at best. In this EXACT same way, to understand “true” or “default” horse nature, we must examine the “untamed” natural horse thriving in it’s natural environment. Human beings are no different.
CASE STUDY: True Human Nature
To actually study what “true” human nature might be, we must first set a few of them free. Then we can wait and see how they turn out. We would have to allow a pool of “free” and “untamed” human beings to flourish into adulthood in a “coercion-free” environment. It would have to be a natural and nurturing environment lacking in all forms of coercion, confinement, as well as all types of isolation (including isolation from different age groups). We would have to allow the “free” human being to come into being naturally on his own—meticulously unaided by our molding hands. By not “taming” them fit for society, we will allow for the “untamed” natural true human being to come forth in his full glory into our midst. Only when these children grow into adulthood, will we then be able to experience for ourselves what “default” human nature might be. Until we attempt this rather bold experiment, risking the very future of our own children by profoundly trusting them to find their own way, I’m afraid, we will never know what “true” human nature might be. Cambridge University noticed the exact same problem.
In 2010, Cambridge University’s Behavioral and Brain Sciences published a review: “The Weirdest People In The World?” Its authors pointed out that scientists routinely make broad claims about human nature, using samples drawn almost entirely from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic – WEIRD – societies. Fully 96% of the subjects whose behavior has been reported in top psychological journals were drawn from only 12% of the world’s population. WEIRD is not “untamed” human nature but “tamed fit for society” human nature.
WEIRD, we will come to understand, is captive-human nature mistaken for default human nature.
A disease is defined as:
: a disordered or incorrectly functioning organ, part, structure, or system of body.
: a condition that prevents the body or mind from functioning normally.
If it is true that default human nature is indeed actually sincere, then:
- Insincerity is not normal.
- Insincerity is abnormal.
- Insincerity is a disorder, a dysfunction, a malfunction of normal human function.
- Insincerity has a cause, a definite chain of causality with definable steps.
- An Insincere Person would be a dysfunctional person, a diseased person.
- An Insincere Person would be a sick person diseased with Insincerity.
To properly understand the thorny vines of Insincerity, we must first take a good look at its roots. At the level of Cosmic Irony, (go figure) if it isn’t Sincerity itself, that lies at the very root of Insincerity. Somewhere deep beneath the shifting surfaces of even the coldest & most insincere person, lies intact, the sincere child that person once was. That sincere child we all started out as, is our default sincere selves. Every person in the world was born sincere by default. This is because Sincerity is fundamental, or “default” to our Universe.
Insincerity could not exist without Sincerity.
Every Insincere person out there very well knows that a careful & thorough study of Sincerity is absolutely essential if one is to accurately emulate it’s symptoms. All lies depend on truths. All lies are rooted in truths.
The veracity of a lie depends entirely on how closely it mimics the truth.
Some lies are hard to tell mainly because of how closely they resemble the truth. It takes an intimate knowledge of the truth to craft a near perfect lie. Naturally therefore, it is the most Insincere among us who become the best detectors of hypocrisy. The Insincere are so good at spotting hypocrisy that they think they can size most people up in mere minutes. If you consider yourself to be a very good judge of character, especially of bad character, you might want to take a good look at yourself. Some politicians, however, may have reached far deeper levels of insincerity than most have. Perhaps this is why it is said that:
“No one can fool a seasoned politician.”
Indistinguishability with Sincerity,
is Insincerity’s mission statement.
Where would lies be without the truth?
Without the truth, they would be lost
—lost without a source of emulation
—lost without a source for existence.
Insincerity is acting sincere instead of being sincere. Insincerity is also what deludes the self into thinking that “acting sincere” is more or less “being sincere”. Insincerity is like a method actor playing a “sincere” version of himself — he is an oxymoron — a genuine fake.
To dismantle a Lie, the Truth behind the Lie must first be grasped. Likewise, Insincerity cannot be grasped without first understanding its foundation — Sincerity.
What is sincerity, but the absence of Insincerity.
Insincerity cannot be understood in and of itself. In and of itself, insincerity has no existence. Insincerity depends entirely on Sincerity as it’s base foundation for it’s existence. Insincerity is something that can only be seen up against the background Universe of Sincerity. Insincerity, the adulteration of sincerity, must necessarily posit sincerity as it’s default base, in order to exist.
Sincerity is all there was in the Universe until Insincerity arrived on the scene.
From the so called “Big Bang” all the way until us humans supposedly showed up, our Universe may have been “INSINCERITY FREE!” When you ring a bell, it rings true, because the bell is being true to its self. Whatever the tone of each bell, it will always rings true to itself. That tone given, is the bell’s sincere response. All of science and technology depend on substances remaining ‘true to their natures’ (i.e. Sincere). We couldn’t build a single high rise building otherwise. When water boils consistently at the same temperature, it is being true to its own nature. It is being sincere. Rocks are sincere too. Have you ever met an insincere rock? an insincere mountain or an insincere tree? Have you met an insincere puppy or a baby? Is there anything about the night sky, that seems particularly insincere to you?
Sincerity is Omnipresent.
If our Universe was INSINCERITY FREE until we showed up, it might have just as well been INSANITY FREE, until we showed up on the scene, as well.
What is Sanity?
but the absence of Insanity?
Insanity (like Insincerity) cannot be understood in and of itself. Insanity (like Insincerity) depends entirely on Sanity as it’s base for existence. This is because, Insanity, the malfunction of Sanity, must necessarily posit a Sane Universe as it’s rational root base in order to exist. If the Universe were itself “unsane” or “irrational”, it could not have produced sanity. It is precisely because we live in a Sane Universe that the very concept of Sanity can even be known.
No one could become Sane in an Unsane Universe.
An Unsane Universe could only produce the Unsane.
Only a Sane Universe can produce Sane people.
To be more precise,
A Sane Universe can produce both Sane people and Unsane people.
But an Unsane Universe can only produce the Unsane.
The very fact that Sanity is known as a concept in our Universe, posits our Universe to be Sane.
The Default Nature of our Universe is Sane.
Sanity (like Sincerity) is Omnipresent
A Sane Universe is Sane because it consistently functions precisely according to definite laws. This feature of the Universe, is precisely what allows us to predict the movement of celestial bodies of even other time periods with astounding accuracy. Our Universe is meticulously rational, almost irrationally sane, functioning at the level of precision that seems to be no less than infinite, if I may embellish it, not at all. The number pi is a good example of how meticulously finely tuned our Universe actually is. This high level of definition is a testament to the sheer Sanity of our Universe.
Thus, we hereby posit that the Default Nature of the Universe and indeed everything & everyone in it must therefor be fundamentally Sincere, Sane, & Rational. This is the only way, both Sanity and Insanity, as well as, both Sincerity and Insincerity can exist in one and the same Universe.
To be Sincere means to be true to the self.
When a bell rings true, it’s tone rings true to itself.
When a baby girl smiles at you, she really means it.
Insincerity is a disease of the heart.
Insincerity IS a diseased heart.
Only a diseased Heart can be Insincere.
So now that we have established Insincerity as a disorder, lets “diagnose” it’s root causality. Unlike default attributes, the causality of disorders & malfunctions can be ascertained. The causality of “default” attributes cannot be known by any study of it’s symptoms —i.e. the Universe. For example, the cause of why yellow looks yellow is not ascertainable. Yellow looks yellow because it looks yellow. But if that yellow were to look green, for example, the blue shades you are wearing, might be the cause.
The core causality of Universal “defaults” cannot be ascertained within that Universe. This is because Universal “defaults” are“axiomatic” to that Universe. In other words, pi is pi, and thats it. An axiom is what they call an “irreducible” truth. It is a principle so foundational as to be beyond examination. Axioms are always beyond the possibility of explanation. Sincerity, being “default” to human nature, needs no explanation. This is because it has no cause. Sincerity just is. If you were to ask a baby why she is sincere? She’ll probably just smile at you. There is no explanation for Sincerity. Insincerity, on the other hand, always has an explanation —a definite cause. All malfunctions, dysfunctions, disorders, and diseases in the Cosmos have definable causes.
“When something goes wrong…”
my mentor (Mike Canaday, the Goat Buddha) used to say,
“rest assure, there is always a reason.”
Disorders such as Insincerity, and Insanity always have definable causes. Universal “defaults” such as sincerity, honesty and sanity, on the other hand are necessarily causeless. Sincerity requires the absence of causality. Sincerity is necessarily without cause. Meher Baba says that “Love must be spontaneous.” The definition of Spontaneity, is the perfect absence of prior cause. If you are being Sincere for any reason (for any reason at all), rest assure, you are not “really” being Sincere.
Love = Spontaneous = the perfect absence of prior cause.
We all know this. When someone helps you out in a big way, and for absolutely no reason, absolutely no possibility of return or gain, recognition, or even gratitude —- what do we say about such people? We say they are Sincere. When we say they are Sincere, what we are recognizing is the very absence of reason. Because Sincerity is “default” to the Universe, it cannot be something that is brought about for any reason or cause. In fact, it is the absence of reason and cause that we recognize as sincere.
Sincerity is necessarily causeless.
Sincerity requires the perfect absence of prior cause.
Spontaneity IS the perfect absence of prior cause.
Sincerity is necessarily Spontaneous, and
Spontaneity is necessarily Sincere.
If prior cause is present, it cannot be Sincerity
If prior cause is present it is nothing but Insincerity acting Sincere.
Sincerity is someone who is just as he is.
“스스로 있는 자다.”
“I am, (of myself) just as I am.”
Korean Bible, Exodus 3:14
Meher Baba says that “the best reason for loving God is for no reason at all.” This is because reasons infringe on sincerity. Every reason you have for loving God can, in a sense, be deducted from your love’s sincerity. Sincere love for God, is necessarily reason-less. This explains why love cannot be induced, or caused by any kind of effort. Love can only be spontaneous. Love too, like Sincerity, and Spontaneity, requires the perfect absence of cause.
Insincerity on the other hand, always has a reason, a definite purpose, and a definable cause. Behind every insincere act, rest assure, there is always a reason. But what causes Insincerity? If Insincerity is a disfunction, and if all disfunction’s have causes, then what caused Insincerity?
Insincerity has a definite cause, and is always caused.
Could we even say that Insincerity is manufactured? Lets examine this possibility, with an open mind. Could this answer why some places in the world are much more Insincere than others? For example, wouldn’t you agree that certain socio-geographical locations, such as New York City or London produce far greater numbers of Insincere people per-capita, than say, a small farming town in the Himalayas?
Before tyranny, such as NAZI Germany, unleashes itself, the leadership very well knows that sufficient levels of Insincerity must be reached in the general population. For tyranny to succeed sincerity must be routed out, to make room for unbridled obedience. Blind obedience is not a feature that is natural to man. It must be instilled.—or rather Installed.
It is always in the name of creating a new utopia for man that tyranny, begins the process of manufacturing Insincerity on an industrial scale. Before showing his teeth to the world, Hitler waited more than 10 years, for these children of the Hitler Youth to mature into the ranks of the esteemed SS.
The fact that Insincerity is a disorder that can be manufactured, who’s processes’ can be clearly defined and streamlined like a production line, is a well known fact by all successful enslavers of men. They know that the truly Sincere (unfortunately) are un-enslave-able, or rather un-program-able. Only the Insincere are enslave-able, or programable.
The Sincere are not programmable.
Only caged-human beings, or “tamed” human beings, or human beings “made fit for society” via coercion are programable, upgradable, manipulatable, herd-able, and therefore useful for tyranny.
The causality of Insincerity can be likened to a manufacturing process. A scientist once said “if you don’t know how to make the problem yet, you really don’t understand the problem yet.” To understand the nature of a problem, you’ve got to be able to recreate it. Likewise, the manufacturing process of Insincerity IS it’s exact causality.
BUT WHAT ABOUT LOVE?
Often I hear the mantra “love is the solution” and “love will fix everything” or “all you need is love.” It used to be my mantra as well. But over the years I’ve come to wonder how it is that all this love, wasn’t doing much. To those who were hippies in the 60’s would it be too unkind to ask “where’s the love now?” What happened to all that love? What happened to all that freedom? What happened? The answer is simple.
Love is nothing if not sincere.
The word Love, has been hijacked by Insincere Love, masquerading as Love.
Hypnotized by the “Consensus Trance” of Insincerely,
Selfish love is thought to be love,
Selective love is thought to be love,
Possessive love is thought to be love,
Demanding love is thought to be love,
Even Jealous Love is thought to be love,
Even Retributory love is thought to be love,
But most of all,
Under the “Consensus Delusion” of these Industrial Dark Ages,
Conditional love is thought to be Unconditional love.
Under the hypnotism of Insincerity,
Love itself, is seen as something that can rightfully demand a “fair” share
in return for it’s investment.
Love itself, is seen as something given for a reason.
It is seen as something that has to be earned, or deserved.
It is seen as something one becomes worthy of.
Under the consensus delusion of Kali Yuga,
conditioned love, is literally spoken of as unconditional love.
This is not love.
If it is not causeless and reasonless, it is not love.
Love that has to be earned, is not love.
“Love alone is devoid of all purpose.”
— Meher Baba
In fact, here is Meher Baba’s entire statement on the purposelessness of Love.
PURPOSELESSNESS IN INFINITE EXISTENCE
“Love alone is devoid of all purpose and a spark of Divine Love sets fire to all purposes.”
— Meher Baba
If you think mother’s love is unconditional love,
what about the condition that “the child must be mine”
for the mother’s love to pour forth?
Isn’t this a condition of some sort?
Isn’t this why mothers tend to love their own child so much more than,
say a kid they’ve never even met?
If mother’s love is not the primary example of conditional love,
I don’t know what is.
Is there any part of mother’s love that is not conditional?
is there any part of a mother’s love that is not hinged on the child being hers?
This is exactly how Insincerity obfuscates & deforms the “actual” meaning of even the simplest of words, such as “unconditional.”
It must be seen clearly that
if True Love were an arrow
Insincerity is near perfect armor.
INSINCERITY UNDERPINS even LOVE & HONESTY
So far we have been talking about Insincerity of the heart & not of the mind. Honesty and Sincerity can easily be confused with each other. I used to be confused about it too. It was the honesty of insincere people that opened my eyes. I found myself asking myself, “is it true that one can be totally honest about something, and totally insincere at the same time?” And I’m afraid the answer is yes.
The NAZI scientists who were doing medical experiments at Auschwitz, for example, left nothing less than brutally honest and exact details of their experiments. Brutal honesty apparently can coexist with “ice-cold” insincerity in the same person at the same time. This is why, even honesty counts for near nothing, when one is Insincere with the self. Insincerity even underpins honesty.
So what about love? Isn’t love the most powerful thing in the world? YES, but not on this fractal.
No matter how much love you have,
if that love is in anyway insincere,
what matters how much love you might have?
What good is an ocean of love
if that love is Insincerity?
Yet, didn’t the man say something like
all you need is but one drop,
just one drop,
just one mustard seed,
of “Sincere Love” …
(you know the rest)
The Disorder of Insincerity must be seen as something that can render “all the love in the world” irrelevant, ineffective, null and void (on Fractal -2). Insincerity is like perfect armor against love piercing your heart. Insincerity is like garlic, if love were a vampire. If Love were the sun, Insincerity would be like an umbrella that checks the sun’s light. I think you get the point.
Sincerity is nothing if not reasonless(purposeless). When your love hinges on reasons(purposes), when those reasons dissipate, so does the love. True love, does not dissipate. It is timeless(eternal). Divine love does not (indeed cannot) dissipate, for it does not owe it’s existence to anything perishable. Divine love is default to our Universe, ever-present in every nook and corner of it. Divine love is perfectly blind. If God were to love me for a reason such as “being a good boy” then it would follow that he may not love me (or love me less) if I were bad. God’s love not being conditioned by any reasons at all, is what allows for His unlimited, unending, all encompassing mercy.
But sadly, Insincerity, in a sense, can even keep God at bey, from our hearts. If you are not sincere with yourself, how can it be possible for you to have genuine interactions with God? If you don’t take yourself seriously, how can you take your relationship with God seriously? It cannot be done. Insincerity even underpins our relationship with God. The Disease of Insincerity underpins absolutely everything, including God (in a sense). The only thing Insincerity does not underpin is Nothing. (i.e. The Real Nothing of Nirvana, i.e. Fractal Zero: )
Perhaps, Insincerity is a graver disorder than most of us have given it credit. At this opportune time, I would like to solemnly posit that:
Insincerity IS the gravest disorder known to man.
“Mankind “ as a whole is infected with the disease of Insincerity.
“Humanity” as a whole, (as a single living organism), is RIGHT NOW in critical condition, infected with the contagion of Insincerity spread all over most of it’s body.
Insincerity is the primary disease that must be checked.
To use a computer as an analogy, Insincerity is not a malfunction at the interactive level of the computer but a malfunction at the very core. Insincerity can be likened to a malfunction happening at the machine language level of the computer.
To be specific, the Virus of Insincerity, is not an Application problem (such as a problem with your beliefs or convictions) though it does cause them to malfunction unnoticeably; nor is it a problem with your Operating System (as in your culture, language, or how your mind works, as well as your world-view), though it does unnoticeably undermine proper function in these areas as well. Insincerity is a malfunction at the Machine Language level of the computer. Machine language is how the computer interfaces with it’s own hardware. Machine language is what manages the phase transition between hardware and software. Put simply, Machine language is the only language the physical “machine” actually understands. Insincerity is a systemic problem, noticeably occurring at this foundation level of our minds. Insincerity is an interface problem happening at the “phase transition” between “I” & my “self”.
Insincerity is a malfunction in how we relate to our selves.
It is not so much a problem with our beliefs, or even how we think, as it is a problem with how we relate those beliefs & thoughts to our “selves”. Insincerity, put simply, is a relationship disorder one is having with one’s self. The Insincere cannot take themselves seriously because they don’t trust themselves at a fundamental level. If we aren’t Sincere with ourselves, are we even being ourselves? Does it matter how strong your convictions are if you can’t trust your own mind? Does it matter what you think, if you don’t trust your own thinking?
If you cannot trust your own thinking,
how can you trust what anyone else thinks,
— when in fact, it was YOU who chose
who’s thinking to trust?
If you cannot trust your own discernment,
this means that
you cannot trust discernment itself.
Contrary to the prevailing efforts around the world to change ourselves, or to improve ourselves, it must be seen that “not being ourselves” IS precisely the problem. Trying to improve ourselves or mold ourselves into what we are NOT—IS Precisely— the problem. Insincerity or the disease of “not really being yourself” cannot be fixed by “trying to be something” other than what you already are. Even if you were trying to honestly be “who you actually are” all such efforts can only run counter to Sincerity, because “what you are without trying to be it” IS what Sincerity is. “Who you actually are” is not something that can be faked, even by you. Sincerity is the uncontrived self.
Sincerity is the absence of self-craftsmanship, not the perfection of it.
Sincerity is someone who is just as he is, for no particular reason.
Sincerity is the default self.
To find out how Insincerity is caused, lets step into the (much larger) shoes of a tyrant and learn from him, step by step, how to manufacture Insincerity on an industrial scale.
A Heart is not made Insincere directly. It is the Mind that is made Insincere first. It is then the Insincere Mind that makes the Heart Insincere. An Insincere Heart is the creation of an Insincere Mind. To make the Heart Insincere, all one need do is make the Mind insincere. Once the Mind is made to malfunction with Insincerity, the Heart’s dysfunction will soon follow.
Insincerity is a malfunction of the heart caused by a malfunction of the mind.
Sincerity is being true to yourself.
Insincerity is being untrue to yourself.
What does this mean exactly?
What does it mean to be ‘true’ or ‘untrue’ to yourself?
This question lies at the very crux of the matter. To be untrue to yourself means you are lying to yourself. It means that somewhere deep inside you, you have decided not to see the world as you actually ‘saw things’. Somewhere down the line, you’ve decided to overrule how you actually ‘saw things’ with how you thought you ‘aught to see things’.
To be untrue to yourself means that you are seeing the world as you’ve arbitrarily decided to see it, rather than how you actually are seeing it. This is what it means to be untrue to yourself.
How then does man become untrue to himself? How does the mind, the very instrument charged with the discernment of reality, come to refuse to carry out it’s primary function? This would be like a liver refusing to process toxins, or a stomach refusing to digest food. Or an eye refusing to see.
An insincere mind, is a mind in dysfunction.
The mind is charged with one primary task above all, and that task is to discern reality for itself. Contrary to popular usage, the mind’s job is not to select the best external agency to outsource it’s assessment function to, but to do it entirely of itself.
The outsourcing of any aspect of discernment by the mind, constitutes a catastrophic malfunction in that mind’s proper function.
The moment the perceptual framework of a mind is in any way influenced by information accepted as true without the total wholehearted concurrence of that mind’s “inner voice”, that mind has now breached the boundaries of normal function into malfunction. All children are born with sincere curiosity. Sincere curiosity is not something that can be satisfied with accepting second hand information as facts. Sincere Curiosity requires nothing less than direct experiential certainty from the foundation up for anything to be considered a “fact”. Only an Insincere curiosity could settle for second hand information, and accept it without confirming it thoroughly for itself to it’s own satisfaction. A sincere mind intuits that only direct experiential certainty can be trusted as absolute certainty.
(from the subjective personal viewpoint)
To be the sole sovereign authority of all one thinks IS what makes for Sincerity. As long as you are the Exclusive Sole Authority that discerns(judges) everything you think about from the axiomatic ground up, you are Sincere with yourself. You may just be a baby, but as long as you are doing all your own thinking for yourself you are Sincere with yourself. The moment you allow some external agency to overrule your own “inner discernment,” you have now become -by definition- no longer sincere with yourself.
(from subjective personal viewpoint)
If you are not in-sourcing all of your discernment from the axiomatic ground up, you are–by definition– Insincere with yourself. Over time the sincere feel the increasing need to meticulously reexamine all their own thinking from the very ground up. It is curiosity itself that ignites the concentration, which “mega-pixelizes” the clarity of a child’s focus. According to the Buddha, sincere curiosity focuses on it’s subject of inquiry not unlike how a cat suddenly comes into total concentration when it sees a mouse. The cat’s total focus, as if captive of the mouse, cannot help but offer up the totality of it’s concentration to it’s prey. The cat, at this point, is entirely unaware of self — only the prey. It’s total focus mega-pixelizes, so to speak, it’s view of the mouse. In this way, sincere curiosity cannot help but be utterly captivated helplessly by it’s subject of inquiry. It is this total concentration that enables children to learn up to 4-6 languages at once without any real difficulty.
The insincere, on the other hand, cannot really grasp at the Truth without in someway downgrading it to a lower pixel-rate thereby adulterating it. Wavering curiosity cannot focus on anything for long. How can he who does not think for himself ever really “grasp” anything, anyway? How can someone who doesn’t even think for himself really “get it” about anything? When the insincere “get it right” what you have is “right just wrong.” The Truth itself, when held by the Insincere can only be held as a low-definition, low pixel-rate, rounded-up version of the itself—-not unlike a really bad photo you spilled coffee on. Insincerity lacks the very captive nature of focus that only true curiosity can provide effortlessly, and automatically. Lao Tzu would say of the Sincere: “The sage, by doing nothing, leaves nothing undone.” To the Insincere, unwavering concentration is seen as something that one must work hard and develop over years of hard work. The insincere think that we must “try to concentrate.” The reason why you have to try to concentrate is because you aren’t that interested. Our concentration effortlessly submits to our deep interests.
Unlike the insincere, the sincere cannot help but concentrate.
So what could account for such a catastrophic malfunction in the mind’s function? A mind that no longer sees for itself is no longer true to itself (i.e. malfunctioning). If the mind is not seeing for itself what is the mind seeing instead then?
An insincere mind is one that looks at the world through the eyes of others, over its own.
An insincere mind is one that has come to “implicitly” trust the opinions of others, over its own. An insincere mind is insincere with itself because it can no longer totally trust itself—to see things aright on it’s own.
The Insincere read books to learn how to think like others.
The Sincere read books to learn how to think for themselves.
An insincere mind is a mind that has come to “implicitly” doubt its own autonomous discernment.
An insincere mind is one that no longer trusts it’s own “inner voice”.
Silencing this “inner voice” of discernment is what makes for an insincere mind.
The only way to get a sincere mind to distrust it’s own “inner voice” (it’s own honest assessment, and its own inner discernment), would be to convince the mind that it is not functioning right. The Sincere Mind must so thoroughly be convinced that it’s own honest assessments are not to be trusted. This is the only way a sincere mind can be made to forgo it’s own discernment in earnest. To kill a mind, it must first doubt itself. The moment, a sincere mind comes to doubt it’s own “inner-voice”—in favor of an external authority structure —the malfunction of insincerity can now be said to be well established in that mind.
A mind that was made to doubt its own proper function can no longer, in good conscience, trust itself to do it’s own thinking for itself autonomously. It can no longer take itself seriously anymore either. A mind that sees itself as incompetent cannot help but become insincere or untrue to itself for reasons of self-preservation. Such a mind can now be said to be Insincere, malfunctioning, or unsane.
Unsane is the mind that does not trust itself.
The moment a sincere mind becomes convinced that it’s own functioning is somehow inadequate or incomplete, malfunction of that mind has now begun. Unable to trust itself, the sincere mind sees no option but to “outsource” the very structure of it’s “thinking,” mainly, to protect itself from its own folly. It is like a healthy person who’s legs never developed because he was somehow convinced (by an authority figure) to live in a wheelchair because he was told his legs were defective. Supporting something that could have stood on it’s own, can serve to weaken the very thing supported. Unable to trust itself the sincere mind commits functional suicide by outsourcing its primary function of discernment.
This act of rescinding one’s own “inner voice” in favor of external authority is referred to in Christian Circles as “selling your soul”. According to the mystic traditions, this act of silencing our “inner voice”, renders God himself, who’s voice can only be heard in the silence of the heart, inaudible.
To achieve this essential step, the child must be made to see himself as a malfunction. He must be made to see himself as an incompetent, incomplete, inadequate being, born with inherent flaws into an essentially flawed & irrational world, seething with unpredictable dangers. The child must see himself as something that exists by virtue of pure chance, a fluke of nature, yet profoundly fortunate to be born to good owners(parents).
Truthities and Falsities
A parent’s obsession with a child’s safety and security can inadvertently mold the child into perceiving himself as a fundamentally inadequate being. A child can be made to see himself as an incomplete, insufficient, and incompetent being, ironically by the most loving parents. He can be made to see himself as a fundamentally flawed and fragile being, living in a very very dangerous & unpredictable (irrational & unsane) world, who couldn’t possibly have survived if not for the strenuous effort & care invested in the child by his owners. He can then be given the implied sense of obligation to remember how fortunate he is to be born to good owners.
Around the world, the term “terrible 2’s” is used to describe the struggle that takes place between parent and child as the parent attempts to “tame” the child in an effort to make him “fit for society”. This period of resistance offered up by the child, as he struggles to preserve his own sovereignty is referred to as the “terrible 2’s”. It is during this period that the child comes to an “implied understanding” of “who/what” he is, “what” the world might be , and “why” things are the way they are. In these formative years children can only understand what is “implied.” They are not capable of “explicit understanding” yet. This is when they are most vulnerable to “falsities.”
- Falsities use “implied language”.
Falsities are “implied understandings.”
Falsities cannot survive the clear light of “explicit examination.”
- Truthities use “explicit (specific) language”.
Truthities are “explicitly understood.”
Truthities requires the absence of “implied understanding.”
Truthities understood “implicitly” are nothing but “falsities” parading as “truthities”
Truthities can only be understood “explicitly.”
Truthities understood “implicitly” closely resemble Truthities, but are actually Falsities.
- The Implied Understanding of Truthities are like “genuine fakes.”
Falsities are like GMO Tomatos, if Truthities were Tomatos — almost indistinguishable.
Falsities prefer “implied language;” and Truthities prefer “explicit language.”
For example, reminding the child to “Be good!” implies the child is “bad”.
Once a “falsity” takes root in a child’s “implied world view” it takes hold of the child’s entire being. The “implied world” is the sub-conscious world, and is not easily repaired even with subsequent “explicit understanding.” During a child’s formative years, regardless of what is “explicitly” instilled in the child, only that which is “implied” is understood & assimilated into the child’s world view.
During these formative years, even the loftiest of Truthities cannot help but be “mis-implied” in the child’s understanding. Remember, the malleable child is only capable of “implied-learning” at this time. Whatever “Truthity” the parent may be trying to “explicitly” instill in the child, gets contextually smeared over by an “implied understanding” that the child gets that he is somehow fundamentally inadequate. Continual bombardment of all kinds of lessons put forth by the parents eventually undermines the child’s own conviction in his own inner voice. Unable to trust itself, the child will soon come to rely on simple “rules” to guide his behavior, like “don’t touch this,” or” don’t go there.” This is where the “letter” begins to spell death. Implied language is made of strict rules & boundaries mainly because it lacks the explicit understanding behind the rules. When parents “set boundaries” for their child, they are unwittingly building an invisible prison inside their own child’s mind. They are building an “implied” prison for his mind, the walls of which will later be fortified with obedience conditioning by the State.
Lets have a listen to 2 year old Jimmy and find out how this “prison for his mind” is built:
- These people(my parents) seem to be my owners. I must be some kind of property that they own–like how I own my toys. I own my toys because they are mine, and my parents own me because they made me and are paying for it dearly. They love me, they take care of me, they tell me what to do, so therefore they own me. The idea that the world is an ‘own-able’ place filled with own-able things, is always one of first delusions(falsities) fuel-injected into the child’s “implied world view” by his parents. Before he could even speak, the child comes to an “implied understanding” that: “All things (including me) are own-able things that can in turn, turn around, and own other things that can then own other things below it. My toys have to do what I say–I have to do what my parents say–and my parents have to get up early to do what their Bosses at work say–and I hear even the Bosses have to Do what a bigger Boss says, and this chain of ownership goes all the way up to the top.
Else-Esteem & Else-Worth
- If your sense of self worth is derived from the opinion of others
what you have is else-worth not self-worth.
- If your sense of self-esteem is derived from the opinion of others
what you have is else-esteem not self-esteem.
A truly authentic person has no care wether he is seen to be authentic or not. Because his self-esteem is derived from his own discernment of himself, he does not cling desperately to the opinions of others. And as such his self-esteem is self-contained, measured only against his OWN principles. It is when we become enslaved to the opinion of others, that we become Insincere. It is when we fabricate our “else-esteem” to please the assessment of others, that we come to live inauthentic lives.
It is when we feel the need to influence what others think of us, by projecting a contrived image of ourselves, that we ourselves become Insincere (and Inauthentic).
Under such a world-view, only a “false” sense of “else-ownership” (not “self-ownership) could be possible. “Else-ownership” like “else-esteem” and “else-worth” offer grand but ultimately empty promises.
Even the concept of “self-ownership” is clearly ludicrous. The “revealed truth” (from Meher Baba) does not tell us that people are own-able things at all. In fact, the “revealed truth” says that God owns it all–outright!–each and all of us, doesn’t it? There is no such Hierarchical Arrangement wherein: God owns Nations–Nations owns Men–Man owns Kid, Kid owns Dog–and Dog owns Bone. Yet, this is what is understood to be true in our “implied world view.” If we stop and ask ourselves the “explicit” question of “who owns the dog bone”? A Theist would have to say that God owns the dog bone outright directly. But our “implied understanding” tells us otherwise. It tells us that “the bone is owned by the dog, who is own by me.” Doesn’t the revealed truth tell us that God alone owns that dog bones directly, without the need of any intermediaries such as myself or even the dog? Isn’t that what the revealed truth tells us?
No it doesn’t. Not at all.
That is what the Revealed Truth “implies”!
But what it “explicitly” means is that there is no such thing as “ownership.”
Let me explain:
The Revealed Truth does not tell us that God owns everything.
The Revealed Truth tells us that God IS everything.
The Revealed Truth tells us that there is NO SUCH THING AS OWNERSHIP!
The Revealed Truth tells us that Ownership is a Delusion.
The Revealed Truth tells us that everything in the world is like a “Active Use Rental” that owns itself.
The Revealed Truth tells us that every sentient being is inalienably, inescapably, invariably, indeed “actual”-ly SOVEREIGN! — interdependent yet sovereign — That’s every person, every animal, every river, every mountain, every rock, down to every piece of dust in every Universe!
The Revealed Truth tells us that Ownership even as an idea is delusory.
It is a clear falsity injected into our worldview, unwittingly, by none other than our parents.
The Revealed Truth tells us that every individual, even a baby in the womb, as well as all the countless micro organisms in his stomach, are all individual Sovereign Beings, though interdependent with each other. In fact if ownership were a function of dependence, we are just as dependent on the bacteria in our stomachs as they are dependent on us. In this way, all of existence, according to Buddha, is one huge impermanent interdependent whole. It is not something that can be divided up and owned. Thus the child cannot be owned, not even by the parents. Even the Bible tells us that our children are not our property. The false-world view that people & things are own-able(wholly or partially), is one of the oldest, and one of the most INDISPENSABLE “falsities” essential for human enslavement.
Here’s Jimmy again:
2. These people( my parents) seem to be my bosses. These people seem to be suggesting that I should just do as they say. Why? Because there’s something wrong with me. Apparently, I must have been born somehow “incomplete”, “incompetent” and “inadequate.” Since they know what they are doing and I clearly don’t, what they seem to be “strongly” suggesting is for me to rescind my “inner voice” in favor of their “authority”. So I fought it for a year saying “NO! NO!” all day. Sometimes even when they just call my name I used to just say “no”. But boy are these guys persistent. After a year, I gave up, and decided to just let them tell me what to do and think. Its easier, less fighting, and best of all I don’t have to think for myself anymore. For now, they shall do my thinking for me, until they fix my head up with things to memorize, and then my mind will work right, which means I can think for myself as taught by them. This is how the virus of Ad Verecundiam (look it up) is installed in the child. Once that “inner voice” is silenced sincerity is lost. No ‘tamed’ child can grow to be a sincere ‘natural’ adult.
“Be natural.” — Meher Baba
Here’s Jimmy again:
3. These people(parents) seem to think there’s something wrong with me. I must have been born somehow “inadequate”, “incomplete”, and “insufficient”. That is why I need all these shots(vaccines) without which a small bug, so small I can’t even see them, they say could kill me. The world is full of at least 23 different dangerous bugs that can kill me, just like that! (he claps his hands) The world is a dangerous place. A very dangerous place! A very very dangerous place. Unpredictable! Irrational! It makes no sense. No wonder God doesn’t have time for us. That’s why we must protect ourselves. Thank God my Owners know how to “compensate” for all my many ” inadequacies”–unlike those poor kids in Africa. No one can feel secure who see’s himself as a fundamentally inadequate being.
By the third year, most parents are able to “tame” their child as “the spirit of resistance” to the parent’s authority begins to wither. By the time the child is “fit to become a member of society” that inner voice is all but silenced with automatic thank yous and pleases. In Mystic circles, this act of the child rescinding his own inner voice in favor of external authority, is referred to aptly as the act of “selling one’s soul.” (or selling the child’s soul) The irony is that, it is not we(the child) who sold our soul, but our parents who stole it from us. It is our sick parents, who were raised in a sick family, in a sick community, attending sick schools, in a sick society, in a sick Kali Yuga Word–that robbed us of our Sincerity.
- Can he who sees himself as “inadequate”, “incomplete”, and “incompetent”, trust that “still small voice” within himself?
- Can he who sees himself as “inadequate”, “incomplete”, and “incompetent”, trust himself to even think for himself?
Wouldn’t such a person think it’d be more prudent to “outsource his thinking” to a more “competent” external agency? –preferably a “legitimate” external authority with established credibility– “recognized,” “certified”, “licensed” and “qualified” by a “recognized” “official” “authority” — of our real “sugar-daddy” — the State(Government).
- Can he who who doesn’t think for himself, even be himself?
- If you are not being yourself, how can you be sincere?
UNLESS YOU ARE YOURSELF,
Not insecurely but SURELY!
YOU CANNOT BE SINCERE.
INSincerity of the Heart
Once the mind is broken, its time to break the heart. This is done by making sure the child feel that his own inner “moral compass” is malfunction. Teaching him lots of morality usually does the trick. In order for the child to give up his inner voice(conscience), he must come to see himself as inherently a-moral. To do this we must instill the “implied understanding” that:
If your Parents weren’t there to teach you “right” from “wrong”
— you would have surely fallen for the “Dark Side of the Force.”
This first step usually softens the child’s grip on his heart’s “moral compass.” But we must not leave a void where there was once a “conscience”. Voids must always be filled. In anything, if you leave a void, you are asking for trouble. We must fill that void, as soon as possible with a new moral code—an “explicitly” articulated set of “rules”. The conscience must be replaced by external moral codes comprised of “explicit rules” that are to be “obeyed” to the “letter” with no allowance for exceptions.
The child must be steeped with the “implied understanding” that to obey authority is most “right” and worthy of “pride” and that to disobey authority is most “wrong” and utterly “shameful.” This message must be “implied” to the child, while at the same time the child is told “explicitly” to do only what he thinks is right. This confusion(contradiction) is important. The child must be given the implied understanding that only obedience is “good,” while at the same time verbally told that “you should always only listen to your heart by doing what’s right — as I have instructed.” Being made to feel the pressure that obedience is the only moral choice all the while at the same time being told to follow your heart is what disorients the child’s conscience and confuses it. When the child obeys, he must be told that he is a “good boy.” And if the child disobeys he must be told he is a “bad boy”. This type of training(conditioning) is great for disrupting the child’s moral compass from functioning properly, and from developing into maturity. Further, the “cognitive dissonance” created by such blatant contradictions coexisting in one mind, can catastrophically undermine the child’s “critical thinking apparatus” from developing properly right from the start.
Teaching morality(right from wrong) as soon as possible, and as frequently as possible, is the surest and fastest way of completely disorienting and dismantling the child’s inner “moral compass”.
If done with enough persistence and coercion, the child’s moral compass can be completely disoriented (or made non-functional). This is how super-soldiers(heartless killers) are made. —
The moment the child says to himself in his own “implied language” (Machine Language) something like this, the selling of his soul is finished :
“Thank god, I got good parents (and the church or state) to do my thinking for me. Doing what you are told makes you a good boy, it’s pretty simple. Why reinvent the wheel, when they’ve already sorted everything out. All I have to do is— think, say, and do as I’m told, and stay within those arbitrary boundaries (6 million lines of code just for tax law) they set for me. Thinking is just so much extra work anyway…. Who want’s to think. when we can copy others thoughts. Lets play. I’m bored. I’m bored…. Maybe I’ll just think about all the things I can get away with….hmmm..”
At this moment, the installation of the disorder(or virus) called “Insincerity of the mind” can be said to be completed successfully. If the child does not say “I’m bored” often or at least periodically, this means that the installation of insincerity is wavering. Further updates to this virus of Ad Verecundiam must be installed by trained professionals only. (Check your local listing for Department of Education approved Schools for further details.)
Once the child has dethroned his own “inner-voice”(conscience) as the sole judge, jury, and executioner of all his thoughts and actions, he can now be said to be no longer sincere. Once the child decides to “outsource” his “discernment” or “moral compass” to an external authority, the child’s soul is sold—to the parents at first, but eventually he will end up in the hands of the highest bidder.
To be the sole sovereign authority of all one thinks IS what makes for Sincerity. No one who does not see himself as Sovereign can be Sincere. As long as you are the Exclusive Sole Authority that discerns(or judges) everything you think about, you are Sincere with yourself. You may just be a baby, but as long as you are doing all your thinking for yourself (from the ground axiom level up) you are Sincere with yourself. The moment you allow some external authority to overrule your own “inner voice,” you have now become -by definition- Insincere with yourself.
One can be sincerely wrong, yet still be Sincere.
One can even be Ignorant, yet still be Sincere.
One cannot be insincere and be right.
The insincere may have the “letter” right but not the “spirit” at all.
There is nothing about Sincerity, that a baby can’t do!
If you are not in-sourcing your discernment, you are–by definition– Insincere with yourself. The insincere cannot grasp at Truth without adulterating it. How can he who does not think for himself ever really “grasp” anything, anyway? How can someone who doesn’t even think for himself really “get it” about anything? When the insincere “get it right” what they have is “right just wrong.” Even Truthities, when held by an insincere mind can only be held falsely. When the insincere “get it right” it is nothing but a warped version of a bad copy of someone else’s words.
For the Insincere,
Truths are nothing but Lies that (very) closely resemble the Truth.
For the Insincere, Truthities are like near perfect mimicries of the truth. Truthities, are what truths look like when held by an insincere mind. Like a warped mirror, the insincere mind cannot help but reflect on everything falsely. This is because, insincerity lacks the very sincerity required to grasp at the truth for itself.
Yet at the same time, their knowledge (the insincere) of the “dark side” is profound.
Only the insincere can know what insincerity really means.
Only the inauthentic can know what inauthenticity really means.
Only the high level hypocrite can truly understands how cold and cynical hypocrisy can get.
The sincere don’t really understand these words.
The sincere have no idea how deep insincerity can get.
Only the insincere can know how deep hypocrisy can go.
“Hypocrisy is said to be the tribute vice pays to virtue.”
— Meher Baba
A man who owns himself, owns his thoughts.
A Sincere man is a man who owns his thoughts.
An Insincere man is a man who doesn’t own his own thoughts.
A Sincere man wants to know for himself.
An Insincere man doesn’t.
(A Sincere woman is a man.
Women are men born in female incarnations.
There are no women, only men in this world.
There are two types of hu-men,
female and male.
Children are men too.
Little men are men just as much as big and older men.
We are all men.)
“I will be born a man, a Perfect Master.”
— Mani Irani
The Universe is Sincere and Sane by default.
Man(Woman,Baby, Child-God:MWBC-G) is Sincere & Sane by Default.
No one is born insincere.
No one is inherently insincere.
Insincerity & Insanity are not inherent to man(MWBC-G).
Insincerity is caused.
Things that have causes can be manufactured.
The manufacturing process for Insincerity is it’s exact causality.
The child must be made to see himself as fundamentally incomplete, incompetent and inadequate.
The child must be made to see the world as a dangerous, unpredictable, and irrational place.
The child must see everything as own-able partially or wholly, including himself.
The child must see that ownership is fundamentally hierarchical.
The child is then asked to rescind his own “inner voice” in favor of parent’s authority because his “inner voice” is incompetent.
The child must be taught what to think & how to think to stop his thinking.
The child must be taught “right” from “wrong” to silence his “moral compass”
The child must be taught that “not sharing” is bad.
Soon he will learn to distrust his own thoughts, his own conscience, his own inner voice.
Most of all, the child must be taught “implicitly” that obedience is the highest virtue & disobedience is the lowest vice. Once the child rescinds his own “inner voice” and outsources his thinking his soul is sold. Soon you will be able to get the child to do unthinkable “evil” in the name of the name of “good.”
“Habits formed at 3 will last until 80.” — Korean Proverb.
Upasni Maharaj, one of Meher Baba’s masters, stressed that each person must develop their own personal faith, unique only to themselves; that strong faith is a very personalized faith, to which the aspirant holds on very tightly, and guards jealously as his very own; based on his very own understanding of the ‘Truth’. At Upasni Maharaj’s temple, I was guided to this poster that hung at the main hall dedicated to the female gender. Upasni’s chief disciple who took on his charge Satguru Sati Godavarimataji had this message posted on one of it’s central columns.
This message (I was told) was written for the women of the world.
The Glory of Intellect
The true greatness and glory of intellect lies in contemplation of the divine, seeking the company of the holy, righteous behavior and leading a truthful life. It is the duty of every human being always to keep his intellect in its pristine glory. He should not allow it to stray along the wrong path of indiscipline and violence but observe restraint and forbearance. Even in everyday life the intellect should not be allowed to go astray leaving the path of righteousness.
Man considers that his greatness lies in achieving name and fame and material possessions. In pursuit of these goals he keeps his intellect or faculty of intelligence in abeyance and drags it deep down to ignorance and degradation, thereby ruining himself. The intellect should always be nourished and nurtured on proper food – that of contemplation of the divine, constant repetition of the divine name, meditation and mental invocation of one’s ‘Satguru’ by having love and compassion for all beings and living in contentment and in contemplation of God one can make one’s life worthy of living. When the intellect is thus nurtured and kept in its true greatness, the worldly glory and respectability which a man craves for automatically follow.
Wise, respectable and intelligent people know very well, wherein lies the real interest of the nation if everyone trains and keeps his intellect in its true and natural sublime the whole country will attain glory and greatness with its citizens living in happiness and contentment.
– Satguru Sati Godavarimataji
While on Meher Baba’s side the intellect is clearly stressed as an instrument, though necessary, inadequate for grasping “THE TRUTH”. His master Upasni’s camp highly stresses the “de-bugging” of our thinking apparatus(intellect) as a PRIORITIZABLE essential ingredient, especially for Women. Satguru Sati Godavari is a Woman. Upasni’s Temple houses only female nuns.
She joined Upasni as a child.
Having a faulty intellect, plagued with fallacies (or errors-in reasoning), which act like computer viruses, is like wearing beer-goggles. You cannot discern the truth with it.
Having a sound intellectual charity, cleared of all fallacies(errors/viruses), with it’s core competency of critical thinking intact and functioning properly and in tact, is similar to wearing flat clear glasses that do not in any way effect one’s view of reality, as it is, before his eyes.
I’m afraid for those of us who have already lost our Sincerity, it will be next to impossible to recapture our Sincerity. What we can do is protect our children from losing their Sincerity. As for us we are like crushed coke cans. Once you crush a can, even if you meticulously straighten it back out, the fold lines will never be entirely removed. For most of us, the infection of Ad Verecundiam has seeped into our psyche since before we could speak. Our mission, is really about how we can protect children from the tyranny of loving parents. Our children — they are the New Humanity.
IN CONCLUSION, it seems clear that we are destined to recapture the glory of our intellects, through the restoration of our Sincerity(Sanity), by understanding the root cause of our Insincerity(Unsanity) — and thereby irraticating it’s influence from Humanity– and low and behold the Beloved’s New Humanity will be upon us — like a cool breeze.
This was a specimen of my mind for your perusal.
I retain the right maintain that I could be wrong about absolutely everything, at all times.
Chai “mischievous” Gatewalla.
Please continue reading, there is much more to this….
You will enjoy it.
Take a deep breath and keep on reading!
The Wonderland of Insincerity
The Insincere don’t live in the real world. They live in wonderland. Wonderland is an irrational and superstitious place filled with fun mysteries. It is a place where two opposing contradictions can coexist in harmony in one and the same mind. It is a place where blatant contradictions get along so well with each other that some of them even get married to each other, and live together in happy matrimony, in one and the same mind.
To an insincere person everything seems like an opinion, even facts. The distinction between facts and opinions are never all that clear to those who have outsourced their thinking. An insincere person is a person that was made unsure of himself at the core. This is what makes him persuadable. Only an insincere person can say “I can see their point” about both sides of a perfectly opposed argument. The insincere are mentally vulnerable to persuasion attacks by social engineering methods, because none of their ideas are firmly rooted in “unshakable” principles. Instead, an insincere person’s principles are sliding around on ice, so to speak. The insincere are unprincipled and therefor their thoughts are vulnerable to persuasion. The Insincere have mobile principles. Their principles are plausibly deniable on all fronts, fully retrofitted with state of the art features such as on the spot adjustability, and complete adaptability for all types of retrofits. It is an awesome machine to behold. These mobile principles are fully modifiable, bendable, even breakable, and reassignable as needed. The Insincere are able to have all their principles sitting right on the fence (so to speak) just waiting to join whichever side wins the war. Compromise is considered an “art” by the Insincere, not a sin, or even an error.
It is from the perspective of a faulty world view, that the Truth feels like a trap.
Sincere is the default human being.
Sincerity is Sane.
The default human being is Sane.
Sincere is the “untamed” human being.
Insincerity is the “tamed” “captive” “domesticated” and so called“civilized” human being.
— who is actually uncivilized.
Insincerity is Unsane.
Insincerity is MANUFACTURED by the insincere.
Default Human Nature is Free, Sane, Sincere, Authentic, and therefore naturally Curious. “Tamed” Human Nature is Captive, Unsane, Insincere, Inauthentic, and therefore unnaturally fascinated with the inessential, superficial & shallow.
The New Humanity is a bunch of “untamed”, free, Sane, Sincere, Authentic people, that are naturally Curious. They are people who cannot “really” understand what you mean when you say “hypocrite.” They may think they understood what you meant when you explain to them what a “hypocrite” is, but you’d know they didn’t really “get it”.
- Insincerity, is like trying to quench your thirst by eating a piece of paper with “water” written on it.
Insincerity gets it “right” but its always “right just wrong.”
Insincerity is always Unsane.
Insincerity is not Insane but Unsane.
Insanity is not repairable.
Unsanity is repairable.
- Sane Societies produce Sane people.
Sane Societies are conflict-less.
- Unsane Societies produce Unsane people.
Unsane Societies are competitive.
- Sane Societies multiply Sanity.
Unsane societies manufacture Unsanity.
Unprincipled Man Redefined
To an unprincipled man “survival” is an important principle.
An Unprincipled Man is:
:A man who does not require direct experiential certainty for his thinking.
:A man who can be satisfied with second hand knowledge.
:A man who gets excited when he gets something for free.
: A man to whom “safety” is more important than “ideas/principles/axioms.”
:A man to whom “saving lives” is more important than “ideas/principles/axioms.”
— “Self preservation” or survival is the first and most important principle of Modern Satanism.
:A man to whom “compromise” is the way to peace and harmony.
:A man who likes to follow “procedures” and “rules”
:A man who believes in “leadership”, is always a “follower.”
— those who think for themselves do not, and cannot, believe in “leadership.”
:A man to whom “rules” are sacred and good, and breaking rules is bad no matter what.
:A man to whom the strict rule of non violence is not flexible.
:A man to whom “giving up a bit of freedom for safety & security” is an acceptable compromise.
:A man who does not hold his Kye(계) (Natural Law & Non-aggression Principle).
In his essay, “Satanism: The Feared Religion”, the Church of Satan’s current administrator, Peter H. Gilmore, states: (according to Wikipedia)
“The reality behind Satan is simply the dark evolutionary force of entropy that permeates all of nature and provides the drive for survival and propagation inherent in all living things.”
Satanism says the following: (Do these match your real beliefs?)
Principled Man Redefined
To a principled man “survival of the fittest” is definitely not something that can even be considered as a principle. If you don’t even know who you are, where you came from & where you are going, how can survival be of any real consequence to you? (Where were you a thousand years ago? Where will you be in a thousand years? Where did you come from? — none of us know the answers to these questions via direct experiential certainty)
— Contrary to “survival” “safety” “security” and “saving lives” being most important, Meher Baba says “Life is a mighty joke. He who knows this can hardly be understood by others. He who does not know it finds himself in a state of delusion. He may ponder over this problem day and night but will find himself incapable of knowing it. Why? People take life seriously, and God lightly; whereas we must take God seriously, and life lightly. Then we know that we always were the same and will ever remain the same — the originator of this joke. This Knowledge is not achieved by reasoning, but it is the Knowledge of experience.”
A Principled Man is:
:A man who requires no less than direct experiential certainty for his knowledge.
:A man who cannot outsourced his thinking, nor his moral compass.
: A man to whom his principles are more important than life itself.
:A man to whom freedom is a principle worth risking “security”.
:A man to whom the absence of coercion is a (uncompromisable) necessity.
:A man to whom the absence of coercion is clearly seen as freedom and vice versa.
:A man to whom life is nothing without principles.
: A man whom cannot live without his principles.
:A man who would “rather die” than be enslaved.
:A man who would rather die than compromise his principles and live a half-life.
:A man who will settle for no less than a world where we all(everyone of all races, and ages) can live compromise-free.
:A man who feels the (critical) need to own all of his own thoughts (absolutely) from axiomatic foundation up.
:A man who knows nothing is ever actually for free, and doesn’t therefore want anything for free — ever.
: A man who believes in God and God’s laws(principles). He is self-thinking, self-guided. He is not a follower of any man-made authority, thus cannot believe in leadership. That would be a contradiction. And this man’s mind despises internal contradictions.
Even if you so call “believe” in Meher Baba’s words that indeed Life is not serious and that it is God that should be taken Seriously, if the actual life you are living prioritizes “Safety” and “security,” what does this mean about you? Are you living according to the principles pleasing to Baba, or Modern Satanism? Are you standing firm in the truth no matter what, or are you going with the flow like everyone else?
The one that you actually obey — that is your real religion. –CG
Meher Baba says:
“The deeper secrets of spiritual life are unraveled to those who take risks and who make bold experiments with life. They are not meant for the idler who seeks guarantees for every step. Those who speculate from the shore about the ocean shall know only its surface, but those who would know the depths of the ocean must be willing to plunge into it.”
Living a cautious life guided by the “reasonable” principle that “safety” and “security” is more important than freedom of thought, for sure doesn’t sound at all like the life Baba is recommending for us…
It’s seems to me, what Baba really wanted to say was:
“No balls — No f%$#ing spirituality!”
I could be wrong.
SHYNESS is INSincere
Shyness is a form of insincerity. Shyness is related to modesty in that there is something shy about modesty and something modest about shyness. Meher Baba warns us to be wary of modesty. “Beware of modesty. Modesty, under the cloak of humility, invariably leads one into the clutches of self-deception.” Shyness is a manifestation of this self-deception. Shyness, like Modesty, is acutely aware of itself. Shyness is that uncomfortable feeling we feel when we receive praise.
Shyness is the fear of our true nature being discovered by others.
Shyness fears that if others really knew me, I mean REALLY KNEW ME, they would not like me anymore–or respect me anymore–or love me anymore–or be attracted to me anymore. Shyness says that if that person were to smell my farts and see me pick my nose, he (or she) might not respect me anymore. Shyness is our own sincerity interfering with the “act” we are putting on.
What shyness fears most of all is discovery, being exposed of one’s real nature.
Deception lies at the very core of shyness.
One becomes shy by the standard with which one judges others. And these are very shallow standards indeed, like how one dresses or looks. One is shy because one is shallow, and judges others by these very same shallow standards. By imagining the self, as seen through the eyes of the other, Shyness turns around and judges itself by the very same shallow standards it mocked others with. A shy person judges himself harshly. The last thing Shyness wants is to be laughed at with the same veracity it laughs at others. When embarrassed, shyness seeks refuge in isolation. Once alone, it begins to rebuke and berate itself harshly repeating phrases like:
“Why am I so stupid! I’m so stupid! Idiot! I’m worthless! I don’t deserve to live.”
“If only I could go back in time to that moment and play that part over again.
— but do it just right this time, like a pro —
The most important FACT
that needs to be concealed is
how much I hate myself
for caring so much about
what you think of me. ”
Shyness imagines itself reacting to the same situation with a better ‘act’ next time. Every shy person is a method actor playing out a well crafted role, to suite prevailing social trends and standards — all of which are external & shallow.
Shyness is a method actor convincingly playing out the part of a Genuine Imitation.
Whats funny is that Shyness hates the hypocrite. It relishes the moment when a hypocrite “who deserved it” gets exposed. Shyness is the absence of integrity that pays tribute to integrity.
Shyness is dishonesty yearning to be honest more than anything.
Shyness can only occur in those who are enslaved to the opinion of others.
Shyness can only occur in those who are putting on an act, and fear exposure.
Shyness is a product of else-esteem and else-worth, not self-esteem and self-worth.
Shyness only occurs in a a diseased society.
Shyness does not occur in healthy societies.
Shyness is not your fault.
Shyness was done to you, when you were robbed of your sincerity when you were a child.
The Story of
Losing your Sincerity is like spilled milk. We cannot fix ourselves. However, by understanding the “root cause” of the problem and it’s “chain of causality”, we can help to prevent our children from suffering a similar fate. Lets discover the real “root cause” of “Insincerity” by examining the “root cause” of another “symptom” — Zits.
Peter DePore was a happy Pore. He was a happy Pore who lived on the surface of beautiful girl named So-Hyun, who lived in Seoul Korea. When the first McDonalds opened up in Seoul, So-Hyun was so excited to try the famous, Big Mac, and Peter DePore was excited for her too. With his limited intellect, all Peter could understand was that the Big Mac represented the best food in the world, enjoyed by no less than the most superior people in the world, because they are the richest, and therefor the Best. Not bad for a pore, I thought. When So-Hyun had her first Big-Mac, she was amazed at how good it tasted. It was a bit dry but boy was it good, she thought. Kind of bland and tasteless, but what an amazing meal, she thought. Everything was just perfect, she thought.
But the next day, Peter was attacked by a bunch of strange chemicals known as “toxins.” Peter knew right away what the problem was. The food at McDonalds was no good. But as the days went by So-Hyun kept eating at McDonalds more and more often, and Peter was being visited by more and more chemical toxins as time went on. Life slowly became more and more miserable for poor Peter DePore. He yearned for the days when he and So-Hyun were so happy together.
Peter tried his best to fight off the chemical toxins, but year after year of bombardment finally got to him. Peter became infected and started swelling until he felt like he was about to Pop. Alarmed about her looks, her most important asset in her mind, So-Hyun, rushed to the doctor. Peter was so relieved. “Finally” he thought “the doctor will explain to So-Hyun about all the chemical toxins that she’s been eating and convince her to stop. Despite his condition Peter DePore tried to remain positive. This was going to be the best day of his life.
Is Peter DePore a pore or a zit?
After a couple hours of paperwork, So-Hyun finally got to see the doctor. The Doctor took a look at So-Hyun’s face and said “What you have here,” pointing at Peter,”is a Zit.” Peter couldn’t believe his ears, he yelled out “I am not a Zit! I am a Pore! Peter DePore is my name!” But of course the Doctor couldn’t hear him. “We got just the solution for you, little man!” said the doctor pointing at Peter. Then he handed So-Hyun a nice slick tube with ZIT-ZAPPA written on it. Peter couldn’t believe his eyes. ” I am not a Zit! I am a Pore!,” but no one could hear him.
Immediately So-Hyun started rubbing Zit Zappa on her face. Peter could feel the chemical toxins in Zit Zappa fast at work. Suddenly, he started choking & found it hard to breath. He couldn’t believe what was happening to him. Here he was, the clear victim of a crime, being falsely accused of being the actual perpetrator. And to make matters even worse, the actual perpetrators of the crime–chemical toxins–were to be applied as the “solution” to Peter who has now been identified as the “problem,” or “Peter the Zit”. Wow, he thought. I thought these humans were smart. They know how to make all kinds of awesome stuff, yet how can they be so irrational about something so basic.
He couldn’t understand why the good doctor would do such a thing? How can I be the culprit? Why isn’t the Doctor addressing the actual cause of the problem? How can the “symptoms” be treated as the “problem.” “I am not the problem Doctor,” Peter wanted to shout “The toxic food that So-Hyun is eating is the actual culprit?” “Don’t you know Doctor that, no problem can be solved without addressing it’s root causes?” but no one but God could hear him.
“You can address the symptoms all you want, but until you address the root cause, no problem is fixed.” — Peter the Zit (A.k.a. Peter DePore)
The Fractal Nature of Causality
In the same way that the problem of Acne was actually a systemic problem that involved So-Hymn’s entire body, as well as the “root cause” which lies in her consciousness. — In that very same way, when many psychopaths appear in a given society, the individual psychopaths are not “causal” but “symptomatic” of a much graver and deeper “cause” rooted in the “collective social consciousness .” Only a sick society can produce psychopaths. Only a sick socio-economic order, can produce shy, insecure, incomplete, inadequate, maladjusted, or insincere people.
To see this clearer one must look beyond the causality of our daily lives, to a much larger FRACTAL of causality at work, which is to see the entire Social organism as a single Whole. If we look even further beyond the precipice, we can see the entire Ecosystem, and indeed the entire Cosmos functioning as a single inter-depended Whole. For example, lets say an art collector, for some irrational reason, decides he will appraise the Mona Lisa, only be examining the “left eye” of the Mona Lisa.
Could such a man get a good grip on what the Mona Lisa is all about?
Is it possible for someone who just specializes on the” lips only” of Mona Lisa to get a true understanding of the Mona Lisa? The more someone like this thinks he’s beginning to understand the Mona Lisa — Isn’t it just his misunderstanding that is getting deeper?
Is it possible for someone who just specializes on the “face only” of Mona Lisa to not misunderstand the Mona Lisa? What about if the “left eye only guy”, the “lips only guy” and the “face only guy” got together and talked about the Essence of the Mona Lisa for centuries?
Could they have eventually deduced there’d be a curvy road winding into the mountains?
Could they have somehow guessed there’d be a serene lake fading into the distance?
To appreciate the Mona Lisa, you must see the WHOLE painting, and then discuss it with others who too are looking at the WHOLE picture. If the “lips guy” happened to be there, all his input would at best be of negligible import. In this exact same way, SPECIALIZATION has mainly served to DEEPEN our MISUNDERSTANDING of the world we live in. The fact that the Whole is more than the sum of it’s parts, can never be seen through the eyes of SPECIALIZATION. The Truth can only be MISUNDERSTOOD by those who refuse to step away far enough from the canvas, to see the Whole picture from beyond the precipice.
- TO UNDERSTAND THE SELF WE MUST LOOK AT THE WHOLE SOCIETY
- To understand the Society, we must look at the whole ecology…
- To understand the ecology we must look at all the different societies of all the different species on earth as one integral whole.
- Like So-Hyun’s Whole being is to her One Pore(Zit),
- so is our Whole Social Structure to each and every One of us.
- You Will Know Them by Their Fruits
“You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thorn-bushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them.” — Matthew 7:15-20
You Will know the body by the worst zit on it.
You will know the society by the worst person in it.
Its pretty simple, if only one can see Society as a single organism with which One has primarily a “symptomatic” relationship. What needs to go is the “diseased social order” itself not it’s bad members.
Unhealthy Social Structures
(All Coercion based Hierarchical Societies),
generate unhealthy people.
Insincerity is a Symptom of a Sick Society.
Insincerity is a condition of captivity.
Healthy Social Structures(Spiritual Anarchism) generate healthy people, not shy & insecure people. There are societies like the Aka, Kalahari, and the Ladakh where SHYNESS does not exist. To learn more check out The Ladakh People (click and it will open in new tab for subsequent viewing)
Sincere Curiosity vs. Utilitarian Curiosity
Fascination is curiosity enjoying itself.
At its best, fascination marvels with curiosity
at the source of all fascination
So why is curiosity so important? Curiosity becomes important not for what it is but for what it isn’t. If the best reason for loving God is for no reason at all, the best reason for wanting to know the Truth(God) is also for no reason at all. Sincere curiosity is curiosity without reason or motive. Utilitarian Curiosity is the curiosity of an inventor like Thomas Edison who was motivated by a strong desire to make something useful and therefor profitable. Sincere Curiosity is closer to the curiosity of a Newton or an Einstein, who would gladly give up some wealth they have, if only they could know the truth. Their curiosity is sincere to the extent that they are reasonless. If Einstein’s curiosity, for example, was later on in life somehow motivated by a pursuit of fame and recognition, to that extent his curiosity would have become utilitarian. If one were willing to risk all he has including life itself, in order to tabernacle with the truth, what else could this be but sincere curiosity enflamed?
Curiosity lies at the very foundation of the Universe. Meher Baba tells us that it was curiosity alone that sprung all of creation into being, with the simplest of questions — “who am I?” This original curiosity was so faint and reasonless that another word was needed to describe it. Baba calls it the “original whim.” Why did Adam take a bite out of the apple from “the tree of knowledge of good and evil”? Yes, Eve and the snake had something to do with it, but Adam disobeyed God’s only order ultimately because he was curious. Curious enough to risk everything. As such, the Bible tells us that the world as we know it today comes as a result of this curious bite.
Within all of us, way down at the bottom lurks this most original of curiosities. “Who am I?” is the quintessential question of all questions. It is the ultimate question that underpins all other questions. It underpins all that we do, all that we want, as well as all there is. This most original, most foundational, and most sincere question seeks but one thing —the Absolute Truth of one’s existence confirmed through direct experiential certainty.
The Buddha explains Sincerity by asking a few questions to a disciple.
- “Where were you before you were born?” — I don’t know.
- “What were you before you were born?” — I don’t know.
- “Will you drop this body one day?” — Yes.
- “So this place is only a temporary station?” — Yes.
- “So this place is not your final destination for sure?” — Yes
- “Where will you be after you drop the body?” — I don’t know.
- “What will you be after you drop the body?” — I don’t know.
- “So, who are you?” — I don’t know.
- “So, what are you?” — I don’t know.
- “So, if you don’t even know who you are, where you came from, and where you are going, how can you take this world seriously when you know it is but a temporary station? How can you even think about getting involved in worldly affairs when you yourself are unknown to yourself? Unless you have chosen to be insincere with yourself in someway, how can you take this world seriously knowing it is only a temporary station. Meher Baba asks a similar question when he asks “ Do you want to escape prison or improve it?”
Imagine yourself to be Sherlock Holmes. You suddenly wake up in some strange planet entirely foreign to you. You have a pounding headache and you realize you are suffering from total amnesia. You cannot remember your name or where you came from. You quickly realize you may be facing the greatest challenge of your career as an investigator. Here you are in some foreign place, you don’t know who you are and where you came from. What to do? Where to start? Right away your focus would have to concentrate on figuring out “who” you are, as well as how to get back “home” wherever that is. You would not be getting too involved in the local affairs of that planet, now would you? Think about it. What would Sherlock Holmes or Spock really do, if they were trapped in such a situation? Would they get deeply involved with local secular matters? Or would they have no choice but to dive deep within themselves in search for their true identities first? Sincerity cannot take the world seriously, without first knowing who One is. Since the “self” is not something that is knowable in that world(temporary station) the world itself is not something that can be taken all too seriously. The world is not something that can be taken seriously unless one already happens know the self. Once One knows the self, then perhaps the world can be taken seriously, but not before — and not sincerely.
When the Buddha was young, he thought he knew who he was. But soon experiences taught him that he had no idea who he was. As soon as this occurred he had to leave his involvement with the world behind. He said “How can I in earnest get involved in any such worldly affairs, when in fact, I don’t even know who I am? It is better not to do than to do Insincerely, and I cannot Sincerely get involved in worldly affairs. The only thing I can do right now in all sincerity is to leave the world in order that I find myself first.” And with this, he left the palace of his birth.
- A truly sincere person cannot get passed the question “who am I?”
- To a truly sincere person this question must be answered before anything & everything, period.
- A truly sincere person cannot take the world seriously, because existence itself is undermined by an even bigger problem — of not knowing who or what one is.
- The truly sincere therefore naturally end up taking God seriously, and life lightly. They cannot help it. To the sincere, the Truth is not negotiable with anything in the world — not by choice — but choiceless-ly. The truly sincere are free from choice. Only the Insincere imagine freedom to be made of choices. The truly sincere live freely in a choiceness world —- they are free from choice.
- In this sense, the most sincere question, the only sincere question is “who am I?”
- It is the mother of all inquiries, the very womb that gave birth to curiosity.
- “Who am I?” is the ultimate inquiry, the only truly sincere inquiry.
- This most primal and first question then bifurcates into two questions due to the first “false assumption.”
- The first false assumption splits the first question “who am I?” into “who am I? and “what is all this.”
The first false assumption is the perceived “separation” between “me”(I) and “not-me”or “other”. In other words, by assuming that there is such a thing as me(or this) as a separate entity that exists autonomous of all (that) or the world, is the first false assumption that causes the first and most primal question to bifurcate into two slightly more false questions. This first false assumption is the mother of all false assumptions, and ironically it is provided for by the parent. Many ancient cultures refrain from naming the child right away for this very reason.
In China and Korea for example, the child is given a non name to start with. It is said that the Grim Reaper who goes around collecting souls, has a list just like Santa Clause. It is said that when you name your child something like “dog-poop” the Grim Reaper will pass over the child thinking no one in their right mind would name their baby “dog-poop.” Growing up in Korea, I had aunts that were named all kinds of weird things like “aunt dog-poop” or “aunt little fish,” and yes both of them were well in their 90’s before they passed. Bruce Lee was named “little dragon” or more accurately “wimpy lizard” for the same reason. It is said that if you name your child properly at an early age — the Grim Reaper will take notice of him and one day just snatch his soul away. So they will often wait till the child is 7 or so before they giving him a proper name. To the average Korean or Chinese the deeper significance of this important tradition has long been lost, but not totally.
“The Dao that can be Named is not the eternal(changeless) Dao.
The Name that can be Named is not the eternal(changeless) Name.”
The first bewilderment a child faces before he can even speak is the implied language version of “who am I?” This is the most important question in all of existence. It is critical for the parent not to inadvertently answer this question by filling in the wrong void with a name. When the unverbalized and lingering question of “who am I?” is constantly bombarded with“You are John. Your name is John. Hi John. You are John Adams” and so on, and repeated over and over again until finally the child responds to his given name, the child begins to identify himself, the answer to the question “who am I?” with the given & written name. The primordial question of “who am I?” essential gets smeared over by a finger stabbing at the child chest the name repeating “John” and then pointing at itself saying “mommy”. Pointing “John” and then pointing “dad” and then pointing “mom” and so on. Continual bombardment of this exercise eventually gets the child to accept that he must accept this mass of moving flesh called John as “me”.
The question “who am I?” having been force-fed a false identification with the body as well as the name John, is fulfilled with a false promise that will one day unveil itself. But for now the primordial question begins to fade far into the background beyond the horizon as the child’s interests turn outwards. Once “me” is identified against the background of “not-me,” “not-me” becomes the focus of interest externalizing the child. “What is all this stuff around me?” replaces “who am I?” as No #1 ranking question. The original and primordial question of “who am I?” has now been satisfied with “John Adams, white caucasian, blue eyes, 65 pounds, 2’4” and so on. Once the child identifies himself with the body and the name, the Grim Reaper has snatched up his soul. Until the child rediscovers the original question and finds that his curiosity honing in on it, sincerity cannot be recaptured. The New Humanity will not be a people that are eager to name their child. The New Humanity sees their child as not theirs at all but as God’s children directly. They see themselves as foster parents at best. Naming the child is not something they would dare engage in, especially during the child’s formative years. No child will be named sooner than 7, with a permanent name. Nor will the child be given a name not pleasing to him. The child may even choose to be nameless if he chooses. Or decide to even change his name, if he sees fit. The New Humanity will see the child’s name as his own sovereign territory.
The Insincere do not kill — they “engages the target.”
The Insincere do not eat cow meat or chicken meat — they eat beef & poultry instead.
The Insincere do not have surgeries — they have “procedures”
The Insincere find comfort in the “financial” enforceability of a “marriage contract”.
Once Truthities are seen for what they are, as Falsities, then the mind automatically becomes that much more Sanitized = that much Saner = and that much Sincerer. When Truthities acquired through “implication” during childhood are unearthed and “explicitly” exposed as Falsities, one’s Perception shifts automatically to new levels of Clarity = Sanity = Sincerity. To find our Sincerity is to find our Default Selves prior to coercion warped our minds Unsane = or Insincere.
So the burning question becomes–am I really thinking for myself?
Or have I unwittingly “outsourced” my thinking to external agencies?
Do I really own “all” my thoughts from the ground up?
Could “my thoughts” have been molded by others?
Do I need to un-mute my “inner-voice”?
“I am never silent. I speak eternally.
The voice that is heard deep within the soul is My voice
—the voice of inspiration, of intuition, of guidance.
To those who are receptive to this voice,
— Meher Baba