CHAPTER FIVE

ADVANCED SOCIALIZATION



Recognizing compatibility in the grand scheme of the world, believing and making real those things both seen and unseen, the abstract mind represented one side of a parallel track, followed for the most part by those conjoined with their surroundings, sustained by the abundance they found on their global wanderlust. The other side of that track, the logical mind, believing little else but what it could hold in its hands, labored with assigning meaning to the varied proceedings of daily social interaction and trade, for the sake of consistency, in communities where lack put an edge on planning. With such a narrow focus, the good fortune empowered by Divine Guidance became more ego-centric as we grew increasingly comfortable with the notion we were responsible for all positive results and more than happy to take the credit, further undermining and weakening Truth’s grip for most everyone caught up in the budding village agenda. This pair of track, parallel in the “now”, seemingly comes together at the horizon, but the horizon seems forever out of reach as humankind’s return to oneness is set in a pattern of diametrically opposed view points; abstract and logical. The horizon is not in the “now”, in the sense of where we’re at, but represents the future––where we’re going––and rest assured, Divine Guidance has unity––or a coming together––on our horizon, that is, in everyone's future.

In the “now” however, each path traveled––and there are as many and they are as diverse, as there are individuals––all share the common theme about The Truth, only to manifest as opposing view points for the benefit of exercising free will. Lessons are not learned unless there is a choice to be made and learned more readily, for all intents and purposes, when it’s the “wrong” choice! In the Divine Universe that is Creation, in which we are all one, there is no “wrong”! Our perception of what we call wrong, even the concept of it, is only another example, albeit the most popular one, of adverse views about the same event, or about anything, or about everything. Parallel tracks going to a single destination, by definition never coming together except at the illusory horizon. Every experience, real or imagined, has two definable sides that have come to be variously described as; pro and con, black and white, optimistic and pessimistic, positive and negative, etc., each at odds with itself, representing nothing more than the opportunity to choose. These choices, faced along each step of everyone’s path aren’t so much about direction as they are attitude. Regardless of how we proceed or how it appears we do, our direction is always forward, if rarely intentional. Divine inspiration moves us from one point to the next, encountering each enhancement or challenge as we are prepared to do so and not one modicum before. The decisions that accrue into experience are about our attitude, the way we choose to look at every chance for advancement. No situation has a light or dark side except what our discernment would have us believe is so. How we move through it depends on whether we’re positive or negative in our view of it. The more negative we are, the slower we move. Some of us are so negative, so much of the time about everything, it seems we’re standing still or even moving backward. Our spiritual growth is empowered by light (positive attitudes and optimism). Be assured each individual “will see the light” in his or her own time, for if it were possible to do so before we were ready, it would not be accompanied by comprehension. The Truth is already in us, seek not for outside demonstration.

Abstract and logical, whether as an approach to making choices or about how opportunities influence lifestyles, each in its own way allows for a purposeful basis from which its growing genre can extrapolate, or at least foresee, the directions that daily concerns might take. From this “square one” position, each way of thinking evolved along its own convoluted path and on the one hand, without intending to oversimplify or generalize, came to be populated by creative free-thinking souls, while on the other, saw regimented more disciplined types, who lived to control as many aspects of their life as needed, to justify their insistence on consistency in order to plan ahead effectively. Even though the means of approach described here fit neatly into what today has become distinct schools of thought, our historical view of them, as related to the savage mind, is represented only as embryonic attempts at establishing rational thought processes in spite of the chaos around them and the instinct for survival. From this womb of thought form, each took their direction from their surroundings and through their interactions, but unconsciously defined the ground rules that would forevermore classify otherwise perfectly normal beings by how they chose to view the obvious. Our selective witnessing and even more selective memory didn’t have selfish origins but simply was emblematic of how individuals––freedom seeking egos––can see exactly what they want in any situation regardless of the conclusions of others, who upon witnessing the same event, might recall the “facts” as something entirely different, because they too have seen it precisely the way it best suits them. More malleable than the witness, is their long-term memory. The further removed we are from the actual event, the longer we have to allow it to conform to our personal predilection, and what ever slant that assumes, the more self serving it becomes. Quite unintentionally, we shape the echoes of activities in our minds so as to pose the least objectionable image or record of what actually happened. This is a self defense mechanism that protects us against going stark raving mad by being overwhelmed with the emotions––which were new to our kind to begin with––invoked by the unimaginably inhumane characteristic behavior, of the barbarians we fondly refer to as our ancestors. From these earliest events and throughout all the millennia since, it’s been the differences in the way we see the same things that have kept us far enough apart to regard each other with suspicion, alienate those who refuse to think the way we do and wage war with any who try to impose their way of thinking on us. Not too surprisingly then, encounters between those of opposing views might find common ground elusive, or shaky at best, and easier to avoid rather than admit a possible error in judgment––sure to be perceived as a weakness––any compromise might suggest. So, the evolution of thought was well on its road to confusing the simple lives of our forebears and though tolerance and compromise itself would find an occasional respite among the confrontations loosely called social behavior, the chasm that separated these parallel tracks could never prove to be wide or deep enough to stunt anyone's spiritual growth.

All who survived, or even flourished, by living as if it were possible to be one with nature found fewer material or resource obstacles on their path, as long as emotions didn’t get in the way. Obviously they would though, and still do of course, because dismissing feelings is not only a lot to ask of savages, who relied entirely on prowess to gain and keep all property used to exemplify their status among peers, it’s unreasonable to expect of anyone who places too much emphasis on what other people think. Even so, the tribal lifestyle offered a means of appreciating our true nature, while in the confines of a village, those engrossed in defining cultural parameters to project their influence, were refining what might have been the first addiction, “greed”! In spite of distinct and innumerable differences, the common thread almost entirely unique to our species, is emotion. We can say; “almost entirely”, because the nurturing instinct witnessed in nature so closely resembles the purest of love, that we can’t entirely rule out the possibility it is. In any case, we can be sure love is the first emotion we experience (from our being nurtured) even if it’s the last we embrace with understanding. Our enunciation of free will added a lot more to our repertoire than the right to choose, because choices can’t be made without consequences, and although facing up to any responsibility inherent to that was beyond the scope of the average savage, it had to start somewhere. People who are open minded enough to know their way of thinking isn’t suitable for everybody and additionally, recognize those who do think differently as someone of worth, have the capacity to demonstrate respect, compassion and sympathy. “In the beginning”, these faculties found little favor however, because their practice could be interpreted as a weakness at a time in our history when every advantage was taken to dominate. No wonder then, what evolved from these beginnings was a belief system that thinks nothing of taking advantage of anyone who shows empathy toward another. As has become obvious, the older any belief system the more likely we are to accept it as fact, making it difficult to deny even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Because of the nurturing instinct and its apparent capacity for compassion and sympathy, women have long exhibited behavior that is interpreted as a weakness and thus are considered the weaker sex. This mind set is so old that many women themselves have come to think of it as true. These misguided notions have been promoted from the earliest of times by the physically dominant of our kind, when equating attributes of character with those of physical stature, at the same time learning that; if you tell someone something often enough, they’ll start believing it. It would seem the child bearing half of humanity has “enjoyed” the most familiarity with emotions––including and especially the positive ones; whereas it was expected of them to care for others––while coping with expressing the full spectrum of feelings that were overwhelming the senses of all newly free-thinking souls.

The confusion that these mixed feelings wrought on the otherwise deliberate behavior of our usually single minded primitives, was due largely to the fact that any consideration of each other, for any reason, was based solely on our impression of the physical characteristics relevant to the situation. That is to say, before we realized others might be wrestling with the same questions we had only recently become aware of ourselves, the outcomes of interactions relied on body language. Once it was clear we were not the only ones who knew things like fear, for example, and how it’s consequences felt, it was only a matter of time until we learned why not to show it and how to impart it to our advantage. Denial of what was going on inside was easy, since it wasn’t readily understood, and the associated visual clues from it were already interpreted as the body language part of the more comfortable and time tested physical stature judgments. That is to say, it wasn’t our habit to over think matters anyhow. For one thing, reaction time meant survival and since hesitation could bring about less than desirable outcomes under most circumstances, the “acting without thinking” pattern of instinct endured and, sadly, survives to modern times largely unchanged. Our struggle with emotions has been the silent revolution we’ve never made peace with and denial has done little more than relegate it to a level of convenience, with the proclamation of it’s prominence in women and nonexistence in men. Accordingly, countless labels and generalizations have served as invaluable fodder for the bravado of the non-child bearing half of humankind, who––by their denial––lacking emotional experience, aren’t secure enough to make the choice of equality.

As in every other circumstance, there are also exceptions to the stereotypical emotional development, or for that matter, the perceived weakness it engenders. Naturally there were men who didn’t think it at all odd to express their feelings or to understand, others had feelings too. By the same token, don’t underestimate the vehemence a woman can levy in defense of her offspring. In addition, jealousy knows no gender, and the many levels of emotional maturity or denial, as the case may be, aren’t always gender specific so much as they are gender preferred. One such partiality, if you will, is illustrated with the example that; the character qualities admired as bravery and gallantry throughout our history, are quickly and easily deposed by any who can’t bring themselves to that level of behavior, and instead adopt a false confidence or “ego trip”, typical vehicles of denial. The “female” emotional agenda, on the other hand, supports her maturing earlier, in a way that predisposes a mother’s nurturing to both sustain us and invoke whatever self-esteem we may need to feel loved––hence worthy––during the earliest and most formative years of our own physical and emotional development. To be sure, these broad comparisons serve only to construct a “norm” from which an infinite number of possible degrees of complexity evolve, along paths favoring more specific combinations of established behavior traits, dependent largely on the choices an individual is facing. By the clarity afforded us from eternity, if that were our milieu, we could see the continuation of development guiding us through the choices that will ultimately allow God’s Will to be embraced. So by the sum of our physical incarnations, we will have encountered every avenue of expression in order that we may fully comprehend our timely revelation of The Truth. These experiences, by necessity, run the gamut of emotional extremes, because spiritual development is not fulfilled until we have won the silent revolution by breaking the emotional bonds that are holding us hostage in the physical.

Having said that, it should be increasingly obvious that everyone grows at their own rate. Every incarnate soul comes to each challenge faced, fully able to deal with it. What happens from that point is a matter of choice. Those choices depend largely on the attitude at the time the challenge is offered. The degree to which we accept the opportunity to learn, or not, determines our individual pace. Remembering eternity is our true place of origin; the home from whence we’ve come in order to learn in the physical and to where we return at each lesson’s end, it remains clear that the apparent rate of advance along our path is of no particular consequence. There is no faster or slower way to grow back to the “oneness” of our true nature, represented as spiritual unity. With that in mind and as hard as that may be to believe, consider that from the vantage point of the observer everything happens exactly the way it’s supposed to!!

Admittedly, that’s a bitter pill for all those who have invested a large portion of their life in the pursuit of unrealistic expectations within a contrary time frame. These self-proclaimed “victims” of other’s inexpedience, manifest many adverse behaviors under the pretext of; running late, emergency, not enough time or, very simply, the attitude that equates; “the rules don’t apply to me”. Even though unsaid, this last one is the assertion of the over confident ego showing little or no patience for themselves or others who, “get in the way”. As important as patience is, there is a reason it’s among one of the last principals of Divine Truth revealed to us. We nearly all appreciate it’s significance, but for the most part have resigned ourselves into believing we lack enough of it to get, what is generally accepted to be, the most out of a given situation. Our full potential is seldom realized then, because we fail to see it through to the end. During an encounter we often glean what we perceive to be the allotted portion of our due, but too soon begin thinking about what’s coming next, so lacking both attention span and patience, we move on before finishing what we started. As if to punctuate that point of character, many of our challenges are revisited from a number of perspectives so as to reap the absolute greatest benefit. The very same lesson can return under totally unrelated circumstances and in a guise bearing no resemblance to any of it’s former or future wrappings, that we would recognize. The advancement along our individual path is chronicled in such a way that patience has little usage until we have reached a point where we are becoming aware of the “at-one-ment” that lies ahead. We’ve no reason really to even expect patience until we have a glimpse of that “big picture” where its meaning begins to fit its purpose. Actually, we practiced its premise long before we considered it or recognized it to be an asset to ones character. With that in mind, we have a pretty good idea of what it feels like, even if our abbreviated attention span only allows an occasional glance, and by the time we associate it’s cultivation as being beneficial, the adage “practice makes perfect”, can be a comfort rather than an annoying reminder. Attitude, of course, is the best beginning in making any choices that will get us where we want to go and when applied to the practice of patience, attitude can at least pass for a reasonable enough facsimile of it to derive, as stated, the benefit of an occasional hint at what the real thing feels like.

The best attitude most ancients could muster in difficult relationships was one of tolerance, at least when there was some incentive involved. Since survival had long been established as a top priority, both in the short term and long term scheme of things, any advantage could often be too precarious to rely on long enough to secure the desired result, whatever the objective. Consequently, and as a precursor to patience, toleration was assumed acceptable, at least while any hope remained that our relative position might be improved upon by the exercise of it. Not surprisingly, the need to observe tolerant behavior came up more often among people trying to establish villages where proximity and commerce emphasized getting along. Depending on each other further enhanced the probability that otherwise irritating characteristics would be tolerated in order to get the most out of what was hard times for all. They had a common interest in making it work, even when looking out for number one. The rules of conducting business were gaining acceptance, but also helped frame what would be tolerable behavior in general. As these environments expanded into permanent settlements, with all the necessary criterion to that end becoming manifest, a sense of long term commitment became more self-evident and no doubt engendered the qualities required to maintain order. Establishing rules of conduct is nothing but the defining of limits beyond which any act or deed is no longer tolerable. So with the rewards of tolerant attitudes coming on many levels, the presupposed incentive proved the practice had value often enough not to dismiss it outright. With tolerance as the seed of patience having now germinated in the fertile untilled soil of our emotional infancy, its roots would wind their way through the stubborn involvement of countless encounters and unrelated relationships, over thousands of generations and unmeasured incarnations, only rarely and briefly offering the desired fruit of understanding or taste of compassion long enough to remind us that an alternative to discourse does exist, and that its cultivation might one day lead to an increasingly civilized way of relating to one another.

By defining “incentive” as the hope of unrealized prosperity or additional abundance, it takes on a significance with universal qualities that qualify its usage beyond those reasons given for a tolerant attitude. The hope of reward that incentive implies, applies to every facet of human life and endeavor. Reward, in fact, structured our behavior millennia before we consciously used it to our advantage as a simple incentive or convoluted manipulation. What ever the application, it would become common to every culture and regardless of the apparent outcome desired by its implication, the lessons learned through the persistent practice of any skills inspired by incentives, could only affect us positively on the quest that is our path. So it is that after being influenced by the incentive / reward scenario that helped optimize the conclusions of countless encounters through myriad incarnations, does our physical recall begin to grasp the reality that reward might even embrace the concept of patience.

Well, it does, but the conceptual thinking that would allow such a leap belongs to the realm of the abstract and that school of thought, as alluded to earlier, registered the majority of its practitioners among the tribal “nations” that were spreading out to populate every land mass––from the smallest island to the largest continent––adapting their lifestyle to the unique challenges and abundance of each new land. Not blazing a trail for others to follow, but establishing a permanent and independent, if remote, presence where resources supported it. Learning how to fit in, becoming and living as one with the surroundings they considered their host, multiplying and dividing locally before setting out again on another spasm of expansion reaching ever further beyond the horizon. Patience among these peoples wasn’t something they strived toward even on the level of tolerance, after all, familial confrontations were simply a motive to move on, which in turn seemingly perpetuated their path’s directive. If there was an incentive / reward relationship it would be mutually understood and equally rewarding because they were a part of their surroundings. The natural rhythms and cycles they adopted had an indigenous patience no conscious effort could rival. The same seasonal, less hurried pace set the tone for a lifestyle that didn’t need the discipline or emotional extremes of the villagers who found it to their advantage when dealing with the uncooperative. Moreover, the hope as represented by incentive was a “given”, not because it was taken for granted, but that they were provided for in the abundance of their surroundings. In most cases, their need could not exceed their supply.

None of this is meant to imply that life was idyllic for the aboriginals, as populations spread for tens of thousands of years, enduring the harshest of extremes that natural forces could impose. Everything from generations-long drought to glaciation––both its advance and retreat––in addition to the inherent planet wide repercussions associated to it, would bear witness to the adaptability and stamina of this newest and only independently thinking addition to the kingdom of animals. Our survival as a species was enhanced, if not assured, by the individuality our free will represented. Everyone of our bipedal forebears, though some admittedly succeeded to the point of rudimentary tool making, were hindered by the very instincts that served them well throughout circumstances both predictable and unpredictable, but prevented them from adapting quickly enough to continue flourishing in the face of unexpected long term hardships. Our ability to recognize and pursue opportunities that might lend themselves to avoiding a calamity, significantly reduced the number and complexity of challenges and threats on our path. Such layered thinking patterns brought together actions and consequences in a way no other primate had a facility for. As a result, experiences accrued into a resource of their own, from which we could draw the details of related events making us less vulnerable and not as likely to find ourselves at the mercy of natures wrath, at least to the extent we couldn’t recover from an event, that might otherwise have doomed a less than able creature. The fossil record testifies to that evidence clearly.

Our adaptability also proved useful in shaping the immediate environment to suit our needs, either from the necessity of becoming an agrarian culture or as a territorial ritual that did little more than demonstrate control. In either or all cases for that matter, what began in us as a peerless physical characteristic came to fruition on another level when we were guided to manifest adaptability into our surroundings. As with any unique and entirely unaccustomed awareness, there are no pre-established rules of procedure. It was during our initial floundering expression of that unprecedented aptitude for adaptability, when the methodical rape of the landscape was dealt its first blow by neophyte villagers needing elbow room, clearing forests both for building materials and acreage on which to plant, diverting the flow of natural waterways for irrigation, not to mention the original instances of despoiling so many unrenewable resources whose limits at the time were far beyond our self-centered comprehension. Though indeed, the vastness of the wilderness precluded any concern regarding the economy of its use, the practices utilized in establishing our earliest centers of social life created a mind set of wasteful habits allowing an incubation of the delusion; that we would never run out of space or resources. It never entered our mind, therefore, to act any way but free wielding and unreserved, seeing the abundance found in these virgin territories as ours for the taking. On the other hand, those choosing to live as a part of what they increasingly perceived to be a world whose plant and animal populations maintained a tenuous balance, embarked on every endeavor so as to give back as much as they took and not take any more than to satisfy their immanent need, gaining an abiding respect for the richness that same abundance meant to them. These two approaches to husbandry, albeit caricatures of the most extreme examples, represented the fundamental abuse and use, respectively, of every available resource. Nonetheless, from the timeless eternal perspective, it’s clearly seen all manner of exploiting what was apparently inherently ours throughout that period of expanding consciousness and horizons, was not only entirely appropriate but expected behavior considering the spiritual to physical juncture we were navigating. Without benefit of previous experience and foreknowledge, that is by the narrowest possible physical viewpoint of the “now”, our day to day struggle to protect and survive life, seemed to hold nothing in its future but chronic divisiveness and hostility. After all, the “ego-centered” part of our path that dictates actions and reactions, especially with regards to personal agendas, is suitable for little else except to use what ever means necessary, to what ever end is desired. In other words, our choices are measured in accordance to the lesson at hand, as is always the case, and in the physical their validation rarely extends beyond that immediate challenge. That’s what was alluded to earlier when it was said; there are no wrong choices. Everything happens exactly the way it’s supposed to, regardless of what our notion about right and wrong is!

If there were a cognizant singularity that enabled adaptability, it would be our best effort at utilizing time to serve us, perseverance. The refusal to give up or be held down attests to the compelling force behind our single-minded will to live. Adaptability is the assurance life will go on, at any cost. At least a portion of that remittance is disbursed through the perseverance it takes to endure the trial and error pitfalls of discovering what works in more situations than not. In that way our mutability gleans clues regarding which way to adjust behavior to enhance survivability. It’s clear then, perseverance supports adaptation by the way it manages time. We would do well to remember however, we are referencing characteristics while not unique to, but for the purpose of this treatment, confined to the sentient. Though many things seem to act in ways that mimic perseverance, because of their tenacious or stubborn resistance to our will, it’s simply nature’s “original instinct”, or self defense, protecting those who would otherwise be overwhelmed. The awareness required to choose to persevere is accompanied by the requisite attention span thereby qualifying the choice as a viable option and not just a primordial defense mechanism. How much attention we’re willing to invest in our pursuit of any endeavor quantifies our value of said endeavor’s esteem. When an expected result holds no foreseeable value for us, the refrain is often overheard or spoken of ourselves; “I don’t have time for that” or “It’s not worth my time”. Rest assured however, when it comes to surviving, attention span, perseverance and adaptability are symbiotic and enduring.

If a conscious choice produced an adaptation showing enough promise to gain wider usage, we were quick to take credit for the innovation, especially in the event it should add to the quality of life, if only by increasing the odds of holding on to it a while longer. When, on the other hand, and in spite of attention span and perseverance, the outcome of a trial and error episode didn’t favor further consideration, we learned to take the attention off our party to it, by placing the blame elsewhere. No sooner had our ego set about to demarcate its individuality and highlight the positives, to feed its attention starved appetite, did we realize that not all forms of attention were healthy or desirable. Adapting to that revelation introduced “finger pointing”, which became popular as soon as we were “old enough” to decide the consequences of a bad choice were worse than making no choice. As we fine-tuned our capacity to dispute the obvious, from the earliest cowering denial postures to an increasingly sophisticated barrage of disparaging accusations intended to shift culpability, finger pointing became acceptable––by the accuser anyhow––as long as it was convincing enough to imbue what has come to be called “reasonable doubt” in the minds of those who hold to the belief our judgment is preeminent and final.

Somewhere between blindly giving into the wrath due the impugned and standing up for impunity we realized, without either clear intent or dubious means, that the environment we found so malleable to suit our needs, included each other. Many of the primitives who were out in front of the pack with the skills necessary in reshaping things to satisfy an agenda or specific purpose, also led the way in convincing others to bend according to their will. The practice of inciting conformity was not exclusive to the leader types however. All of us, some unintentionally, some otherwise, have tried changing those around us to accommodate our personal expectations. It’s our nature to presume, if a change must be made to improve our circumstances, then it has to come from someone or something other than ourselves. On the one hand, we have always been quick when taking responsibility for any adaptations that make life easier. On the other hand, our reticence regarding personal adaptability––including positive character changes––leaves us insensible to opportunities in overcoming challenges we face. That indifference concerning our own motivations invariably leaves the door open for others to enter and in turn shape our way of thinking for us, that is to say; change us to suit their need while convincing us our needs are being met, which then makes us the adaptable environment whose resources they are taking advantage of.

If any of what’s been said so far has been retained, then we’re well assured that in reality, the appearance of being used or taken advantage of, is not what it seems, but only another necessary step in the ongoing accrual of physical experiences benefiting all parties involved equally. No event has more meaning for one, than it does for another. Regardless of appearances, Divine Guidance is at work in all things, even though its varied manifestations are not always kind to the physical senses or fair by our measure of moral conduct.