Some recent posts by Dick Richardson
- View SourceMidwife to a New Species of Man
This is indeed an incredible concept is it not. Never before in the annuls of human existence is it hardly likely that any then existing level of Human Beings consciously took on the job of being Midwife to a New Species of Man, or indeed even ever having noticed it coming. I have no personal experience of past levels or species of Homo, and the written word only goes back about five thousand years, and we have come a long way even since then. But one then has to look to archaeology to go back beyond that, and one can only form `conclusions' based on the evidence of what is found that way. As interesting as that is it does not reveal as to what it was actually like living as one of that species. Indeed, what was it really like living in any particular place just five hundred years ago. I don't suppose any of us would fancy that very much if the option to exchange places with them were on offer.
But let us say that if life here on earth (or anywhere for that matter) DOES notice signs that there is an evolutionary CUSP at which a new species is beginning to emerge in the unfolding of the implicate order of things. What then? And if beings studied closely at the time then why should it not be noticed? Greater states of awareness and intelligence would count for little if it could not see things with a clearer eye and then do things with that greater aware state of being. And that being the case then does it seem so way out that they would then usher in this new state by volition and action, and nurture it and encourage it? It would seem very odd if they didn't. Because something has never happened before does not mean that it will never happen as we already know well enough. It is natural enough to nurture and take care of ones own progeny, so why not with a new species, and a new society of human beings on earth. Or do we always have to stay as we are today? If we did then that would be the first time that has ever happened. Humanity has never stopped changing yet. So, off with the old and on with the new. It is only assisting the natural flow and unfolding away. To fear change is to fear something which is inevitable, and may well turn out to be much better than it is now. With a little volitional help and assistance. Does it not seem natural enough that the unfolding of the implicate order should pick up a gear from unconscious unfolding to conscious unfolding.
Good fortune with and to the Roots and Wings Society. As now envisaged in its yet infancy. And things grow.
Hitting the Road Analogy
One of the analogies which I liked best when I was writing the books was that of the ROAD analogy to life experience. It is so simple yet straight to the point and it works. Also it directly emphasises the insurmountable differences between religious believers, pure rationalists, pshycis and mystics. Mystics talk of things that both pure rationalists and religionists laugh at. Was it ever NOT like that? And it has not changed yet. This is like three different species of Homo, leastwise Existentially so.
However, in life, and in the psyche itself, there exists stuff to experiences. Likening this to a `Road of Experiential Phenomena' makes it simple enough for all to understand. That is why I used it all those years ago. Thus
Let us take a long road and call it `Visual Lane'. Let us liken things along that lane to buildings and man made structures. Bill and Harry have never been down that road at all. Bill is a materialist rationalist and Harry is a fundamentalists religionists. Tom and Fred have been two and three hundred yards down that road respectively, and they are called Psychics by society. Sid has been seven hundred yards down that road and Mark went right to the end of the road and discovered that it was a no through road, it came to an end. Who is going to agree with whom as to what is found along that road? According to Bill and Harry there is no such road at all, for they have never even seen it.
Tom and Fred both know well enough that the road is there and both agree on what the first few building were along that road. But Fred had been a few yards more and seen a few buildings which Tom had not seen. In so far as they each go there is then a fog and they cannot even see that there is any more road. So, according to Tom then Fred had just imagined the rest. Sid cannot get a look in with either of these other people because according to them Sid is a complete idiot and suffering from mental disorientation. Yet he has seen everything which they had seen, agrees with it, but saying there is more and the road goes on a long way yet. Dare Mark say anything to any of them? If so then why bother? Do you get the picture?
Reincarnation and Total Memory Loss
Given that the phenomenon of Annihilation and total memory loss exists (and it empathically does as you will find out) then how could one ever remember a past life or even facets of one, and assuming that the IMPLICATION of reincarnation IS what it seems and IS what is IMPLIED? If one goes into that Timeless realm ALL memory is OBLITERATED whilst there. FACT !
So, how could one categorically say I KNOW this or that about a past life. I have no past life experiences by the way. And I would not want any thank you very much. The implication being is that if one has genuine past life experience then they could NOT have gone to that paradisiacal timeless realm (the Ground of Being). If one goes there DURING a lifetime then all memory is restored on arriving back in spacetime consciences. FACT! Memory had not been obliterated at all, one had just gone beyond where it is AT. But if one came into a new life as a baby from that transcendent realm then one would remember NOTHING, for annihilation would have obliterated it all.
So, what are the implications of this? IF reincarnation was such and IF they truly were remembering real experiences which were THEIRS (and not simply just past human archetypes from the subconscious) then there are only TWO possible explanations. And ONE is that they died and did NOT go back into the Ground of Being. (Unlikely). So, what the hell would have happened to them then? I can only make a logical guess for I do not know. But they would plainly have been switched off and yet gone into some cold storage and then came straight back here as baby and with some vague recollection of past times. The other answer, and which makes much more sense to me, is that all the memories are stored in the subconscious (or soul) and that during a next life something happens in which an old memory can help them in some way here and now; and thus recollection occurs, albeit through a glass darkly.
If human beings categorically KNEW that there were other lifetimes then it would totally alter everything for us here and now, and this lifetime would probably not be lived to the full, and it would not be lived unconditionally. NOT a good idea. Do I believe in reincarnation (they often ask). I don't believe in anything. I see no advantage to it and I see much disadvantage to it. Better to know than to believe. Also, if one wanted a cartload of beliefs then how are you going to choose which ones to carry? And why? Just get out there and learn and dump all the beliefs. They are deadwood and baggage, and not fit for Apes. They are also the best means for subjugation and exploitation. THAT is why they want you to have them in the first place. Grow out of it.
The Non Ordinary
It has been said, suggested, that `ordinary' is something which is inflicted on to us by society. But it plainly is not so. No human being ever inflicted on to me the living experiences of space, time, changing events and all the phenomenon found therein. These thing are common and they happen every day; they are experienced every day. They are certainly not inflicted on to me by any person, group or cultural nurture.
But along with this there are experiences which are far more rare, not common daily experience, and which most of society does not even talk about. Neither did society inflict these on to me. They just happen, albeit not every day, and they are quite rare. But they reveal things that are NOT found by normal common daily experiences. And they make sense.
However, what society DOES try to inflict upon one (if you let them) is as it what is `real' and what is not `real'. Only this or that experience can be real, therefore any other is not real; kind of thing. Therefore only the common daily experiences can be real and all other is a well; rubbish :- ) Yet this `rubbish' HAPPENS. Therefore it must be the result of an undercooked sausage or an over active imagination, or a lie. The old old story of ignorance always being right. Hence, it is said by some `Give to society that which belongs to society and keep to yourself that which is your own'. And which is something which I do not go along with one jot; and for reasons well explained years ago; and sharing being just one of them.
But why tell folks something that they DON'T want to hear? To which my answer is why not. For it can do no harm and it may do some good. If they really do not want to hear it then they are not going to listen anyway. So no problem. But if they do listen then it can act as food for thought. A catalyst. A seed in the melting pot. And seeds can grow and have an effect. Thus cause and effect.
But, and there is a very BIG pragmatic BUT here, why bother to tell the kind of folks where it plainly is not going to make a jot of difference to them if hearing it. The simply answer is DON'T. Tell ONLY those who ask to hear it and those whom it MIGHT make a difference to. But recognising which is which is the trick. And if in doubt then go for it anyway. They can only spit it back in your face. No problem. Just wipe it off and move on. In life there is the common and regular and there is the less common and not so regular. It is all a part of the mix and the human situation. Go with it or ignore it. Ignoring it is their loss. They are just NOT ready for it. The less common is the icing on the cake of life.
The more I am
The more I am then the less I have. The less I am then the more I have. If I am everything then I have nothing. If I am next to nothing then everything which exists is mine to have. Those who seek beauty will find more and more of it, and they will have that. Those who give away the love within them to it and lose their self in it will get back more and more of it. And they will live, and they will have it all. It is only by losing yourself in the all and giving yourself up to it by melting in to it, that you find your self, and then you have it all. Having it is not owning it or commanding it, it is being it and living it. And letting it live, through you. And in living it you have it all. For you. This, and this alone, is the never ending dance of the Observer and the Observed, when the I and thou is unnoticeable, for there is just the dance; the one thing. No duality of two individual participants. The Ground of our Being, endless wonder though it is, does not offer us enough. We are lavished with more and more. It is only the beginning , and we cannot even spend there that which is our own there; and albeit that even this much is given to us. But there is more. In the final analysis it does not matter what it all IS while independent of the Observer and the Observed, it is that it happens is all that matters. And it does. If you give up yourself then you will find it. And then another dance begins, in Time, as it is in Eternity. It IS a song of Love and Beauty, and shared by two. And nought can dance alone. Neither can it be given; but only received, and with an open heart. Such is the song of life. Plainly, this is not a message for this world at this time. Why do they not see it? Sad.