Third Field. Part 1.

Today I will share a little about two strands which influence human conscious and subconscious, therefore human manifestations and results, on a global level. I will turn to aspects of Judaic and Christian traditions, described and included in The Old and The New Testament respectively. The point of this is to illustrate the complimentary attributes of each aspect. The comparative representation aiming at showing superiority of one above the other, is necessarily included in religiously influenced thinking but irrelevant for our analysis. Judaic tradition should not concern itself with Christianity and vice versa.

The trends of interest describe two different aspects of non-created reality. The first is the regularity mentioned in an Old Testament – the ‘eye for an eye’ which tells us that for each act of certain nature/weight, there will be an act of equal weight returned. Some refer to it as karma, some as cause and effect, some assume it as the basis for revenge. This undercurrent is naturally very prevalent in the Jewish consciousness collectively. Only they use the flip side of this regularity and spreading violence in disguise of a victim who is entitled to ‘even things out’. Their own conduct had been full of deceit and crime for centuries (Holocaust was ‘just’ a consequence or manifestation of their collective suppression of Shadow). It is no coincidence that Israel is the most militarized country in the world. There is plenty to defend and deflect.

What is unfortunate, in my view, is that we have claimed The Word to be about us, rather than including us. ‘Eye for an eye’ represents the natural law of balance which is not discriminatory and not bound by Earthly time. Things will always come to balance, that is one of the Universal laws humans are subject to as part of that Universe. No, we are not special, and were created quite randomly from the clusters of gases but some-thing made us think we were superior and can tailor reality to our whims outside of the law. We claimed to know what is the right counter-action for the ‘harm’ inflicted, we claimed the right to deliver that counter-action and based our system of justice on it (as in how much compensation money is a leg of a war veteran worth, for example). We have gone to war in the name of The Word, of our particular understanding of God.

I am yet to see ‘war’ of soldiers who fight in their own name. Do any of us fight in our own name? We say: in the name of God, Jesus, Allah, country, science, love, ethics, giving up and away responsibility for our actions. Responsibility which does not lie with the Universe or any aspect of our construct. Do we give ourselves a chance to come up to our ‘enemy’,  beloved, or a deserted family member and say: In my name, I come to hurt you, because your action felt like a rape to my heart. In my name, I am here to kill you because your words/actions were disrespectful of the bond I have with myself and my family, which felt like violence. In my name, I hate you for your absence because it crippled me, and I cannot love fully The One to whom this love belongs. In my name, I want to get rid of you because I do not understand your language, your way of thinking, your values, I prefer not to look at you because I never saw myself fully, and you remind me of this. In my name, I accept you ~ and let’s leave gods, wars and politics out of it.

In my understanding the acceptance stems from neutrality we find in ourselves towards every and each aspect of ourselves, known or unknown and neutrality can be exercised only in balance which we navigate within us and others who are in our proximity. And as ‘eye for an eye’, in how I observe it, describes the balance on a large, natural (planetary) and cosmic (galactic) levels, Jesus’ teachings of forgiveness and unconditional love pertain to the inner realms, the microcosm of our consciousness, which is readily available because observable within and through our actions. How do these two relate, if at all? In my experience, no balance between two, or more parties (nations/countries/politicians or individual people) can be exercised if each of the party is not in balance within themselves first. We are never in balance if we allow the Shadow to take over our actions.

And here is where the idea and experience of Christian ‘resurrection’ enters the scene, which is exclusively an inner act. For forgiveness is little more than summoning of our essence from all ‘dead’ aspects, thought forms, practices, habits, suppressed guilt, shame, terror, bringing all that we think ‘is not’, into the Light. At this stage, there is no another to forgive, although we like to objectify or project aspects of ourselves to avoid owning them. Here is also how Christians perverted this, what is an inherently, act of humility. They took it out, they started to forgive each other in public, they started taking their confessions elsewhere for the third party to absolve their ‘sins’, they started using forgiveness as a trading card, and claim superiority over the one who is forgiven. We need to pay attention to how we parade around in our religious righteousness, for playing in victim/perpetrator/victor arena only shows we are still at the mercy of and acting through archetypes.

What I attempted to illustrate so far was that the two descriptions of balance, without on a macro scale, and within on a micro scale can work with one another, to the benefit of one another and each other. Spherically (that is inclusively) speaking one cannot exist without the other, the inner journey of awareness is halted without the outer counter balance, and the outer expansion is resisted or contracted (that is – going in the opposite to the intended way) without the inner summoning of ‘Spirit from the dead’.

Here’s how I see all these ‘insubstantial’ aspects affect us in the manifested world, specifically when it comes to conflict and political action. If we understand that each representative nation has the same right to exist on the planet (this is obviously an uncomfortable reality for the British), each coming with different values and culture, what they create with each other (exchange, clash, war) belongs to the third field of the two involved, is their responsibility and unique contribution to the evolution or involution of societies. Naturally, when more parties are equally (that is – intentionally) involved, the third field will be much more complex. For the sake of simplicity let’s assume the two are involved and create the third field, in which the combination of their conscious and shadow aspects, as well as all genetic entanglements of the two are Present. Because we all meet by the grace of love to see each other exactly, if we are unable to look at what we think does not exist, the gifts of the third field cannot be bestowed upon those who are here to carry them. For some of us the third field created is the gift to All and requires deeper than average maturity to tend to it.

The third field belongs to those who created it. The field serves the creators and itself, only if acknowledged directly, respected and understood. Introducing any third party, in form of a mediator, priest, counselor to discuss or decide matters of the third field deflects its potential and, as they are necessarily an inorganic matter in the field, contributes to creation of karma, rather than resolution, dissolution and harmony. We have seen this for decades in USA practices of meddling politics, intensified by Jimmy Carter’s peace mission for Begin and Sadat, where his misplaced preaching and missionary ambitions brought inadequate offers to everyone involved and misconceptions in place of solutions, all because he wanted to be remembered as someone he saw himself as. Needless to say, the continuous tradition of meddling plays very well into the hands of the Israelis in current times, the grandest ‘victims’ of the XX century, revenging through the arms of USA and Britain.

And there are reasons for religions and governments to collude. People, nations and communities, when in balance, are in peace, that is – neutrality. For those who are in balance and neutrality, truth is the only legitimate, observable reality to be lived. Religions and governments have too many crimes under their belt to let the peace, therefore truth, prevail. Britain will do almost anything, together with bombing others in name of its security, to divert the eyes from its own criminal history. Do we really believe, that Britain, with the centuries of oppression in its blood, goes to war in defense of anyone?

Of course this attention seeking behaviour of religions and governments ‘puppets’ us all, peacemakers included, as they give attention and energy to counter-balance that which is not their responsibility in the first place. For those for whom neutrality is real and important will focus their potential into strengthening the core within of themselves and their country so that they can represent their values with clarity, unmoved.

Related posts: Systemic Balance 24 Aug 2015, Love. Apparently 14 Sep 2014, ID-entity. Part 2 2 Aug 2015, Sliding Societies, 25 Apr 2015

Related topics: On Power by Ryan Pickrell On Vulnerability by Brene Brown