Not a state?

Some folks say recognition – life recognizing itself in whatever way it does, as oneness, all as consciousness/love, as capacity for the world – is not a state.

I see how it’s true. It’s not depending on content of experience, of presence of absence of certain emotions, thoughts, health or illness and so on. It’s not even dependent on “spiritual” states that may come and go (openings, satori, feelings of bliss, love).

And yet, the reverse seems true as well. It’s a state of recognition. And it can and does come and go.

Even if it has been here for – within the story of time – a long time, it may be gone the next moment. Any story of permanence of this recognition is just that, a story.

Note: Life can recognize itself in different ways. It can recognize itself as oneness. It can recognize itself, in all is many forms, as consciousness and/or love. It can recognize itself as capacity for any of this.

Note 2: I realize that this can be seen as a play with word, and it is, of course. And yet, it seems honest to recognize recognition itself as a state. It is a state of recognition. It can and does come and go. Life is free to appear to itself as confusion and clarity, also when it comes to this recognition. That’s part of the play. It’s part of Lila.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.