Transformation
is holographic. Each piece is the whole. The whole is each
piece. While pieces of the whole may have some isolated use or hold
interest in and of themselves, the full power and magic of
transformation
is most potent when all of it is in play all at once.
Certain ways of viewing the world become critical accesses to
transformation,
just as certain conversations become critical accesses to
transformation.
One of these critical accesses to
transformation,
for example, is viewing the world as empty and
meaningless. This particular view isn't, as is sometimes
erroneously supposed, a justification for ennui, apathy, and
lawlessness. Instead it's an opportunity for enormous freedom and
creativity.
A friend of mine (who's not a
graduate
of
Werner's work
- which is neither a bad thing nor a good thing: it simply sets the
stage for this conversation) heard a piece of the
distinction empty and meaningless without hearing the
other piece about freedom and creativity, leaving him only
with ennui, apathy, and lawlessness. He used this to make the
possibility of
transformation
(and with it,
Werner's work)
wrong.
The time we had in conversation wasn't long enough for me to deliver,
in depth and completely, the entire distinction empty and meaningless
for him. Actually the intellectual component of this
distinction can be delivered quite quickly - it's the
experiential component which takes time. So I looked for a
way to make clear for him what was missing, without which he'd only get
ennui, apathy, and lawlessness from empty and meaningless - which would
not only be next to useless for him but would really be
counterproductive and even damaging to his future listening for
Werner's work.
Fortunately (for both of us) I came up with something
apropos to say before my time with him ran out. I asked
him to consider the way empty and meaningless sounds when considered
purely as a concept - in other
words,
when
who he really is
isn't in the picture. Then I asked him to consider the way empty and
meaningless sounds as an experience - in other
words,
when
who he really is
is fully in the picture.
Now, we all already know
who we really are
can never not be fully in the picture. But it sure feels
like it sometimes, doesn't it? If it never felt like it sometimes, we'd
never have a feeling of alienation, we'd never have a feeling of ennui,
we'd never have a feeling of apathy, yes? I asked him to consider
without
who he really is
fully in the picture, without
presence of
Self
brought to bear on empty and meaningless, that yes, ennui, apathy, and
lawlessness would be a corollary of empty and meaningless. Indeed, if
presence of
Self
isn't brought to bear on empty and meaningless, then ennui, apathy, and
lawlessness would actually be high states. But with
who he really is
fully in the picture, with
presence of Self
brought to bear on empty and meaningless, empty and meaningless becomes
an awesome opportunity, awesome enough to keep him up late
at night and drive him out of bed early in the morning.
We were at a point in the conversation when we were inquiring into
whether laws are rendered "optional" if they're quote
unquote "meaningless". We were inquiring into whether
natural laws (such as
gravity)
carry the same weight as man made laws (such as driving
within the speed limit). I asked him what the difference might be. He
said he can't walk away from natural laws like
gravity
but he can walk away from man made laws and not be noticed - ie in the
case of exceeding the speed limit, he can drive away and
not be noticed.
So ... he thinks he can walk away from man made laws and not be
noticed?! This, I thought with a wry grin, isn't a guy who's ever been
divorced ...
Even the possibility for argument's sake (remember, he wasn't a
graduate)
there's no meaning in Life other than the meaning we ascribe to
Life, doesn't allow for lawlessness. The fact that it's empty and
meaningless, the fact that it doesn't mean anything that it's empty and
meaningless, and the fact that it doesn't mean anything that it
doesn't mean anything that it's empty and meaningless (if you
make it mean something, that's just more arrogance), isn't a
license to break the law(s) with impunity.
Transformation
doesn't provide a way of avoiding any laws, natural or man made. Nor
does
transformation
provide a way out of the consequences of breaking any
laws, a way of getting off the hook of the consequences of
breaking any laws, natural or man made. If anything,
transformation
provides just the opposite: a way of taking on all laws,
natural and man made, with
integrity.
Now, are all laws empty and meaningless? Yes ofcourse they are. But be careful! Be very
careful where you go next with this line of thought. Laws mean
whatever we make them mean ... which doesn't
mean they can be ignored or diminished or disrespected. By
agreement we follow and obey laws. And yes you
did make an agreement to follow and obey both natural and
man made laws. You made this agreement by being born into
this species in this civilization on
this planet.
Gee! I hope you get that ...
As I look through the veil of laws I abide by as a human
being, I see I can hold them as restrictive, constraining, and
limiting. But they only appear restrictive, constraining, and limiting
if
who I really am
isn't present in my relationship with them. Once
who I really am
is present in my replationship with laws, once I regard my interaction
with all laws, natural or man made, with a bright
presence of Self,
then I can honor all laws, allow for all laws, be
subject to all laws, and yet not be limited by any of
them.
With that, something clicked for my friend. No further
explanation was necessary. He didn't ask or say anything. But he didn't
have to ask or say anything. I knew he got something,
something which came with a new measure of freedom for his life as a
human being in the world.