Child

The devastating responsibility of being God - Seen from the viewpoint of a mortal being - Part 1

back to home pdf share

Being autonomous is being free. A free thinker, a free creator.

It is being the same as God, as seen from the viewpoint of a mortal being, a human being.

During innumerable incarnations a victim state was developed within the soul as well as an almost complete feeling of human powerlessness.

That powerlessness generates a huge fear in a world in which almost anything can happen. The fear of being separated as to the consciousness and thereby experiencing a continuous threat in my existence. At the same time I am so double: I long for autonomous freedom and I want to get rid of the fear for responsibility. What is missing, is the lived-through unity, the connection, and the knowledge that comes with it.

Take for instance the point of view of the microcosm. Long ago it exchanged its autonomy for the richness of the wild, experiencing life. No longer living from the idea of God, but from the self-created thoughts, which then reflect in a no longer completely divine reality, in a constantly slower reality, until eventually in matter as we experience it now.

By then the microcosm is already so far distant from its point of origin, it has fallen so deep into experiences, that – as its own observer, as a witness, as a bodily state of being - it can no longer generate through thoughts, it can no longer procreate.

The different species were developed from the material world, and eventually a prototype human being was developed which could be included in the microcosm.

A duality being, a human being, was created: man becomes the instrument of Man. That was the idea, the thought. Men can become the instrument, but to that end both of them need to be re-structured, regenerated, healed, restored.

Such a microcosm then incarnates again in order to temporarily be liberated from the primal guilt during its fall, in the great forgetting of this incarnation, or else to pay off its primal guilt and re-gain its autonomy. The primal guilt originates from the creative thinking outside of God, although of course there is in fact nothing existing outside of God.

The simple fact of the opportunity to reincarnate has cost the microcosm an almost complete loss of its residue of autonomy, its remaining power.

It allows itself to be captured by a human conception, living from the shared life soul of two human children of different gender. Complex creation! Imagine that loss of freedom, again and again…

The microcosm carries its primal guilt, and added thereto, the karmic guilt such as the balance that has since then evolved: has the energy of the stars been used for restoring or for degeneration? That karma does not connect smoothly with the life soul of the new concept, which begins to develop under the compelling influences of the parents’ blood – their shared life souls – and the influences determined by karma. There is zero autonomy, no freedom, no power. The developing consciousness of the embryo and later on of the baby constrainedly relinquishes its power to its creator, the mother, in order to be allowed to live. Then, in that life, the child will gradually and step by step fight for particles of autonomy and re-gain them over the educators and its surrounding.

Hereto childhood diseases provide a beautiful supportive role for the environment. The urge for free self-development is very intense and leads to psychological situations like ‘the tyranny of the high chair’, at that moment in the development of a human being an actual  and necessary power concentration.

We grow up to be young adults, independent, free. However, still developed from the first, karma-forced period of our life. Limited autonomy therefore, and after adolescence a more direct influence of the karmic package of the microcosm, at the expense of the blood heritage of the parents. Wherefrom the puberty conflicts result. However, with an individual consciousness.

Young adults often immediately trade the sometimes hard fought for autonomy for the opportunity to earn a living – another guilt product – and to live their life. In one or a sequence of professions for which we have first to study hard for about 20 years. In a field of study we have chosen before our 18th birthday, so in that choice still a large amount of blood heritage needs to be settled.

In our own family we have learned to navigate a bit more or a bit less between personal autonomy and exchange in order to be able to live our life. There is a continuous balancing between I and we. We develop the necessary mechanisms so that we succeed in gaining as much for the ‘I” as possible. The basic impetus in our blood is staying alive. That striving we share with all life on earth. Power concentrations and power sharing increase the chance to survive. Power concentration within my own person increases my liberty to act and parallel thereto my responsibility for every act or deed. Also my conscious or unconscious fear for that responsibility are in this way increased. Sharing power with others is a different strategy.

According to the culture in which we grew up and are living, the balance between I and we lies at a different point. In general Europeans are more “I” than African people, who think and live more from the ‘we-surviving’ principle. They relinquish more autonomy to the family at large, the tribe, the nation. Even more so if such speaking is vigorously punished by the never ending bloody battle between tribes or nations.

 

To be continued in part 2

back to home pdf share