Meditations & Reflections

The heart and mind have two distinct modes of communication. The heart primarily communicates through gnosis , direct knowing, or ‘knowings’, and its wisdom is not bound by time, space, or dimensions, whether or not one realizes that fact. The mind, however, primarily communicates through knowledge as information, a form of given data or speculation. When the mind imposes its mode of communication on the heart, the heart simply retreats, like a beloved who is fed up with you. Here is where the force of will or separate ego is involved, and the heart simply refuses to engage. On the other hand, when the heart commands, the mind obeys, willingly or unwillingly, consciously or unconsciously, whether you resist—kick, buck, and drag your feet, or not. If the heart does not command, it simply invites and accepts. This means, the heart is a faculty of intuitive and holistic wisdom, while the mind is a faculty of information, of interpretive and speculative data. This is why many great treasur...

  Inner Dialogues 3: Intermission Here in these dialogues, we see a consistent theme of contrasts. There seems to be an ebb and flow of parallels that at time stand apart, and at other times cross paths. Or an image of a spectrum comes to mind, where there are opposites, and yet while these opposites may stand apart, they also give rise to one another. Then again, at either extreme they are at odds, and they appear to be at odds with a vengeance!  These interconnecting opposites and parallels in the web of life are often outlined in terms of East/West, Indigenous Cultures/Civil Society, Heart-mind/Mind-brain, Ancient/Modern, and the like. Is it correct to assume, the aim of this approach is to introduce these opposites as a peace-making and bridge building effort?  Yes absolutely. Common objections to the above approach often include fragmented and misinformed scholarships. 

Inner Dialogues 2  How shall we begin the inquiry into what meditation is? Modern lifestyles have popularized the idea of materialism. Generally, modern materialism—which is considered post-modernism in current philosophy and science—has two facets; one manifests in complex forms of rationalism, and the other, (which is less complex and therefore more dominant) manifests itself in various types of empiricism, like the empirical sciences that offer evidence based knowledge that is tangible and physical.  A current extension of empiricism, which must be noted, is addressed as a peculiar form of scientism. Its roots are found in Britain’s atheistic schools of thought, and the logical positivism of those like Bertrand Russell, whose aim was to quantify all human affairs in a scientific language—including our social and cultural heritage, while on the whole, of course, they failed. The “ism” attached to science here is a contradiction of sorts, a kind of absurdity, meant to examine...

Don’t let the mind work too hard, in fact don’t let it work much at all, for the heart is tirelessly hard at work with far greater efficiency, maintaining a delicate balance between one’s physical and spiritual well being, and her intelligence does so effortlessly. Tell the geniuses of today’s industries, I challenge you to work as hard and effortlessly as the heart, while leaving the mind behind. Then this world of fear, reward, and punishment, will be transformed into love.  Punishments would not be necessary, when loving beings hold themselves responsible, and rewards would have no meaning, when loving beings are rewarded far more than they could imagine.  It is the heart that leads, while the mind must bow and prostrate before it. The mind could never lead, as its efforts create greater suffering. Heart intelligence is the master; mind-body intelligence is the sheathe, her temporary protector in this physical environment, a follower, administrator, interpreter, and transla...

When the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche exposed the truth that “god is dead,” and other existentialist philosophers echoed the same sentiments, they meant the god of lazy spirituality is dead; however, their solutions to this dilemma often lacked substance.

 It seems, one of the hardest things to face in any coupling dynamic, is one's own flaws. When I first contemplated this, the word that came was "faults" in place of "flaws." Reading it that way—"One of the hardest things to face in any coupling dynamic is one's own faults"—I soon realized was incorrect, and in fact the reason why we do not seem to be able to face our flaws is because we are too stuck on our faults and fault-finding. And with "any coupling dynamic" I mean anything from dealing with one's occasional acquaintance, to encounters with a car mechanic, physician, best-friend, siblings, or spousal relationships. It may even be extended to a coupling dynamic with one's pet, nature, or even God or our source of being! Many social scientists and thinkers, in fact, the whole gamut of modern western thought, is often obsessed and lead by this fault-seeking and finding mindset. So much so that we have specialists in various fa...