Monday, 29 July 2013

Duality v Isness.

Duality v Isness.

(An article inspired by my friend, Mandy Peterson's book.

What is Duality and what is Isness, and why does it matter what we believe?

Duality by dictionary definition is:

duality (djuːˈælɪtɪ Pronunciation for duality



(plural) -ties
  1. the state or quality of being two or in two parts; dichotomy
  2. (physics) the principle that a wave-particle duality exists in microphysics in which wave theory and corpuscular theory are complementary. The propagation of electromagnetic radiation is analysed using wave theory but its interaction with matter is described in terms of photons. The condition of particles such as electrons, neutrons, and atoms is described in terms of de Broglie waves
  3. (geometry) the interchangeability of the roles of the point and the plane in statements and theorems in projective geometry


View thesaurus entry
= dualism, dichotomy, polarity, doubleness, biformity, duplexity

Isness by dictionary definition: (also known as Being)

being (ˈbiːɪŋ Pronunciation for being



  1. the state or fact of existing; existence
  2. essential nature; self ⇒ she put her whole being into the part
  3. something that exists or is thought to exist, esp something that cannot be assigned to any category ⇒ a being from outer space
  4. a person; human being
  5. (in the philosophy of Aristotle) actuality Compare becoming (sense 3)

be1 (biː Pronunciation for be1 ; unstressed Pronunciation for be1



Word forms:   1st person singular present tense am
Word forms:   2nd person are
Word forms:   3rd person is
Word forms:   plural present tense are
Word forms:   1st person singular past tense was
Word forms:   2nd person were
Word forms:   3rd person was
Word forms:   plural past tense were
Word forms:   present participle being
Word forms:   past participle been
  1. to have presence in the realm of perceived reality; exist; live ⇒ I think, therefore I am, not all that is can be understood
  2. used in the perfect or past perfect tenses only to pay a visit; go ⇒ have you been to Spain?
  3. to take place; occur ⇒ my birthday was last Thursday
  4. copula used as a linking verb between the subject of a sentence and its noun or adjective complement or complementing phrase. In this case be expresses the relationship of either essential or incidental equivalence or identity ( John is a man; John is a musician) or specifies an essential or incidental attribute ( honey is sweet; Susan is angry). It is also used with an adverbial complement to indicate a relationship of location in space or time ( Bill is at the office; the dance is on Saturday)
  5. takes a present participle forms the progressive present tense ⇒ the man is running
  6. takes a past participle forms the passive voice of all transitive verbs and (archaically) certain intransitive ones ⇒ a good film is being shown on television tonight, I am done
  7. takes an infinitive expresses intention, expectation, supposition, or obligation ⇒ the president is to arrive at 9.30, you are not to leave before I say so
  8. takes a past participle forms the perfect or past perfect tense of certain intransitive verbs of motion, such as go or come ⇒ the last train is gone

Word Origin

Old English bēon; related to Old High German bim am, Latin fui I have been, Greek phuein to bring forth, Sanskrit bhavati he is


View thesaurus entry
= exist, be present, be extant
= be alive, live, exist, survive, breathe, last, be present, continue, endure, be living, be extant, happen
= be situated, be set, be placed, be located, be installed, be positioned
= attend, go to, be at, be there, be present, frequent, haunt
= cost, come to, sell at, set (someone) back, command a price of
= amount to, become, come to, total, equal, add up to
= feel

Translations for 'being'

  • British English: being You can refer to any real or imaginary creature as a being. NOUNPeople expect a horse to perform like a car, with no thought for its feelings as a living being.
  • Brazilian Portuguese: ser
  • Chinese: 生物
  • European Spanish: ser
  • French: être
  • German: Lebewesen
  • Italian: essere
  • Japanese: 生命体
  • Korean: 존재
  • Portuguese: ser
  • Spanish: ser

To the untrained eye, it may appear that there are always pluses and minuses. Good or evil, love and hate, war and peace, cold and heat, or light and darkness. Up, down, left, right, inside and outside, forwards and backwards. But you may be surprised to know that by a process we call relativity we can arrive at many other points of conclusion and or debate. Duality would have us believe that both exist side by side and that there is only one thing or the other, with it's opposite at the point of us determining our viewpoint. 


For example.

If we are cold, that means there is an absence of heat. Heat exists as a concept like everything else, therefore if we are not experiencing it, we are subjected to it's diverse opposite. The amount to which we are experiencing it is determined by our personal decision about where one ends and one begins. Quantifying. In this theorising model, both heat and cold are the same thing, just adverse ends of a spectrum of sensation felt by our bodies sensory receptors, with determinable advances towards or away from each end. Which of course also indicates/theorizes that there is/are no ends, on this linear scale.

If we go up, by relativity, we are no longer going down or stationary. Right means less left, and so on... I'm sure you are beginning to get my point. So if we move from one to the other both still exist in the material and tangible world in which we perceive this experience to be taking place, whilst another potential truth also exists. That we can move and not move and whilst we are moving, one of the perceived ends appears closer, but also that the non movement requires a silence, a pause which in and of itself is neither of the ends of the scale.
Is the fog clearing, or are you still confused?

I merely offer another perspective that you and I can consider, to be able to diversify our relative thinking, and see this in and of itself as somewhat limiting to our being, our Isness.

Duality gives us a reason to feel comfortable in the main, because we can fit things into a neat box. We label it up and pigeon hole it and go away thinking nothing bad can come our way because we have organised our world as we wish it to be. Compared to the theory of complete chaos, relativity and duality appear very sound and dependable. Have we considered our own limiting minds in all of our calculations? Our emotions, beliefs, prejudices and bias, not to mention our paranoia that we don't know everything and our rationality dictating our soundness of mind? Duality really implies that something is, and it is, because of what it is not. And by definition, there are many things it is not, all at the same theoretical moment in what we have constructed to evaluate this and called this time.

Being, Isness however allows us to accept all things as equal, as being one with each other. This Isness means logically that each occurrence is as important as any other. That what holds each thing together is as important and relative as any of the other component parts which it bonds/holds/controls to keep them where they are, will and should be.

Significantly we as human beings have for centuries tried desperately to control, understand and manipulate everything in our material and tangible existence, but without the wisdom to see that we cannot and do not have the power to control everything. There does seem to be a type of order in the realms of the known universe, and the tangible reality we have called life. And yet there is also a lot of mystery, chaos and apparent tragedy in it too.
My personal experiences have shown me that following a particular path can lead to treasure as also it can lead to disappointment. No one way is superior to any other in discernible and or credible values, other than does it serve me or not. For this reason I cannot judge one way as being inferior or superior, despite what other human beings state of their experiences. My truth is only that. My truth. It is a truth, based upon present considerations and data. Tomorrow it may change, or it may not, depending upon what event comes along to offer me a new way of evaluating that new data.

From my perspective, I still find myself attached to outcomes, despite having been on a mission to lose that attachment. I have experienced no great move towards the things I sought, despite having renounced a desire to achieve them. In this duality I feel sure that there exists another caveat, another possible way to conceive and understand through theorizing and action that outcomes are not relative to desire and passion and determination alone. My friend makes a rather interesting point in her book, I am the Lotus, not the muddy pond.

Mandy says:

So, I now believe that the Truth or 'Secret' lies not in anything we have, own or experience within the material world. It lies with understanding that we will continue to materially need and want something until we simply do not need or want it anymore – and do not need to control our minds and thoughts in an attempt to receive, avoid and acquire it.

When I read this I knew immediately that it resonates with me deeply. Applying it is somewhat more difficult, though the experiences I have had so far, no doubt have been necessary to achieve the outcome I wish to arrive at. All of my successes have come from repeated failures. (Perceived failure) I believe my eventual vindication will be that life has taught me the value of all things through experience and not as a result of regrets over what I didn't do.

Please have a look at the book and Mandy Peterson's website as I'm sure that you will also be rewarded for your efforts to see through the veil of illusion.

So why does it matter what we believe?

Because our very consciousness depends upon our awareness of what we must do in the collective process of, not human beings having a spiritual experience, but spiritual beings having a human experience.

Time is here for a new shift in our joint consciousness, and the place is here where that can take effect. Be bold, be courageous and let not doubt hold you back.

I just wanted to share something else with you before you go. A song that I wrote the lyrics to which is about Love and Peace and a tribute to John Lennon and Yoko Ono and their attempt to share this same message in Give Peace a Chance. Not a new subject by any means, but one that has stirred the hearts of poets and songwriters since time began no doubt. With the incredibly intuitive music and performance by one of my brothers and collaboration of many members of my family I share this song with you here.

A special thanks goes to S.M.Peterson.
I totally love this book.

I am the Lotus, not the muddy pond.

Love, Peace and Hugs to everyone.

Peaceful Warrior.

Sunday, 14 July 2013

Why bother to be a warrior?

Why bother to be a warrior?

Is it worth fighting for peace as warriors?

Wouldn't you agree, that fighting against anything is likely to cause the fighter stress and even physical pains? That his fight is somewhat futile if his opponents are not aware of his causes? And that no one side, can actually win if the other does not acknowledge the struggles perceived to be fought for?

We live in a world that has sadly been killing, maiming and destroying civilizations and human beings for as long as time has been recorded. The various warriors of the past have fought valiantly and bravely for many causes, and yet all of them have met the same eventuality, and are now returned to the dust of the earth from which they came. The energy and dreams, the determination and courage they adopted and employed have done nothing more than evaporated into the ether of time and space.

A renowned and impressive mind of the 20th century Carl Sagan, said about this:-

Many empires and dynasties have been formed and founded upon strong belief systems and the courage of those willing to fight in defence of them all. Kings, Queens, Princes and noble men and women of all eras, have likewise pushed their particular brand of idealism across wide and varied landscapes upon this earth since time began. Each one held a certain predisposed belief that their ideas and will were the best for everyone. Not only their devoted citizens, but the wider world they set out to conquer too. 

What a great pity none of them really asked the questions that could have saved humanity so much bloodshed and hatred all of this time. Do the others beliefs have to be proved wrong? Are the views and beliefs held, working effectively for the good of everyone, especially those about to be vanquished? And is it fair to force anyone, especially other human beings to do what we (the warring force) say that they must?

Only a fool would think he/she knew what was best, what was in the best interests of another, before actually holding any type of dialogue with those other peoples. Only the very wisest of historical figures ever made good decisions, and that was only some of the time and with limited successes. The truth is not clear nor discernible in any provable way, as so many determining factors exist. And as human beings, we have so many ways of going about our affairs that each can have a level of observable success, depending on what it is we say that we are trying to achieve by our actions. In a very sad and morose way, even Adolf Hitler was a somewhat successful man. He achieved a huge goal, which was to attempt to exterminate the Jews. Thankfully he did not get all the way to total annihilation of that race, and the world saw to it that he failed. Many say that he was a madman, and yet he got so far into it with the help of millions of his fellow men and women. Were the people fighting against Hitler any more deserving of the title warrior than he was for fighting for his beliefs? No, I did not suggest that I have any sympathy at all with his fight. I merely said that based upon what he wanted to give to the world, his views, his beliefs, he did a very thorough job. 

Killing anyone, Jew, Gentile Muslim or Christian, man, woman or child, Hindu, Sikh, Jain, Buddhist, Taoist or Atheist in my opinion is completely unacceptable. Not for any reason of logic that says one race is superior, that skin colour or belief system is more worthy than another to be able to live freely on this planet. Nor anyone who believes a right of birth decided by dead people is appropriate. I am not calling these things wrong nor right, I am merely saying that it may do us well to consider if these thoughts and more so actions, prove anything about the belief we say we are fighting for. All I've heard my whole life is that we had to fight for our freedom. Well I say to you now, could we not have been better served by loving for our freedom?
War has been shown to have caused more war. What war was ever cause by Peace? By a determined effort to not only say peace, but to act peacefully

When great spirits such as Gandhi, Jesus, Martin Luther King, Leymah Gbowee, Severn Cullis Suzuki, Malala Yousafzai, Peace Pilgrim, Michael Jackson, The Dalai lama, James Redfield, Bob Marley and John Lennon and Yoko Ono to name but a few, stood up and asked us to consider peace, what were they talking about? Were/are they not asking us to GIVE peace a chance?

So in answer to the original title question, is it worth fighting for peace as warriors? (Why bother to be a warrior?) I say this. In determining what is of importance in this life, I consider four things.

  1. Of what is the spirit made.
  2. What is sacred.
  3. What is worth living for.
  4. What is worth dying for.

To me it is simple, the answer to all four is the same. It is LOVE.

So my being a warrior, our being warriors should surely reflect our beliefs in this basic understanding. Love is far stronger than hate and will really save us all a lot of heartache, suffering and distress, if only we choose to adopt it more fully into our hearts and compassionate sharing. We are brothers and sisters alike, one people, one planet one love...!

Be good to one another, be good to yourself. Have courage to be daring.

Love, peace and harmony.

Peaceful Warrior.