After three years of searching for what some might call the truth, I have realised that what I was searching for was something I knew all along. Boy does that sound arrogant! But it is not meant to be. This, as many others exist, is just an example of how words can fail you. How words can actually cause more problems than they solve, when you struggle to explain yourself, or how you feel to another. In my limited experience I have seen this result in a misunderstanding of what is truly being said. Words are taken out of context because most of us rely upon the literal word and the interpretation we perceive that word has in our own minds. Our minds do not seem to look at words in metaphor or allegory which most of the time in me, if I am absolutely honest, leads to a form of conflict.
I have realised that I have an enormous responsibility whenever I am speaking to anyone. Because the words I usecan affect them very literally and the responsibility falls upon me to not do them any harm by the words I choose to use. Do I get this right every time…. no sadly I do not; alas I am still only human. But what does come from this is a realisation that I have abused someone by the words I choose to use and although I suffer for this, as they do, something good comes from it. I suppose the truth I have searched for is a misconception. Simple the creation of something in my mind that will give the answers I so desperately seek. Sucking me under into the fabric of the quest for the knowledge I believe through this misconception will set me free. Is it not strange that history, myth and legend all talk of the quests that have taken place in search or something. Metaphorically warning us of the dangers to do so, that most of us do not heed. Telling us, warning us, that we will be taken from the ones we love and who love us. Telling us that there will always be something to fight and that conflict will only ever result in one thing, conflict, and that if we follow this quest, then all we shall ever be faced with is the never ending circle that is conflict. Have we not been warned of this for millennia? Do we now in this age heed the warnings wrote by so many before as conflict rages all around us? Sadly no we don’t. Why? Because of literal misconceptions, that does not allow us to heed the warnings so plainly written.
I have also realised that the responsibility I have to others is also in my written words and not just in the words I speak. Because again many will take what I write as being literal and not allow themselves to realise that there is two stories going on. One very literal story that has a metaphorical one written within it, as all written or spoken words contain this. The duality of intent is always apparent if you allow yourself to realise it exists. What is very obvious to me is the fact that the literal word without doubt leads to conflict of some sort, whereas metaphorically you are being told that this will happen. The warning is always present. The duality of the intent is always present, something which cannot be denied. Surely something that cannot be denied must by default be the truth. Is this absolute proof that the truth is present in all written/spoken words if we allow ourselves to see the intent? Again could this be classed as arrogance on my behalf for making such a bold statement? Surely the fact that what I have written, based upon its intent, shows this to be undeniable, which in itself proves that arrogance is not my intention? Anyone reading this literally will come to the mindset that I am being arrogant, those reading metaphorically will see my true intentions.
I have said many times that the most powerful thing in the world is simple words written or spoken. All actions and what happens through those actions are solely controlled by the intent of the words that are being used, literally, or metaphorically. I again sound very arrogant in saying this. But again is this not an undeniable truth and again is my intention to be arrogant? In many cases it is not our actions that are at fault; to me it is the intent behind our actions. Realising this allows us to question the intent, which allows us to view the duality for the first time. But in me, once that had happened for the first time, there was no going back. This is not something I can switch on and off. Granted my mind can override this on many occasions, but sooner rather than later I will suffer a pang of morality and realisation will once again spank me right between the eyes as I realise what I have done or said. Many would say that this is a curse and with whom I have spoken of such things, they certainly agree that it is. I suppose it is an affliction in many ways, but one that only serves the greater good in my eyes. Speak to others how you wish to be spoken too; such a simple thing I choose to ignore on so many occasions, but to my peril, because sooner rather than later I will suffer. But from this I can choose to suffer again or not. It is that simple. The choice is always mine and always has been. I just forgot that I could make this choice.
To me now, this is what this thing called the truth I have been searching for really is. I suppose you could call it the power of morality. But are many aspects of this truth a conception? Does this not in itself bring conformity to a mind based idea – and what if that idea is incorrect? Is truth something we must learn or remember? If we must learn the truth, are we then ready to offer that truth amnesty? For if we cannot, then that truth will encourage conflict. Surely if this is the case, then what has been learned did not need to be, or maybe we are just not ready for such things to occur. I feel by remembering a truth the mind is prevented from encouraging any form of conflict for there is no conception, thus, there can be no misconception which generally enforces the need for some sort of conflict to occur – what some might call the epitome of the ego on display? In essence the constant need to be right! But is this not truly how the mind works on all levels? The hardest and simplest thing it cannot accept is that it was wrong. But there are tell tale signs of this that illuminate the way that I have seen in myself. I have witnessed on so many occasions by degree the feeling of humiliation if it is proven by verse that I am wrong in some way. How many times have I taken out of context what someone has said to me, only having to apologise and worse still, try to talk my way out of doing so in the first place, because I cannot admit I was wrong. How many? I could not imagine telling you, as my mind would never allow such a thing to occur. That would be like the fire asking for water to be poured upon it.
Does the fault lay with me or, with others – am I to blame or, are they? I would now most certainly say the fault lieswith me and I am most certainly to blame. But my mind tries to tell me that two wrongs can make a right. Meet conflict with conflict, which is the sales pitch that has been relied upon and sold to me all my life to ensure I follow suit. What does my heart say? The opposite. Two wrongs only increase the wrong. Immorality meeting the same leads to an extension of the same, but surely morality counters immorality every time? A lie meeting a lie only increases the lie. But a lie meeting honesty shows the lie for what it really is. Politeness meeting in-politeness does exactly the same. So surely if you create a bad intent you create a good one by default, but if you create a good intent the above proves that the good intent negates all bad intent.
Maybe the fire is asking for water?