Waching daily Nov 3 2018

I want to talk a little about naturalness, which is a word that comes up here and there.

Naturalness is something that I tend to bring up in contrast to focus on ideals, in that excessive ideals and vain chasing after a kind of perfection constitutes a fundamental problem for authenticity, love, wisdom, etc.

The only ideal should be knowledge, truth, increase of awareness.

But despite this, even the dogmatically religious, conservative, and even fascists claim that they advocate "the natural", even though it is clear to me that they in fact advocate an ideal that often represses the natural.

And the more I've noticed this tendency, the more it has begun to worry me, as it is often a perverted use of the term "natural" that covers up an ideal divorced from reality.

I already touched on this in my review of the book 'The Dharma Manifesto', but I'm going to show a more concrete example I've often seen among nationalistic comments on the net.

This is one I recently found on Youtube...

So this person says, "... belief in individualism is, in my view, no solution. Today people need to be dominated by an ethnic Swedish elite, good Swedish men who govern with an iron fist.

Democracy and especially liberalism and liberal ideas will only lead to ruin."

Obviously, if this person thinks that people need to be dominated, governed and controlled, then he can not let them be natural.

He wants to govern people in the direction of a constructed ideal and disregards their nature.

But then, a little to my shock and discomfort, he twists this into something that he claims is natural in an authoritarian manner, with elements of what I can only call control madness divorced from reality.

He says, "To me, the state should encourage the natural, even to force natural behavior out of the population, to force out the natural Swedishness, to force out natural gender roles and the formation of family.

Pk-ism rests on the unnatural, on the individual, on the rights of gays and racial aliens, on the promiscuous divorced woman's drives, on the childless, on the beta man's cunningness and weakness, on goyim's greed...

Goyim means those who are not Jews, so I don't know why he is using that term... "on the female's hatred towards the feminine.

They oppose the natural world order, because they are afraid of us. They have turned us into dogs to eradicate the wolf."

Okay, so I've seen many similar comments from right-wing extremists, nationalists, etc., but I figured this time I'd respond to the post in order to find out how he would answer me.

Because I thought that at some point I'd want to make a video about this and then it might be good to know a little more exactly how they think about this contradictory statement about naturalness.

What do they mean by "the natural" and what do they base their knowledge of the natural upon?

So I wrote the following to this guy:

Quote: "Today people need to be dominated by an ethnic Swedish elite, good Swedish men who govern with an iron fist."

...Define "good Swedish men"? The will to dominate and control is already the fundamental problem and reveals a lack of trust in people and nature.

There is nothing good in it, only oppression and suppression that leads to more pathology, passive cowardice and more desire to rebel.

It is especially worrying that you also confuse it with something "natural".

Quote: "To me, the state should encourage the natural,"

...This is the only thing that is on the right track, but you distort what is natural and how to achieve it in a perverse and authoritarian manner with elements of delusion (imagination divorced from reality).

Quote: "to force out the natural Swedishness,"

...And what is the natural Swedishness? A small authoritarian elite forcing a majority into submission and obedience in the name of "naturalness"

(where the word "naturalness" merely replaces PK, equality of outcome, religion, Sharia, etc)?

Is the natural Swedishness Saudi Arabia? North Korea? Nazi Germany? How is this attitude less paternalistic than the present order?

Quote: "Pk-ism rests on the unnatural, on the individual," ...The individual is unnatural?

Quote: "the rights of gays" ...Homosexuality is unnatural?

Quote: "racial aliens," ...Other races are unnatural?

Quote: "the promiscuous divorced woman's drives," ...The woman's instincts are unnatural?

Quote: "the childless," ...Childlessness is unnatural?

Quote: "the beta man's cunningness and weakness," ...Cunning and weakness is unnatural?

Quote: "They oppose the natural world order," ...Which is what? If something needs to be controlled and enforced then it tends not to be by nature.

Quote: "They have turned us into dogs to eradicate the wolf." ...Is not domesticating and whipping people into loyal dogs precisely what you suggest in the name of "naturalness"?

Is not the willingness to submit to an elite something that makes man more into a dog than a free and proud wolf? Yet, apparently that is what you expect of Swedes...

Then, in order to not just leave my post full of questioning and criticism, I also mentioned at the end what I believe in myself:

The ancients wisdom of "understand yourself", "all in moderation", non-attachment, honesty,

submission directly to nature/reality (not through an elite claiming to "know" what nature is and believes plants must be commanded in order to grow)

and raising awareness is the only healthy path.

And then I waited for a response. If not directly from this person, then maybe from someone else reading for there were people who had liked his post.

But I received no response, no counter argument, so I suppose I...won the argument, even if it's not about winning, only spreading the right understanding.

Thus I can only speculate how and why they view naturalness the way they do.

But instead of speculating and risk wasting time arguing against a strawman, I would rather talk about how we can know what is natural.

Because I do agree with the basic reasoning, that we need to become more natural, and that our schools, the state, society, etc., should encourage the natural so that we will become more genuine.

But if we are to talk about naturalness, we must first define what we mean by naturalness and how we know that what we are talking about IS naturalness.

Because the word "natural" can easily become just another beautiful word to manipulate the masses with, while it in fact suppresses the natural and provides a false worldview regarding what is natural.

Often, nature is explained in ways that justifies the social order instead of truth.

In a barbarian society, a small group of tyrannical men would sleep with all women and call this natural because "the privilege of the strong is the law of nature" or the like.

In a controlled society where the formation of family is law and religious authorities rule with an iron fist and prohibits homosexuality, this is defended by the natural purpose of sex being only reproduction;

while in a hippie collective, free love is considered to be what's natural because in the matriarchal period, before civilization, there was no family formation in the same way as today

and instead children were the responsibility of the entire group. Etc.

The truth is that we don't know what nature is, and this must be our starting point before we can begin to learn.

The main difficulty in learning something is erroneous knowledge that gets in the way, so we must empty ourselves from assumptions.

The fundamental approach in Timeless Education is to first assume that we do not know anything, then start over anew and begin from what we can know with the most certainty.

These things are our consciousness; a world of movement and constant change; contrasts; connectivity; repetition; and that there can be no goal or permanence in eternity except possibly what's been mentioned.

Thus nature, or reality as we also can call it, is, by its essence, these phenomena.

Nature, even our own nature, is consciousness; layers of ceaseless motion on top; everything in contrast; everything connected; everything in repetition or cycles;

and nothing is going anywhere or has any goal - for ceaseless change makes everything temporary - while repeting cycles, at the same time, makes everything permanent and unchanging.

So these are the principles behind the highest natural law, and is, in general, what we can understand with certainty.

Everything else is belief and speculation and theory and imagination. It does not come closer to the truth than what I mentioned.

And if you are religious you should be interested in what I mentioned, because that is also the basis of all real religion.

Everything else is incompetence and misinterpretations.

So how do we use this knowledge of nature's ultimate essence in a practical and beneficial way in our lives?

The answer is that it is both simple and a challenge. Simple, because our nature has already given us what we need.

A challenge, because most people do not trust nature, not even their own nature, that it is right.

The first thing we have to do is to let go of what inevitably has to change anyway.

To grip onto something in order to try and keep it, control it, own it, identify with it, etc., is to go against nature, because nature is change.

This is the real reason why religions advocate non-attachment and impartiality.

The second thing we must, or should do, to follow the principles of nature, is to stop viewing ourselves as free, independent agents since we depend on everything else around us in connectivity.

Everything we do comes immediately with a price, a counter reaction, a consequence, and this alone is nature's justice.

But everything is, at the same time, part of a broader causal context, which means that we are not entirely responsible for our actions,

that is, we should not take credit for specific accomplishments or blame others for failures.

This is the real reason why religions advocate humility and forgiveness.

The third thing we should do to be synchronized with nature is to appreciate the necessity of opposites for there to be any experience or existence to begin with, since everything is dependent on contrasts.

A strong light also casts a strong shadow, and even the natural cannot be appreciated without experiencing the unnatural. So do not judge and do everything in moderation.

This is the real reason why religions advocate non-dualism and warn of the temptation to eat of the knowledge, i.e. the idea, the delusion, of 'good and evil'.

The fourth thing we should do in the absence of goals in a world without beginning or end, is to live in the present and become more what we are; to embrace our energies.

Nature in us wants to express itself, and to inhibit it is to go against nature.

Many are afraid of this aspect because we know that people are capable of violent expressions.

But violent expressions will just increase from inhibitions because violent expressions derive mainly from frustration.

Authentic and honest self-expression, on the other hand, gives a sense of substance, of existing and living, which reduces frustration and sense of emptiness.

Things exist to be what they are, and only by practicing honest and true self-expression can we learn what we are. There is no other way. Ideas and theories just gets in the way and leads to delusion.

And delusion always comes with disappointment in tow.

And still another thing we should do in connection with all this is to cease with expectations and instead seize all of the moments and experiences that come spontaneously and naturally,

with open curiousity towards as much as possible. Interest in everything.

An all too limited interest or desire reduces life and makes us lose out on what we have and are experiencing in anticipation of something that 'is not' or may never come.

This conclusion about nature, especially non-dualism that derives from the necessity of polarities, also prevents us from falling into some erroneous conclusion that appeal to nature often brings with it.

Not everything in nature is necessarily good for us. But non-dualism also implies that there is no such thing as "the unnatural" since everything has in one way or another come about in nature.

Just the fact that something exists, that it has arisen, prevents us from judging it as unnatural.

That's why impartial receptiveness and interest-in-everything is the only way to flow with nature and reality.

Everything else is not less natural, but it makes us find nature - reality - hostile.

In the end, it's just about fixing our attitude regarding the fact that we are in a rollercoaster we have no control over and that our sole purpose is to let nature express itself through us.

It does not matter what our action is, it's always nature that acts.

But this is what I call 'reality' that acts, creational causality.

When I talk about being natural, I primarily refer to having the courage to let go of inhibitions, especially social-cultural inhibitions that try to repress the energies of the human organism.

So the aspect of nature I am referring to is bioenergies, the intelligence of our organism. So if I find a better word for it than naturalness then I will try to use that instead.

Maybe "bioorganic authenticity" or something in that vein. The actualization of one's personal nature or energy.

But again, this must be done in combination with conscious non-attachment, respect for other people's energies, awareness of how we are participating in mutual maintenance, insight into our limitations, etc.

As well as what is most healthy for our biological body, what we're developed to eat, for this too is an element of awareness about cause-effect.

Yep. I don't think there is much more to say. It will just be a repeat of Timeless Education.

So that'll be enough for this time. Subscribe and check out my other videos.

This is nature speaking to you.