Saturday, November 20, 2010

Why this blog has its name

This blog is thought to be "central". This means it deals with estructural, esencial, central topics. The more specific topics -evenly important- are treated in the diverse blogs and sites I link. This is my project. That is why I called it "Southern Central" and that is why in the two first posts of october 2010 I proposed myself as "leader" for anyone wanting to follow this proposal, in such a grade as he wants to do it.

A fundamental aspect of this "Central" project is to promote commentaries. To comment is the essence of the blogs, which makes them true "conversations", fomenting interchange, complementation and debate of ideas. To comment means "to make sinapsis" in the "neural mass" or "noosfera" of the planet. So leave your comments!.
Another topic is the listing of links: I am being very wide or in other words, reflecting the inmense variety of ideas that are circulating around, as long as they add to a true re-evolution of our consciousness. Visit the re-evolutionary links! (There are hundred more links in the spanish twin of this blog)

My selection is not world wide: This "central" is "southern" (for America). My present analysis makes me envision that America has two poles: USA in the north and Argentina in the south. When I say "Argentina is the south pole", I do it in the sense of the bigger grade of cultural diversity, without despising the southamerican brothers (In fact Southamerica has three sections: andina, amazonic-atlantic-coastal and pampeano-patagonic... I explain this better in another blog...) In the same sense, there should exist a third central, the "central" central, in Central America. As we are situated in the southern pole, we have dificulty to see it.

If we "make zoom outwards", America is the center of the planet, where all cultures, ideas, religions, life styles, join... The mixing is today a characteristic of all this world, but America is not in vain called "the races and cultures crucible".
The function of America is to distribute the persons to the rest of the planet. Efectively, here the different persons have access to all the types of cultural systems and that implies that they are influenced to travel to all the parts of this world, phisicaly or intelectualy.

Another "zoom outwards" and we will see that this planet is a "central" planet or in another words, a "cosmic distributor"... but that is to watch too much, you curious!!

The bull of Ethics and its four legs

The wisdom of India simbolizes Ethics or dharma with a bull. As a bull has four legs, dharma rests on four fundamental principles: 1) veracity, 2) cleanness, 3) mercy or non-violence and 4) austerity.

I will not explain these principles in deep, because I would have to enter a certain point of view about certain questions, such as what happens with violence against animals... but I will try to go into certain fundamental pointsand I believe -I hope- that we all will be able to agree in those at least. And if it is not the case, as I said before, never mind, I just hope this is useful to your own Ethics. Here we go:

About the first, veracity, I have already written in "The 3 of the new Ethics...". There I apply the concept of veracity to the words, relations and actions, in the form of true knowledge (not false), sincere love (not dishonest) and correct action (not failed). Please read that post.

About the second, cleanness, I will explain in this ocassion, beyond exterior cleanness, which is good no doubt, the delicate issue of intentions.
Intentions only a Supreme Being could know them, that is for sure, so the cleanness starts by recognizing that nobody can know the true intentions of another person unless that person reveal them himself. So it is matter of each one´s consciousness (Ethics) to care for the cleanness of his own intentions.
The trully ethical intention means zero egoism: any action that I do with the intention of obtaining a benefit for myself is incorrect in its essence, it goes against the "ideal world" -of which we spoke in the previous post- because it puts the accent in reclaiming to others what they "owe to me" instead of concentrating my consciousness in what "I can do for the other". And to make things more complex, there exists the "extended egoism", which means to seek benefits for my afiliates, family, partners or friends.
All of this is perfectly analyzed by diverse true spiritual masters - or as I call them "life masters" and that is why I will not go deeper into, unless you ask me to in the commentaries.
The final word, then, is once more triple and one: desinterested word, desinterested love and desinterested action.

About mercy, in the first place we must distinguish between the different social responsabilities for diverse social roles. So a judge, he cannot be merciful. He cannot say: "this man killed the other really, but we are going to forgive him". No: he must condemn that man, as much as the law says.
For whoever is not a judge, he must not assume the functions of a judge. Mercy as the ability to return a non-violent action to a violent action, is the source of that happiness known as "peace". Answering violence with more violence only brings suffering (unless you are a type of judge). I have intelligent and experienced readers, so I dont need to probe this last asertion, which fundaments in the karma or action-reaction law.

Austerity refers to "accepting what you deserve" or in other words, each one must learn to live with that which is "his quote" or "his part". Any other conception is greediness. Greed means in the last instance the insatisfaction of a necessity and the concomitant desire of obtaining something that satisfy us. So what we must analyze is if what we feel as a necessity really is so, if it is ony a fancy, desire for something with no reason or with a reason that doesnt obey to a rationale of the utility of the object or relation in question for our life. The utilitarian principle must be then our guide. Of course then it arises a question: "useful for whom?"
This question is very complex. To start, the insatisfaction of necessities is at plain sight today, and we can say without fault that it is caused by a bad distribution of riches. Again, so my masters say. But by the other hand, it is also true that many times, when one gives opportunities to such needed people, they simply waste it, administering in the worst way which you give to them. I know what I am talking about. I have observed it and I have listened to many persons that have worked to better the lives of the poor and have seen the same.
So it seems that what we really have to distribute is a proper education. And that, dear readers, is what we are doing here: starting by teaching the teachers. Because at this time I know that not any person comes to read a blog of philosophy or Ethics, but those persons who have a genuine interest in leading others, such as philophers, psichologists, educators, social assitants, etc. That´s why I make this humble effort to share from what I know to potential social leaders, or true and already leaders.

Poor are poor because they dont know how to administrate. Even worst, many of them are proud, envious, with uncontroled senses and mind. All these things I have told you in previous posts, how a person with such chracteristics could´nt ever find peace or happiness in his life. Beware! I am not saying that all poor people is like this, that would be a form of discrimination; but I have seen because I have personal and other´s experience, that many are like this. I sincerely believe that we must do a scientific investigation about this aseverations of mine.

I will put it more clearly: Many rich men and medium class men have the same mentioned problems, except one: they know how to administrate in less or more extent. Then, the true difference is that the poor doesnt know how to administrate. Does it implies that by only teaching him how to administrate we solve the problem of poverty? NO: because there are still the other issues. In fact, the middle class man who has such characteristics as mentioned, can never better his situation, in fact he goes deeper and deeper into debts. And the sons of rich people they usually have this characteristics, specially because they had all for free, then they end up with all properties in mortgage... Is it so or not?

Then first the first: it is an urgent necessity to teach all people, all people, to be austere. Or in other words: 1) To know perfectly themselves, their likes and qualities; 2) each one must assume a social role and the concomitant responsabilities according to that self-knowledge; 3) Each one must determinate which are his true and real necessities, based on the social function that he assumed; 4) Each one must work his consciousness and being to be austere in the sense of accepting only what he needs and not a single grain in excess; 5) every one must be teached to correctly administrate his part...

I could go on enumerating, but I want to concentrate on point (4): It is because of this point that in previous posts I insisted in the necessity of each one having to search for his "life master" or "consciousness master". When I say this I mean: that there is a master for each one of us, he can be the same of another person, or different, that doesnt matter, recognizing such a master is a pending task in the life of each one of us at this moment of our re-evolution.

I cannot teach you, dear reader, what you need to learn in particular, but if you simply accept this search, I can assure you, you will find your "consciousness master", unique and non-repeatable, such as you are unique and non-repeatable.

(I still lack to explain why we must consider different social roles with different "quantities" of necessities. Here arises the roots of the problem of envy, which I mentioned before. Wanting to have what apparently makes happy another one -specially by imitating the "rich and powerful"- is a very dificult problem, with even worst repercutions, such as depopulation of rural areas and the urban misery... but that is a very concrete theme and it needs long debates, so I will not go into it. I will explain why in more detail soon.)

Continuation of the Ethics proposal

I want to retake the Ethics issue. The first I will do is to analyze a fundamental concept: there cannot be Ethics without a north, a star, an ideal.
In previous posts I have explained the concept of "spiritual world", calling it "spiritual" as oposite to the "material" sorld. He whom I know as my main master, Srila Prabhupada, who masterly translated the Bhagavad-Gita "as it is", in one of his books he has named this spiritual world as the "antimaterial world", because its characteristics are just opposite to those of the "material" world - this world where you, my reader, and me, are living at this very moment.

What I propose now is that you follow me to see how far it takes us to imagine this "spiritual world" as our "ideal world" or guide-star.
I have spoken before of certain attractive characteristics of the spiritual world, but today I will focus on those that we are interested in from Ethics perspective. And those characteristics have to do with the relations between persons. Ethics takes birth from the necessity of coordinating the lifes of many persons.

In the spiritual or ideal world, there rule certain fundamental principles:

1) Each person has plain consciousness of who he is, which are his likes and dislikes, which are his qualities and which are his self-assumed responsabilities.
2) Everybody do the tasks that they like, and there are persons for all the likes, so all the tasks are done.
3) Everybody without exception, they perfectly perform all their self-assumed responsabilities without fail.
4a) Everybody does it without expecting a reward. In other words: unconditionally.
4b) Everybody do it by love, pure love, again: unconditionally.
5) Of course there exist the ocium, but the way the persons face it is non-different from the way in which they do their works. In fact there is no distinction between work and ocium, because that distinction is due to our present condition where "work" means effort, something we do with total or partial dislike. In the ideal condition, each task done by each person is liked by him and also he has the necessary qualities to do it perfectly.

To give a quotidian example, in my home I have assumed certain tasks as mine: every kind of transacting like shopping, banking, etc., to wash dishes and clothes, and sometimes water plants, sweeping, and similar tasks. Oh! and cleaning everything I use, like the bath. For the rest of things I dont bother, another person does it for me. I dont expect that she do it for me, nor does she expect something from me. We do it simply because we assumed those responsabilities, but in deep we do it because we love each other.
I add that I enjoy cleaning or going to bank, I valuate it because it keeps me in phisical activity without having to pay extra gymnasium.
If we add the presence of a son or daughter, well oriental wisdom says that the love of a mother for his son is the most similar to the "ideal" love, because it is unconditional (the son cannot give you something in exchange, materially speaking).
When you analyze a wider society, the problem is you not always find reciprocity; but that is not an excuse: if we assume a responsability, we must accomplish the task. That really means we are already "mature" and responsable.
As far as more people starts being responsable, society will be more and more close to our "ideal world". And at the last instance, according to the action-reaction law or karma law, one receives what one gives, and that is infalible...
I have spoken before of the relation between consciousness, freedom and responsability, in "The mistery of freedom partially revealed". In brief: do not expect freedom if you are not responsable; you will have so much freedom as responsability assumed for your actions.

I wanted to end this post with three postulates or simply advises:

"Start by yourself. Do the first step. To change your world, you change"

"Realize your maturity. Discover who you are and which are your qualities. Decide what you like to do and which will be your responsabilities. Then accomplish them"

"If you cannot do the previous for yourself, search around you for somebody who helps you, guiding you or advising you in concrete matters. I tell you so because I have lived all the stages (until now) and so I know what I am speaking of: before I simply (believed that) I do it by myself, but then I discovered the joy and relief of being able to admit my ignorance at certain times and in certain matters, and consulting with other people that I trust. That is the easiest and best way. The other way you have to become stoic to endure many headaches that your continous erroneous actions provoke to you"

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

If you come in the name of president Obama...

Hello. If you come in the name of president Obama, which would be an honor to me, please check the re-evolutionary links in the right column. Check what links we have there. IF you see someone interesting to you, feel free to open it and to know the truth.
You can also check this post in another of my blogs: "Filosofía política: EL SUEÑO DE LA FALSA INDEPENDENCIA".

Thank you.

I wanted to remind you

I wanted to remind you that, part of the experience that I propose to you in this blog, is to visit the links by the right. I have worked a lot reading each site to know what to link and what not. Every one of those links take you to blogs or sites that are protagonists of the "re-evolution of consciousness", as I call it at this moment. In fact, I have erased some links that I made carelessly.

That and to write many comments, those are my two first proposals. I repeat that I hate monologues, and specially mine.

In base to the commentaries that you have already left, I think I will leave the topics I was writing about and I will retake the Ethics topic. When I do it, I hope it serves to the construction of your own Ethics. I dont want to dictaminate nothing to nobody, because I am the "server of Nobody".

The begining of the end 2

This blog follows a sequence. If you are a new reader, you should start by"Return with a proposal" or at least from "The holographic universe. The illusion. Us". Else you will not understand correctly what follows.


At this point I must warn you: if you continue to read, there will be no more return for you to the type of "materialistic" life. You will simply fail in that type of existence. If you are ready to take the risk, go on and you will started to obtain the supreme success: to go back to the "spiritual world", freeing yourself for ever from illusion.

In sciences there exists a principle that is called "Okcham razor" (forgive my english if it is not "razor"). This principle stablishes that one must accept the coherent and embracing enough explanation, that uses the less theoric elements posible. With that, science pretends to get rid of theist theories that speak of a "soul" and even of psychological theories that speak of a "mind". But scientists are getting into trouble because at the end, not even the "force of gravity" exists with proofs: te only thing that exists is a field of phenomena that we perceive and then we assign a force that explains what we perceive. Technically it is not posible to "perceive" in no way, not even with machines, the force of gravity, or the magnetism. They are pure theories. Then if we apply the Ockham razor, we should conclude that there exists only one energy and one force. The only force or power would be the illusion...
How can we solve this? Then it is not posible to understand anything, because "all is illusion"?

We are going to explain in brief what is this material world. For that, we will again cite the Bhagavad-Gita (7,4):

"Earth, water, fire, air, ether (vacuum), mind, intelligence and false ego, this eight combined elements constitute my separated material energies."

Scientists get a complex life with those huge particle accelerators. At first they were looking for more and more sub-particles. They arrived to the point of having a "subatomic zoo", and to order it became very complex, because it grew constantly, to the point that now they recognize particles that they cannot even see, they can only see its effects in a fog, for instance.
Today the theories go in another sense: they have discovered the "holographic nature" of the universe. This vision is not incorrect, at some point all is illusion, but it must be known that "illusion" does not only refer to the vision: the fire element has a correspondence with luminic energy and the sense of vision; but there exist five elements, energies and senses to perceive those energies in all. All of this will be finally recognized by the scientifics, but their material science will not go beyond that. They will never recognize the mind, the intelligence and the false ego, that are the subtle components of material nature. They see those are "brain effluvia".
Even if you recognize this subtle elements, even thus you have not learn all that is to be learnt. As master Prabhupada signals on his magistral explanation of this verse, people "supose that this material world is for the enjoyment of the living entities, and that living entities are the purushas -the cause, the controlers and the enjoyers of the material energy-".
Science as we said doesnt want to recognize even this subtle elements, this is because the scientists want to fundament their opinion that we are the cause, the controlers and the enjoyers. By the other way, there are "masters" that teach the subtle aspects and, no obstant, they are non different from scientists. They also try to put the living entity as the center and cause of everything, and they teach false clasifications where for instance they multiply to infinite the number of "bodies" that we have. I have come to read a theory that postulated that we have 9 bodies: etheric, double astral, and I dont know which others...

All this multiplication of false doctrines was predicted by a great master, the one called Christ or Jesus. He clearly said that "to the end of times" then will come false profets and false messiahs or salvators. At this point, it is not difficult to understand the causes of such multiplication: humanity in general is making use of its intelligence, trying to understand things; but the problem is that there is no humility; instead each one tries to understand by itself, without accepting the necesity of learning all this from another person. The same way as you learn mechanics from a master mechanic or painting from a master painter, it is necesary to understand about what is real or not, about material and spiritual, from a master well versed in such topics, theorically and practically.

The Bhagavad-Gita explains the characteristics of such bona-fide masters in the verses 55-58 of the second chapter:

" is said that a man is in a state of trascendental and pure consciousness, when he leaves all the varieties of desires for sense gratification, desires that come from mental invention, and when his mind, purified in such a way, finds satisfaction in the being only."
"That person whose mind doesnt disturb even in the middle of the three types of suffering, nor gets exultant in the moments of hapiness, and which is free from attachement, fear and anger, it is said to be a steady mind sage."
"In the material world, he who is not affected by any good or evil that he may obtain, and that doesnt price nor dispise it, he has firmly in his possession the perfect knowledge."
"He who is able to retract his senses from the objects of the senses, such as a turtle saves his extremities inside the caparace, he has firmly in his possession the perfect knowledge."

Another criterium to know who is a true master, is that such a master is simply succesful in what he starts. If a master ends for instance in jail, he is not a true master. If a master suffers grave ailings, such as cancer, and he doesnt renegate it, instead he goes on and has success, he is a true master. But if his work comes down, then he is not a true master. If the master´s disciples have success and achieve the qualities described in the previous verses, then he is a true master. If his disciples fail to achieve such qualities, then he is a false master.

I would be glad that you write commentaries and in such a way I would know where to go in the next posts.

The begining of the end

This blog follows a sequence. If you are a new reader, you should start by "Return with a proposal" or at least from "The holographic universe. The illusion. Us". Else you will not understand correctly what follows.


At this point I must warn you: if you continue to read, there will be no more return for you to the type of "materialistic" life. You will simply fail in that type of existence. If you are ready to take the risk, go on and you will started to obtain the supreme success: to go back to the "spiritual world", freeing yourself for ever from illusion.

In the previous post I exposed many themes. I will not repeat what I have already said about illusion. Refering to the "spiritual world", I fundament myself in the Bhagavad-Gita (8, 20-21):

"There exists another nature, non manifest, which is eternal and trascendental to this manifested and non-manifested matter. That nature is supreme and never anihilated. When all this world is anihilated, that part remains as it is."

"That which the sages describe as non manifest and infallible, that which is known as the supreme destiny, that place from which, after arriving to it, you never come back, that is my supreme abode."

From that we will speak soon. I have mentioned also the "voice of the master. In "My sources" I speak in more extent about the necessity of finding a "life teacher" or "spiritual master", and I give my reasons in the post before this, "OK I have just understood about illusion...".
This blog doesnt propose as spiritual master to nobody, because we are all singular and so we need a master that "fits" us. Such a master we can only find ourselves, each one, simply searching for him in our lives. All this world is done with the intention that we find such a master and with his help, we free ourselves from illusion. Nonetheless, this blog serves properly to arriving to the comprehension of why we need such "spiritual master", and to lightly understand what is this world and which is the objective of our existence here.

This world has three aspects or prevalent functions:

1) It is a species of "jail": here end those who get out of the harmony of the spiritual world. As a perfect jail that it is, it offers different grades of freedom to its inhabitants. About that we have explained in "The mistery of freedom...".
2) It is a "rollercoaster" where we can for moments experiment certain types of enjoyments, according to the "good karma" that we have accumulated.
3) It is an "educational system", which teaches us in steps how to free ourselves from illusion. Remember that illusion we generate it in a certain sense ourselves, it is a subproduct of our activity, specially verbal and linguistic. It also teaches us how to "correctly" behave. We have already explained the fundamentals of "correction" in "New Ethics" and "The 3 of the New Ethics...".

Returning to the theme of spiritual world, lets see  that the verse says that nature is not manifested. This refers in contraposition to the material nature, which is "manifest and non manifest" (created and anihilated). And it is clear about the first: "It is supreme and never anihilated", and then again... You can understand then that it is eternal. In the next verse it is explained another characteristic: it is infallible. That refers to the fact there all is perfectly organized, every second, every milimeter, without any need for man-maked machines, to the point that you always get what you want and you never get what you dont want. I have already defined in another post that this is the ideal of "hapiness".
Which is finally mentioned, is that when you arrive to such place or state of existence, you never come back to material existence. This is the fundament of why in this material world it is almost our duty to experiment diverse attitudes and behaviours, with the proposal of "fullfilling our desires" and to understand the esence of illusion. But we must not try to experiment all, because the posibilities are infinite and we will never end. Then which is the moment to stop chasing illusions and become serious in the attainment of the freedom from illusion? That, each one must decide for itself, but my advise is to do it now.

OK I have just understood about "illusion". What now?

If you have readed my posts "The holographic universe. The illusion. Us" and "The true perfection and sense of "illusion"", then you must have understood this:

1) "Reality" that our senses perceive is a holographic projection of the consciousness field into the space-time (see the last discoveries and theories of quantum Physics, for instance the videos that I link in my youtube videochannel, to the right).
2) Reality (without quotes) is that we are not the kings of universe, it is more like we have entangled ourselves with our own creations, and we are or we were about to self-destroy us or, better said, having to start all again.

If this is so, ¿what solution we have?... Well, before speaking of solutions, lets clarify even more what the problem is. The self-destruction is not the biggest problem. At the end, it would be simply the need to start all again from the begining. The problem is that there are some ways without return, spirals into deep holes where nobody, not even God, could take us out without violating our free will (if God exists).
For instance, there are certain philosophic theories that speak about the relativity of all things. These ways of thinking go deep into this vision to the point where they leave no option, because they put in total doubt the posibility of understanding any thing, because all is "points of view", "all minds are contaminated with partiality and cathegories that modify the facts" and "all minds are conditioned" and similar arguments. To the same time, they close any posibility of an exterior intervention which could help us to free ourselves from selfishness. As I said, it is a dangerous hole of self-reference (or extreme egotism).
Another ways of thinking deepen even more the selfishness by the emotive side, resulting in very deep depresions.
Finally, there are the people that propose the theory of nothing and nirvana. These thinkers are ancient and they are cathegorized as "nihilists". They think that the objetive is to achieve "thinking of nothing", "doing nothing" and definitively, to free yourself from the holographic existence and become "one with the being", such as "a drop of water melts into ocean".

All these lines take us to a very complicated situation, but at last, the nihilism has a very quick solution when, after boring for some time in "the nothing", the person returns to exterior world and dedicate himself to phiilantropic activities. Which is something positive...

So what to do then? If all is nothing but illusion, What is the sense of existence?

That is the millon dolar question: What is the sense of existence? We will try to answer in short, so the post doesnt go long, and we will expand with other posts.

This existence that you, my reader, and me, have now, it is called "material existence". The world in which we are is called "material world", and the energy which compose it is called "material energy". The term "material" refers to certain characteristics of this energy and world, such as it changes constantly producing the decadence of all that is (decay, decadence, old age), it is without flavour in itself (because it is dead, without life) and it is a source of ignorance, obscurity. This is only the brief, it is really more complex...
The same way as there exists this "material world", there exists another world or existencial reality called "spiritual world", consistent of "spiritual energy". The term "spiritual" means the characteristics that, obviously, are the oposite of those of "material" world. For instance: it is eternally constant in its youth (there is no birth nor death, nor decadence, nor old age), it is tasty or full of ananda (that is translated often as "wellbeing" or directly "hapiness") and there all have full knowledge.
The spiritual world is similar to this material world in the forms. Better said, its the opposite: this world is similar to that one, but it is "distorted". It is said then that it is (we are) like a multitude of mirrors that reflect the spiritual world, but they are mirrors with slight variations in the surfaces that distort (we distort) the spiritual subjects and objects. The spiritual world is much more variegated and touching than material world. We will go on with this in another posts...

The sense of existence in this "material world" is that we experiment. Efectivelly, to function correctly, the spiritual world needs that its inhabitants follow some rules. When somebody doesnt want to follow these, such person "falls" or enters into this material world. Here it is allowed to do whatever he or she likes, and nobody is going to take you out of here if you dont want. But, be it here or in the spiritual world, there exists one only universal law: the law of action-reaction or karma law, which we have already explained in previous posts. Which means that everything that happens to you, you have provoked it. At first, the living entity refuses to acept this, he prefers to blame others for its situation. That attitude doesnt work, because at the end he continues to suffer the same (nature is imparcial). The moment when the living entity accepts the existence of this law, means a total change in his life, specially because accepting this law means accepting to receive this knowledge from another person.

In other words: the true meaning of existence cannot be found by a solitary person. It is necesary to receive this type of knowledge from another person, which had already undergo all the phases of such a discovery. All the philosophic ways can help you to get out from illusion, even movies speaking about this topic, they say to you the same: you need another person to show you the way.

This material world is constructed in such a way, that it tends to teach you the contrary. All of your life you have been bombarded with the idea that you need nobody to make it, and that is the reason why now you rebel against my words. Said in another way, you dont accept external help, because somebody or many people has told you that you shouldnt do it. You are paying obedience to this persons and that is why you dont want to accept that you need another person, one who doesnt foul you, to be able to step out of the labirinth of illusion or deceit.

If you dont believe me, go ahead, roll around for some time more or some more lives. I have all the time of the world, I am nobody in particular, I am only the voice of the master. "The voice of the master" will follow you wherever you go, now or in five thousand years. It has been with you thousand of years before and it will be with you forever, be it me or another person who incarnates it. Because we love you, because we want to see you free from illusion, consciouss of your eternity, inmanent happiness and full knowledged.

We will continue on the next post.

Sunday, November 14, 2010

The true perfection and sense of "illusion"

We have already explained in gross the illusory nature of reality, or in terms of the physicists, "holographic universe". We have mentioned that fighting against such illusion is useless. It is so because existence means illusion, proyection of desires and ideas over a space-time around us.
There is another sense of the word illusion and it is more important. Illusion, or in sanskrit "maya" means "that which is not". It aplies then not only to the sensorial illusion but also and more properly to perception itself. Perception is a complex act. To feel, to use the five senses to acquire information from context, from the outside, that is only the first step. There is a second level. We have explained this somewhere else: some persons have not go beyond the world of the senses, they live for them. Another ones are in the mind´s level. We are going to explain this, but not too much.
The mind is a little machine. It is designed to serve as instrument of data input, suing of those data, and results devolution. The suing has many aspects such as analysis (different clases of analysis), comparing, ordering, mixing, creation, synthesis... Besides all that -cognitive proceses- there is the conexion between the mind and the feelings, that is another complex that I am going to explain now. Basically, feelings are the opposite of thoughts. The "mental" is properly the "masculine" or "left hemisphere of the brain" (please take all this as mere cathegories), the "emotive" is "femenine" or "right side". You can also understand the emotive as "from hearth". So we see that there are purely "mental" persons, purely "emotive" persons and mixtures of both. Remember that we are parts of a whole. So when we are acting as data procesors, at a mental or emotive level, we are just accomplishing a function in that whole. As if we were parts of a huge body, a cosmic body, lets say in this moment I am being like a neuron or neuronal centre procesing information, analyzing it, explaining it to you. And you are acting as receptors of that information, listening attentively what I say (it is so?) :p
The whole is listening this, through me producing this knowledge at this moment, through others reading what I  just produced. But what whole? Obviously, that whole who didn't know this... If there is a supreme or absolute person, as he is conceived in religions, that person doesn´t need to learn this. He or She already knows... On the contrary we are the ones that needed to know... We will leave this question open for now...
Some researchers in neuropsychology and similar have conceived some day that, at the end, what remains are the ideas. We are, after all, a species of refined computers. For instance a computer, you enter information, she processes, she exhibits some results in the screen or another gadget... She does so for some time, then she "dies" (becomes obsolete); but then, even when the computer is no longer useful, the information remains. We simply pass it to the next computers hard disk and it remains... To this they called "the government of the memes" or "the eternity of the memes". They understood as "memes" (rhyme with "genes") an idea or group of ideas with certain potential, that remained over time using diferent physical support media, and between these media there are us! In other words, we are receptors and transmisors of "memes" or ideas. The ideas may last for centuries, even all the time of the universe (for instance the ideas of chaos and order are such old). We last a few moments in comparison with them, in fact they seem to "use" us for their perpetuation... So after all, ¿We created the ideas or the ideas created us?... disturbing question, but it allows us to re-evaluate our position in the universe. Evidently we are not the kings of the universe.
This having believed and still believing we are the center of the universe or in another words, GOD, this deification of ourselves, is a type of illusion and one ver very serious. It is in fact the essence of our wrong attitude towards nature and existence and it is leading us -or may be it was leading us- to our self-destruction (or in another words, to having to start all again, "game over").

Lets see, lets see, will say the more intelligent: ¿Haven't you say that all toghether, we were "god"? Well, at this point I must show how our teaching system works: knowledge as I understand it is a spiral: first we understand "white against black", then we go over another topics, then we complete the circle, but we are a little more upwards, then, the same topic, but this time, it is "white and black". Another round and now there are grays in the middle, another round and there are colors, another and there is non-visible light...
Now we have understood another element that we didn´t know: the world of the ideas is not there for our manipulation and control of reality... on the contrary it even seems the opposite: ideas control us, they use us as mere transmisors in the fight between them for supremacy.
Because if we look it closely, these ideas opose between them, then they fight to expand on behalf of their opposites. The "order" tries to arrange everything, "chaos" tries to disorder everything... and we are in the middle, we "afiliate" to order or chaos, and we are willing to give our lives for them... this is the pathetic reality of humanity until not long ago and even today... and I am going even far away: if there exist the gods and devils, they are in the same game, just with another high-tech "toys" like lightnings and divine weapons...

In other words, we have created a world that is now our Master. We have submited ourselves to slavery... that, dear readers, is the true perfection and sense of "illusion".

Saturday, November 13, 2010

The truth in one only word

All the truths, the Absolute Truth itself, all things can be told in just one word: "Love". But there is a long way until that...

The holographic universe. The illusion. Us.

Nowadays there is much dialogue about reality as a holographic proyection of our minds. This is a good idea, adecuate to the moment, but inexact.
By the other hand we also know from "Matrix" movie the idea of a superior force that keeps us illusioned, traped in the holographic universe, who knows whit which objetive.
¿Which is the reality? ¿What is our role here?

As we explained in the previous post, we have basically tree power: to wish, to think and to feel. All starts by our desires. From them, with our thoughts we elaborate ideas. These ideas one way or another end materializing (we will explain that in due time). Finally, in relating with the external world we "feel" experiences more or less pleasant. And that is our true objective. In the very inside we are all hedonists. Even the stoic, he is simply someone who is traped in some corner of the holographic maze. Lacking a way out, he decides to "endure" whatever comes, but in his interior the desire is to enjoy.

That is why the great oriental masters warn us against the "sense gratification", not for enjoying itself, but to trying to do it in a "separate way". In other words, "egoistic". Today there are lots of those false philosophies or reliigions that tell us that we simply must wish intensely and then the universe will give us whatever we want. That is not so: the desire of the whole "living entity" is more important and more powerful than the individual entity´s wish. Our desire will be acomplished in the measure of its harmony with the whole´s desire.

The problem for us is that we have not learnt to harmonize our whole desire field. The way to do it is very simple: we have to find our "center". This is a totally individual task. Each one must search and find his own center. To find the center means to recognize a person I will listen to. Because all starts there: listening. To listen means to abandon the proud stances of "I already know" and "I can do it alone".

Scientifics are discovering the holographic nature of universe, but they are also doing because they want to control the universe. They are still in a war plan: war against the nature itself. That is not the attitude that we need now, but another: we must abandon the childlike idea of independence. We are all interdependent, ones from anothers. I cannot satisfy my desires to enjoy in an individual way, I always need another ones. Even the perspective of "I am going to satisfy me" is wrong, because it is egoistic. That is why some day I wrote:

"True hapiness means to know how to enjoy the hapiness of the others".

It is not ME, it is US.

The mistery of freedom partially unshadowed

"Free will" has been debated for a very long time. Normally it is adjudicated to "voluntas". Nonetheless, you can speak of freedom of thoughts, freedom of action and even freedom of love. Notice that I am nameing the three aspects or scopes of our lives: knowledge, love and action (power).

Freedom is, in the first place, a mistery. In no place to the day you will find an adequate definition of what is to be free or a proof about if we are free or not. By the contrary, there are numerous proofs that we are not. At this point of our evolution, we already know that we have strong limits externally as good as internally. External ones as money, political actions of our governants, counter-actions of the communications media, etc. Internal ones, as our inconscious complexes, the type of education we received, and even our plain instincts playing many times in spite of our will, draging us to actions from which later we repent. Even so, many philosophers have proclamed the human free will as absolute...

I dont pretend to conclude or put a final point to the topic, only to bring some light into it. For that I use whatever I consider apropiate, and my first act of freedom is this proclaim: that each of us can use whatever he or she considers apropiate, and that not necessarily must all people to coincide that such fundaments are absolutely definitive. That is why I have said "apropiate" or in other words, "useful". In another post, "My sources" (a page really) I have explained which are my basis and why.

Lets go into the topic. The first that we can understand about freedom, is that it is not an absolute state of consciousness like black-white, but there exist graduations of freedom. It is not the same a person pulled, draged by his senses, a person who dominates his senses but who cant stop de constant flux of his mind, a person that has even controled his mind and catches the knowledge instantly like if he has a wi-fi conexion with the "universal knowledge central". I am talking about knowledge in this case, the same we could say of the action of a person who has to be thinking each movement, that is not the same as an expert that dominates his body to the point of adaptative instantaneous non-thinking response. The love terrain is even more slippery...

No obstant, knowledge happens first. This is a fundamental rule. That's why Jesus -for instance- said "truth will make you free". The difference between an animal -the immediatly previous level of evolution- and a human being -which follows- dwells in these three aspects: more consciousness-freedom-responsability, more inteligence-wisdom-cunning and the ability to love (again love is too complex to be explained in a few words). And it is the knowledge, the use of his intelligence, which allows human being to free himself from the grasp of deceit that is meant by pre-human life. This is easily understandable: just watching the animal life, one realizes how one DOES NOT want to live.

Many will defend that animal life is less abhorrent than human. They say that because they watch how bad are some humans acting (and today it is the majority of population) and how good are some animals acting. It is a selective observation. One could say "look the paceful pigeons", but if you watch how they defend they territories or fight for a mate, droven by luxury or sexual desire, the pacific envision is over. What to speak of predators, what to speak about the constant anxiety to which are exposed the non-predator species. Even in the life of a plant, it can be so nice, but sincerely, which human would want to be a plant?...
It is positive in this selective observation to understand that many persons "with human bodies" they act efectively like animals, this is, being draged by their senses and emotions, without control over them. Then we finally understand in which way we are not free if we are in this type of pre-human existence even having a human body. The second step is when our senses doesn`t drag us so much, but we have became "mental ruminants" which cannot resist the constant insinuations of our mind to commit little or big "evil" acts to a more sofisticated level than simple sensorial compliance. Then we notice another mental phenomena, like ideas fighting for supremacy in our mind, which disturbe us and deviates our attention constantly... Well, there are a miriad of this kind of "mental" phenomena. This is what is called "the mind" and it is a subtle element of our bodies. There are people who prefer to think that it is a mere emanation of our brain... anyways, there it is to make our life unbearable... until we discover what to do with it...
Anyways this problem is not easy to solve, "to dominate the mind is more dificult than to try to stop the wind with your hand", but there exist techniques -meditation techniques- that help us to achieve it.

Finally, the state of consciousness where you have dominated the mind and the senses, that is the true human state of consciousness, and it means that you have achieved real freedom.

Without real freedom, any decision that we make is useless. How could we take useful decisions if we are not even free? That is why it must be understood that, with the objetive of a functional society which doesn't desintegrate, others take decisions for us when we are not yet ready to take our own decisions.
If we notice the way a family works, we understand this instantly: the kid is not ready to take important decisions by himself, and that is why his parents do it for him, either he likes it or not. Humanity on this planet has been until present times like a child, and others have taken decisions for us. Even those who thought that they took the decisions "in the shadows", you must know that it is not so. As it is stated in the Bhagavad-Gita (3,27):

"The person who is confused by the influence of false ego, he believes he is the author of activities that in fact are executed by the three gunas or modalities of material energy (nature)".

Even in our awaken life, the actions are not executed by us, but by our bodies (when we are onfused by the influence of false ego). To better understand this, first one must situate himself in other "place" than his body. Believing to be the "material body" is called "false ego"... A complete reading of the Bhagavad-Gita helps us to understand this... to realize it...
Basicly, our margin of freedom has been reduced for so much time to wish, believe and feel. In the basis of these three aspects of our action, Maya or the illusion (or the Matrix) has created for and through us the world in which we have existed for so long time. As we gain consciousness, we gain freedom and so we will be more and more the makers of our own reality. How is this done? The diverse masters of all the philosophic schools, of all the religions and of all the no-more-esoteric practices are teaching in this very moment to all the people of the world to control their minds and bodies and -once they achieve this- they teach, themselves or another masters, how to create the new reality in which we are destined to finally realize all our dreams.

Now I must talk about responsability. I have already told it is a fundamental companion of freedom: to grow and acquire more knowledge means that from now on, each one must be responsible for his own acts or in another words, stop "blaming" another people for what happens to him. To understand the karma law or the law of action and reaction is a fundamental. This law is the only real, universal, absolute law in existence. All other laws are mere illusions, mere conventions to which we were submited for so long because of our immaturity. With the passing of time and as long as we make ourselves responsibles, such laws start to being revoked in an ever growing number of levels of exitence.

The law of action and reaction is real and absolute. Everyone should understand it and accept its existence, if we are willing a society where all people is included. To accept it means to accept that everything that happens in my life, I myself have generated it, and there is nobody else than me that is responsible for it. Sometimes you put this as the atraction law, it is a version of the same, but the way it is explained this attraction law, it has a deceiving hue, that dilutes the responsability with a promise of omnipotence that never happens in practice.

Sometimes it is not posible to track the causes in the immediate past, then there exists another concept that is pair with and twin of the law of karma, and it is called reincarnation. This is a very icy point to explain. I will not go on with it here, because it would be too long. Even without believing in reincarnation -the eternity of soul in front of the caducity of the material body- it is posible today to perfectly watch the imperium of the law of action and reaction in every aspect of our lives.

Finally, I want to insist that please, you leave your commentaries. I dont like monologues, and mine specially. I also have feelings and I need to know if somebody comes by here, so please leave a "souvenir". And if you can correct me in something or to agregate new elements, we will have all enrichen toghether.

Thursday, November 11, 2010

The 3 of the New Ethics: True Knowledge, Sincere Love and Correct Action...

From knowledge you predicate that it is true or false, from love you predicate that it is sincere or dishonest and from action you predicate that it is correct or incorrect.

False knowledge is ignorance and leads to that mess or estate of being in which we were not long ago and which usually is called "illusion" or "egotism" or "material existence". Dishonest love takes you to that material mess and incorrect action takes you to that mess or material labyrinth. This material mess is Ignorance, Dishonesty and Mistakes and so it is suffering or False Happiness.

The false happiness consists of believing that you are happy when you are not. This is due to a psychological mechanism by which we tend to remember the happy moments and to forget or repress the suffering moments (it is naturally so). When you are asked if you are happy, unless you are suffering in that precise moment, normally you will answer "I am happy". This answer has also to do with pride: the majority of people answers so because they don’t want to admit that sometimes they are unhappy, because that would imply that they have committed mistakes that sometimes have taken them to that unhappiness situation.

To reach Truth in thoughts and words, Honesty in relations and Hit or success in actions means True Happiness.

Who doesn’t want to know the truth, and not be cheated? Notice that I am not asking who wants to cheat others, but who wants to be cheated by others…
Who doesn’t want that others love him/her sincerely? And I am not speaking of being dishonest with others…
Who doesn’t want to hit or be successful in all his/her actions? I am not referring to being hit by another…

The mere possibility of being cheated, betrayed or vanquished, is hateful, nobody likes that. We all want to know the truth, without illusion or cheating, to love and be loved with sincerity and without treason and to act with success and without mistakes.

If you are not in accord with this, tell me! Leave your comment!
If you are in accord with this, tell me! Leave your comment!

I thank you by anticipation.

New Ethics

When you are a kid, you have a type of Ethics based on a binary division, composed of the "good" and "evil". This type of categories of opposites has been useful for us for a long time.
We have already grown up and now we must face the challenge of sharing a new type of Ethics. "Ethics" is the same as "moral" or "values". I don’t use the word "moral" anymore because it has religious connotations that many unconsciously reject, so I propose to unify with the term "Ethics" or if you want, to speak of "values".

In the fundational myth of the Bible, the Genesis, it is explained that to "eat from the tree of the science of Good and Evil" was the first mistake (again, I am avoiding the word "sin"). All the rest of mistakes followed that one: to pretend to determinate for ourselves that which is "good" and that which is "evil". But what is good and what is evil? Why to speak about this?

Basically, for the majority of persons today, the "good" is that which I like and the "bad" is that which I don’t like. This blog is not a "democratic" blog, I am not interested in what the "majority" says and my science is not based on statistics. What I am saying is that in reality, for all of us, it is better to consider good and evil as subjective matters, as "that which I like" and "that which I don’t like". Now, to this "subjective" aspect, or relative aspect, we must confront another "objective" or non-relative aspect, an absolute aspect. I call it the pair "correct" and "incorrect".

There are some relations between the subjective and the objective: when you do the incorrect, you always obtain that which you don’t like. But there is no symmetry here: when you do the correct, you not always obtain what you want, because the "punishment" (from a legal or juridical point of view) is immediately necessary, but the "reward" is not. The reality of our juridical systems seems to say the contrary, but I am considering the reality of a Justice in which human systems are only a part… This topic is long. I will only say that it is related to the oriental concept of "karma" or "law of action and reaction", about which there exists a lot of knowledge circulating today. Go and get it!...

By the contrary, I would like to go in another direction. We must understand what is correct and what is incorrect. This two terms refer to action. We have two ways to approach them:

1) The first way is by authority: this means that we take a person as our personal guide. This person can be like me, but more advanced: to this kind of role you call "master". It can be also an "absolute person", to this one you call "God". In this way there are the many religious and semi-religious ways and I will not go about them.

2) The second way is to amplify our comprehension to be able to advance without an authority apart from ourselves. In this sense, I propose an Ethics based in auto-comprehension and auto-knowledge. Much as Socrates' style.

True Ethics doesn’t mean that I do anything, it means that I do what is proper, the right or correct thing; not by obedience, but because I know what I will call: The True Knowledge, the Sincere Love and the Correct Action. About it I will write on my next post…

How the proposal goes on

If you have not readed the post below, please do it now before going on.


I have proposed to take a transitory leader. Well, I am proposing myself as a leader, not for the world (I am not so stupid as to thing such a thing), simply I propose myself as leader for you, who are reading this.

As a leader, the first thing I propose to you is to write some commentaries to my posts. A good leader, as I understand it, is not a monologist or dictator. I don’t want to lead people that renounce his own individuality and initiative to follow orders. If you read another posts on this blog you will understand what I promote.

Another essential point is that you visit the sites that I link. I consider them extremely important for a world revolution of our collective and One consciousness. Repeating what they are doing is ridiculous. They have already done it. So now try to explore them. In a certain way, they are like extensions of my blog, the same way as my blog is an extension of each of them. You are also an extension of each of us and we are of you. So now know us better, because then you will be knowing your self, and not any part of your self, but that part that is re-evolutioning your own world.

Now go and explore. And come regularly, because I will have more and more posts and links for you. That is my proposal, not my orders. Finally I say to you: Do what your hearth signals you, not what I say…

Then if you like all of this, please, tell me! If you are going to take me as a leader, tell me! I another thing, tell me! And remember, you can change of leader whenever you want. Simply if you take me as leader, you will see how soon our world will change for better. Yes: for better, because you will achieve each time more and more what you want and each time it will happen less what you don’t want. Tell me that is not what you want?............. I know perfectly that which everybody and each one wants and I synthesize it like this:

What everybody wishes is to achieve always what they want and that it never happens what they don’t want.

In the next post I will explain the three aspects of all that we wish and why it is so…

Return with a proposal

I had abandoned the blog. I spent a lot of time doing things in "real life" and recently I opened my youtube videochannel "Nexo Central Sur de América", under the usef 0NobodyNonameetc 0NadaNadieetc. There I link that which seems interesting and, above all, useful for the revolution of consciousness that this world is experiencing. I used to be called "Tattva das" or "servant of Thruth". My new name is "servant of Nobody".

So I will start by explaining a little who is Nobody and who are their relatives.

My first affirmation of today is this one: "We are all relatives" and also "All is relative"… but try to understand correctly… I don’t mean that as all is relative, so we cant talk about things… what I say is that we all are relatives: "We have relations and by those relations we live". At the last point, what keeps us alive is this network of relations that are the different forms of the so-called "love".

¿Who is Nobody? Well, Nobody is the person if whom you can say nothing.
Efectively, of Him you can only say that which He is not, and not that which He is; who He is and not who He isn’t.

His immediate relative is "nothing". Nothing is "that which", it means that it is "impersonal". Nobody is "he/she who", it means "personal".

Another relative of Him is Everything/Everybody. The infinite whole of all the things/persons is relative of the infinitely vacuum of nothing/Nobody.

Finally, the third relative is anybody or maybe somebody… in other words the One. One is me, for instance, one is You, and also Him. But you also can say that the Whole is One, even from a partial part of the Whole you can say that it is One, as long as there is a criterium of Oneness. For instance: "unity of criterium", "unity of desire" or "unity of ideology".

So the movement that I can see in this world in which we are today living is towards that Unity. But beware! Unity doesn’t mean the nullification of diversity. By the other side, there can only be unity if there is a common desire, a common criterium and the communion of powers…

¿How is it that diversity is not nullified then? Well, the secret is to understand that the "picture" that we are painting is a static picture. That is only a part of reality, and it is called that which is in the "space". The other part of reality is called that which rolls over "time". Then unity is produced when all "armonize" their desires, criterium and power under a common leader. But that leadership is kept as long as it is useful for us. The very instant it is not longer useful, we simply change the leader for another and so we change direction.

Finally we must understand that this proposal of mine for unity goes until some entourages or places and along certain time. Each one can accept or reject this proposal, can accept it partially and then he can expand it and better it. The grade of influence of it will be what will bring us to the unity that I am talking about. If it is not accepted, there will be no unity, we will keep navigating each one towards his own direction… If you accept it, you who are reading this, you will have collaborated with a little grain of sand to create the Unity that we all desire and that you desire.

Then One will be All and all things.

Monday, November 8, 2010

Where to look for more

This english version was discontinued. The spanish version has lots and lots of more topics.
Look for it in the menu of links by the right column.

IMPORTANT: Do not use any automatic translator on the spanish Central. It will ruin your understanding of the thing. Read only if you are well versed in spanish. Else wait I will be translating here at Southern Central.

NOTE: we are reasuming the translation to english in this blog.

Tuesday, July 31, 2007

Sexual orientation

To complete the topic, which comes from a previous post, we should consider 2 definitions:

1) Biology: Sexual orientation refers to what or who induces a sexual excitation in you. What kind of people and what part of that people. The most important division is that of male-female, or the pair of opposites homosexual-heterosexual, which refers to you having the same genre or not, respectively. But be aware what I said before about sexual identity (biological and psychological).

2) Behaviour: Here we refer to how you behave, it means who you have sexual relations with and how does your body "function" (or not) in those situations. From this point of view, a person can be biologically homosexual, but "function" bi-sexually, for instance.It can be weirder too, for instance a person who functions well in any situation, but he/she needs to be watching a porn movie. Here the bi-sexuality is not the topic, but the conditioning of the movie (he/she would not function without the movie, in this example). Believe or not, it is very posible to happen such things as this... I´m a licenciate in psychology, so I know what I´m talking about.

Sexual orientation is fixed, so you must learn to live with it (your´s and other´s)

Wednesday, July 25, 2007


I will tell you which values I believe in today.

I believe in the value of being yourself. I believe in the excelence which means you being really yourself, the best yourself you can achieve.

I believe in freedom with responsability. True freedom, without false morals, and true responsability, with true moral.

That is all I can tell you clearly for now.
"Moral", here, means "values".

Discerning and excelence

I believe that it is not vain nor facist to distingüish between things. "Discernment" it is said. "Discriminate", by the other hand, is a bad word today, so I avoid it. The important thing is to keep objectivity when analyzing, and subjectivity at the time of enjoying intimately. Well, that´s what I think...

The point is: ¿Is it useful/good/necessary/etc. (what you want) to distingüish between things, to discern, to see/point the limits? ¿Or is it better that all things be the same, like an amorphous mass, all equal, all with the same rights, etc. etc. etc.?
I think there are criteria as to say: excelent! or mediocre!

But I don´t have the habit to use a waste. In the worst cases, I simply recomend a change of heading or job.