oh my longing for love
likens to that of how the
sun wishes to meet the
moon once again
how the shadows of
the deepest caverns
long to once again be
yielded to the light
as the dark becomes
the sun and moon
eclipse that what i
know is naught
feeling is devoid of truth
and this love to be felt
from the source
personified in a monad
of false self is
what i seek and yet not
as the goal and path
are united by this source of love
September 16, 2014
oh my longing for love
August 23, 2014
Flow is the realization of a non-dual state of being where the action and actor are not two. This is why playing guitar for others can be difficult for me. If i become self-conscious i re-enter dualism and cut off the flow state.
After reading more of Self Liberation Through Seeing With Naked Awareness recently i am more assured in my assumption that all the forms of meditation involve the attainment of flow states in whatever the meditation entails. Whether it is the chanting of a mantra, the Jesus Prayer, the focus upon breath, emptiness, one’s awareness or mental activity, or relaxing into the mind’s intrinsic lucidity. Although varying in activity and passivity, spiritual tradition, and the locus of focus, every one of these types of “meditation” involves a very narrow and specific paradigm of mental activity which prevents the mind from flitting about in all direction and distractions, and which grounds the individual in themselves. Each one when combined with the flow state makes the realization of the type of meditation as described by the masters of that tradition.
I believe that by achieving flow in such a way an individual acquires a clearer view of the nature of reality and themselves and gains a perspective of wisdom as well as a peaceful and compassionate temperament. In this way meditation is the sublime gateway to peace, wisdom, and compassion, and it is grounded in an aspect of psychology which can be applied to all areas of one’s life.
July 22, 2014
I am a human.
i do and say human things.
i sometimes like other humans,
though often i loathe them as well,
and no matter what i am committed
to the seemingly programmed aim
of benefiting my fellow humans.
But being a human can be tough sometimes
with all the silly systems and structures
put in place by some humans
to make life unnecessarily difficult
for other humans. i believe this
is because humans fear thinking,
which inevitably comes without something to distract our silly little ape minds.
It’s important to remember what we are,
to not take ourselves too seriously,
and to not forget that we basically
just shouldn’t harm each other or the planet.
All other silly ape desires you have are fine to pursue,
but they are just that.
Humans are dumb.
You are dumb.
I am dumb.
Let’s just play nice and have fun and
not stop other people from having fun.
If you think the other clothed apes are having fun wrong,
all you can do is show them how you
are having way more fun doing whatever you’re doing.
Telling them they’re having fun wrong
and arguing against them will change
nothing except making both you and them have less fun.
Have your fun, and
if you have enough of it,
others will join.
Because we’re just silly, fun-crazed apes after all.
June 15, 2014
About four years ago i went through the Tibetan Buddhist text The 37 Bodhisattva Practices and analyzed them in the context of Christianity to such an extent that (hopefully) a Christian with no knowledge or interest in Buddhism could still benefit from the wisdom if sincerely desiring to be Christ-like. This text has been very helpful for many Buddhists just beginning on the spiritual path as well as very wise veterans of it. Reading it i was feeling it had all the potential of being adapted to another religion, and since at the time i was in a Christian club at school (for the sake of the spiritual discussion), and because i wanted to learn more about the contents of the Bible, i figured i would begin with the Christian adaptation. The Christian model of the saint fit very well as a parallel for a Bodhisattva, and Buddhahood as becoming Christ-like (of course the comparison is by no means perfect, but still i find there is value in this kind of cross-religious analysis and the basis of differences are beyond the scope or intent of this piece of writing). This should (hopefully) be as useful to Buddhists seeking a better understanding or appreciation for the Christian faith as it is to Christians in aiding their spiritual development. I focused on using only verses from the Old and New Testaments, so that its validity would be less questionable to any Christians who don’t have knowledge of or faith in the apocryphal writings. No doubt the addition of these texts would yield a great wealth of relevant verses to add as references. I will also note that i did not include the text of the verses referenced, due mostly to the sake of saving space. I welcome any and all feedback, and/or dissemination of this text for constructive spiritual purposes.
Note that it will be updated periodically as useful feedback comes in.
Thank you all!
Jacob Ibrahim Abuhamada
May 31, 2014
I don’t like politics or economics. I don’t like them, because they engender such powerful emotions and conflict. The matters they involve are the most direct in affecting the overall condition of life itself for a society. I love religion, because people can be content with dialoguing in a kindly manner and the assumption that in the end “we’ll see who was right” but until that time, religion is just a purely personal thing. Politics and economics affect society at large and the smallest decisions at that level have enormous consequences for the suffering of a society. Nothing is clear cut, and you can’t be content with “we’ll see who was right in the end,” because doing so means potentially unraveling the fabric of society or causing immense suffering and pain for future generations. In some cases it can mean saving countless lives and livelihoods. I recognize that as a spiritual person, my highest goal is the reformation of global society into a place of happiness, well-being, wisdom, and freedom. This is the goal of science as well. But one must remember that politics and economics (in theory) have this very same intent. The problem being of course that no one really knows for sure what the best way of doing things is, and you can’t just be content with differing views. Another’s view could mean you lose your job, your most cherished freedom, or your life. So what can we do?
I have great respect for those who can dedicate themselves to the most contentious of subjects and fight for their opinion of the most effective policy to benefit their society. This is a noble aim (not to say that all such devoted individuals are devoted to this aim in particular. Many are of course power-hungry, status-craving, sociopaths, but i do hold respect for those who aren’t). We all can’t have perfect knowledge of the infinitely complex political and economic systems. We will all have our views on the best specific policy, and we are all likely to fight passionately over our particular chosen views. In the end, we won’t really know what the best policy is. One socio-economic system may work perfectly in one society, but be chaos in another.
What we can be sure of, is that we all (excluding the sociopaths) have the best interest of society in mind. We should remember that when discussing such contentious issues with others. Religion has the benefit of sacredness, which usually commands respect from people, making dialogue much easier. Even debates between the most conservative of religious fundamentalists rarely results in emotional outbursts at one another, and this is because of the embrace of the sacredness. I think it’s important that we transmute this force of sanctity to all contentious subjects, as it allows for the most constructive of dialogues and helps all sides to remember what the primary aim actually is: The benefit of society.
Sure many people hold views that are purely going to affect their own lives for the better, but this isn’t always the case. And even for such individuals, they have convinced themselves with full certainty of the positions they hold and why those policies are the best for all in society. We don’t have the right to deny them of this, just as we don’t have the right to deny a religious view. The intent is still in the right place, even if it took some serious cognitive dissonance to get there.
Now i’m not saying to just be complacent with others’ views if you really think they are harming society. Please do not think this. Fight for your all-important social or economic or political cause (i sure will). Again, i simply ask that people always remember that the final aim is the benefit of the whole of society. If this truly becomes the motivation for all individuals who discuss these subjects i hate so much, then i believe most problems would fix themselves and the society in question would reach the most effective equilibrium. So please, fight on for your view, but remember that your end goal is a compassionate one, and argue under the assumption that the person you’re attempting to dissuade or disprove or debate with is operating under the very same principle of compassion. It’s the best we can do until such time as we enter a utopian world of unity and understanding, or we die as a species.
May 15, 2014
I have synesthesia, and more specifically color-grapheme synesthesia. I recommend you read about it if you are unfamiliar. Here’s a video on it i watched recently that does well to address the scope of what it can entail and the need for more reliable studies on it.
In any case, color-grapheme synesthesia is where letters and numbers are perceived as being inherently colored. The perception is purely mental, in that it doesn’t extend into the visual perception of the external environment. I see that all of these words are black, but i can look at them at the more subtle level of my mind’s perception and see vibrant colors. Recently i got the idea of attempting to illustrate this phenomenon in a way that others can understand, whether you have synesthesia or not.
So here is the alphabet, poorly rendered in MSPaint:
Note that the letter “l” is usually light gray, but in certain situations can be black. Also, the letters “z” and “i” are light gray and white respectively. The presence of the black border was simply to delineate them more easily. And note that there is no significant difference whether upper or lower case or cursive vs. print.
Here are numerals:
I figured i would do a little more to show you what this is like for me. Here is the color-alphabet for me in abstract color form, which is for me, nearly equally as obvious as the actual letters themselves:
Weird, i know. You just see a seemingly random series of colors, when i see the alphabet. It’s crazy stuff. And there exists a dire need for continued research in the phenomenon for its implications in the nature of cognition itself and the philosophical implications for epistemology. I hope to see more research done in the future, but this article on the APA website does well to detail what we know about synesthesia and what its implications can be.
I thought i would continue to explore the representation of my synesthesia for those who are interested and for other synesthetes to attempt to do the same. So here’s my name. First showing my name with the letters, and then showing just the abstract of the colors:
Here’s some simple long division:
And to take it to the farthest level i can conceive of right now, i used OpenOffice (screw MSOffice!) to make this simple coloring-book-like image of some trees and bushes by the sea with the sun shining. Instead of filling it with colors, though, i used letters. For me this isn’t a problem to be “figured out” or compared with the original key, as you’ll have to do. For me, and me alone, this image has color, but it’s at a more subtle level than ordinary visual perception. And i think that’s pretty fucking cool.
I also of course love to study languages. I’ve been studying Arabic for quite some time and i was wondering if this might happen for the foreign alphabet as well. I will do a new post in the future as my Arabic becomes more fluent and these letters become more deeply ingrained in my subconscious, but for now i am noticing that letters representing the same sounds as in English like the Arabic letter fa (ف) are differing slightly in the shade or the vividness. Vowels (alif (ا), ya (ي), and waw (و)) are the most vivid and differ from their Latin equivalents somewhat. Alif is red like “A” but is darker when making the long “ah” sound as in “father”, and lighter/more fiery when making the sound of the a in “apple.” Ya is a golden yellow-orange (obviously related to E and Y), and waw is seeming indigo-violet (similar to the letter O, but darker and more purple). But Arabic also has letters that don’t exist in English or the Latin alphabet in general. ‘Ayin (ع) is a very deep, blood-orange, while ghayn (غ) is like a dark gray-brown.
I will write more on some of the other letters as their colors become more obvious to me. It’s especially interesting to me that there are connections between the new letters and the concept they represent, like as if fa is just an “f” in a weird form, meaning that it still maintains the overall orangeness. What this says about my cognitive processes i’m not sure yet, but i’m excited at the mere prospect of uncovering the meaning.
Jacob Ibrahim Abuhamada