In chapter 3, “The Urge of searching for Truth” a working hypothesis was presented that viewed the universe as a charged mesh and all living and non--living organisms as charged particles, arranged on different levels and positions on this mesh according to their net charge. It was explained that depending on our ‘existential level’ on this mesh, we are bound to have certain experiences in life. On the other hand, the urge of searching for Truth, was considered as the ultimate goal of human beings in life which in a way is to unfold the mystery of our existence.
Now looking at this picture from another angle, no matter on what existential level our life is taking place, we are all following our own individual path to reach the truth of our own individual existence. And this is the main important factor to be taken into consideration. The path each one of us follows in life is most probably the easiest path for our unique original net charge. In fact it is this net charge that determines our path in the first place. It is both predestined and chosen.
If we see life--or in general the whole existence--as a moving wave of Intelligence taking different-- in fact infinite--forms as it travels toward its final “self--actualization”, then every form of existence can be regarded as a specific vibration of this wave. So this wave is simultaneously one and infinite different entities. As it is a wave of Intelligence (or perhaps we can also call it Consciousness), so when it takes a shape, it “knows” what it is doing. It “chooses” the form it is assuming. In other words, the act of assuming a shape is an arbitrary phenomenon rather than “predestined.” At this point, there is no dividing line between the Whole and the Particular. They are one and the same. It is as though the Whole considers this particular shape or entity necessary for the process of its self--actualization. It is experimenting this particular shape, this particular existence. Then once it resumes the shape of the entity under the question, it is when “fate” starts. The form dictates a particular way of being in the universe. Let us not forget that the particular shape or existence decided on, is a decision made by the Whole while the Particular was still in its bosom; when they were still inseparable and indistinguishable. That is why it is possible to say that the fate is not something that another authority plans. Each one of us is responsible for the fate one has. To make God responsible, only helps to assume a passive, inactive, “poor-me” (using James Redfield’s terminology in his book Celestine Prophecy), attitude towards our life. I call it a living-martyr attitude; the person is living in a way as though is being martyred; considers himself/herself completely innocent in the fate he\she is suffering from. The fate we are actualizing is a “joint” decision of the Whole and the Particular; but any time that life seems “unlivable,” we immediately forget our role in it and assume the attitude of a living martyr. We see ourselves as an effect, with the cause something completely separate from us. Such an inactive attitude is very poisonous, for due to its negative nature--I am not the cause, thus I can not do anything about it--depletes us from energy, and in the long run we actually become a living martyr.
So according to this working hypothesis, everything in the universe arises from a wave of Intelligence moving toward development, evolution and completion. The fate of any existence or entity is decided while it is still an indistinguishable part of the Whole (or the wave of Intelligence); thus it has a direct role in its fate; it is responsible for it. Then after separation from the Whole and assumption of an “individual” life, it “forgets” its own role in the form of existence it has assumed and the fate it is leading. It forgets that it had considered this shape and destiny--or the net charge--as the “best and easiest” choice to reach its final goal.
From this perspective, fate is the consequence or the effect of choice. Once the original potential is chosen, then it has to lead a definite fate in order to actualize itself. The original potential is analogous to a seed, that in order to germinate and grow has to fall into the right proper soil and climatic condition. The seed of a Cactus plant must fall into a hot, dry desert, while the seed of a Lotus in a swamp.
Thus according to the original potential we “choose” while still in complete unity with the Whole, our parents, our sex, the time and space (native country) of our birth, the type of historical, social, cultural bed, the path we take in life, in one word our ‘destiny’ will be ‘predetermined.’
Now let us go back to our starting discussion--everything in the universe as a form that the wave of Intelligence chooses to assume in its path toward self-actualization. Let us take this wave as the familiar bell-shaped curve, with one extreme as the maximum matter and minimum intelligence and the other as the opposite. In this way, the whole evolutionary tree can be placed on this curve. (see the following diagram.)
As we go up the ascending limb of the curve, the quantity of intelligence increases, so after the single cell organisms, (with minimum intelligence and maximum matter) we will start having the multi-cellular plants and animals and so on. The zenith of the curve is where human beings exist.
The descending limb can include other forms of life, whose existence is not yet proved “scientifically”, but is acknowledged in the belief systems of primitive people and also occult--believers of today. They include spirits, genii, fairies, angels and as such.
Now there is another way to look at this curve too. It can be taken to represent the life of any individual existence, beginning with birth, followed by growth and maturation (the ascending limb) and finally old age (the descending limb) and death. If we do not take death in the sense of total non-existence, but as dying of one form, and
immediately being born in another form, then here is where a new, but essentially a similar curve starts at a higher level. In this way, the above curve resumes a helical structure, giving rise to the famous helix, which not only is the basic structure of the molecule of life -- DNA -- but is also found in many mystical systems of thought as the symbol of the journey of the soul.1 But it is not necessary to go that far. A simple observation of different stages in our own life cycle (childhood, adolescence, maturity, old age) brings us to the same point. Whenever we finish one stage, say childhood, it is as though we die as a child and are reborn as an adolescent, which is comparatively a higher stage -- from an evolutionary point of view, including both knowledge and skill. The same holds true for the subsequent stages, and by analogy it should follow the same pattern after death. Thus each time that one stage of life ends, we go to a higher stage as though moving through a helix.
So each one of us starts life as a potential the quality and quantity of which is chosen while still in the bosom of the Whole with the aim to experience being. Then according to this potential which acts as a net charge, our level of existence is determined. The ‘free-will’ then leads to ‘necessity’, ‘choice’ to ‘destiny and fate.’ Change in the level of existence is only possible through a change in the net charge.
Now in order to be able to change this net charge, we need to know ourselves. For this purpose, we take the outside world as a mirror of ourselves. In the same way that when we want to know the color of our eyes or whether the outfit we are wearing suits us or not we look into a mirror, the nature of our relationships tell reflect different aspects of our personalities. On the other hand, to change our original net charge means to act as the ‘ruler’ the ‘creator’ of our own life. For this purpose we need a set of rules of conduct suitable for the role we want to play. Here again Nature and its relatively immutable laws, as mentioned in chapter 3, will act as our reference point for our values, morals and whatever else we need to conduct our life. The first step here is to find a definition for good and bad, right and wrong suitable for this world of relativity, of uncertainty that we are living in; a world whose “God (in Nietzsche’s words) is dead;” we should look for a definition that should on one hand transcend Time and Space as much as possible, and on the other hand should be in harmony with Nature as much as possible.
What are the main Natural Laws? The law of change, the law of birth, growth, death, or the law of development. Any form of life undergoes this process of birth, growth and development and finally death, i.e. is in constant change and has its four seasons. Thus anything that will be in the service of or in harmony with these laws will be good and right and vice versa.
In our human world, we can define Good and Right as anything that can help a person to be healthy and content (the most vital and universal conscious goals that all humans regardless of time and place of their lives struggle for), and similarly anything that would harm our health and happiness is Evil and Wrong.
Now as the discoveries of quantum physics have shown the outside world is to an extent what we think it is. In other word, our immediate environment is shaped according to our thoughts and attitudes. Where do our thoughts and attitudes come from? From our environment. And why are we in this particular environment? Because of our original net charge. It has been the proper soil for our seed to germinate and grow. Thus the present environment can be use to discover the real nature of our thoughts and attitudes; the first step necessary for any change.
To take our immediate outside world as a reaction to our actions which in turn arise from our thoughts, is an effective way to change this outside world. Usually our attempts to change this world fail, because we do not realize the reflective nature of its existence, in other words, we want to change the reaction without touching the action producing it.
Our notions of good and evil, right and wrong constitute the foundation of our actions and decisions that now according to our perspective definition are based on that which would make us healthy and content. In the last chapter we explained the laws of health. And in respect to contentment, it goes without saying that we each have a personal definition for it. It is the effect, the fruit of our being. Why should women be undermined if they find their highest contentment in relation to their children. It is very natural to be in this way, as children are their work of art, work and being. Why is it OK for a man to claim that he is most satisfied when he finds himself successful with his job or when he is most creative, but we call women ‘fool, ignorant’ for being content with their own job and creativity? This is another evidence for the fact that women’s conception of their state could not be that of suffering from an ‘inferiority complex’ and other conclusions such as ignorance and so on that arise from some masculine outlook.
The masculine self is different from that of feminine self. Their similarities would arise from their humanity, which unfortunately is taken to mean that which the masculine self understand of it, as masculine values and standards have come to mean human values and standards. Their main similarities can be deducted from that which makes them different from other animals, the most important ones being the urge of creativity and the urge of searching for truth. But each has its own means, or mediums for their fulfillment. Similarly the means we use to approach and understand them, can not be exactly the same. This is another reason for all the present misunderstandings about women’s past and present situation. The means used for this purpose have always been masculine in nature. I have had a very striking observation in this respect. It is now about 2 years that I hold workshops to present these views to women. I have also some private male clients for which I use essentially the system approach explained in this book, i.e. I invite them to treat the outside world as a reflection of their own thoughts, feelings, fears and apprehensions, etc. Then suddenly I noticed it takes a considerably shorter time for men to absorb all this. I kept asking myself why should such a difference arise? Why is it easier for men to get what is said? Then I realized that the system I am using to transfer these concepts is really a masculine system that consists of logic, mental reflection, mental work and so on and so forth, all being ‘foreign’ to women. It is as though it is not their medium for learning. It was then that I concluded that we even now have to search for our medium for transferring concepts. Have you ever observed how differently little boys and girls (our most not yet manipulated and biased masculine and feminine self) behave when in Nature? We should start our observations from here as small children can teach us about what this masculine and feminine self may be.
© Copyright 2000
NetNative & Roya Monajem
(All Rights Reserved)