MasterPok's blog

There are two ways to create experience, from the ground up or from the top down. Actually, all experience is created from the ground up, but one can try to create it from the top down as well, in which case one is still creating it from the ground up, although they are then unaware of the earlier levels of creation.

 

Creating experience from the ground up involves creating experience beginning with emotion, and then moving into thought and then physical experience. Creating experience from the top down involves creating experience by trying to manipulate and arrange physical reality to create a certain emotional reaction.

 

Creating experience from the ground up involves purposefully and intentionally creating emotion, and then letting that flow into thought and physical experience. Creating experience from the top down involves  purposefully and intentionally trying to arrange physical reality in order to create an emotional reaction.

 

Creating experience from the ground up is in accord with the way experience is actually created, which is from the emotional, to the mental, and then to the physical. Creating experience from the top down is therefore the opposite of the way experience is actually created.

 

When we create experience from the top down we are using already created physical experience, which must have some emotional experience as its basis, to try and evoke a particular emotional experience. When we create experience from the top down we are using already existent physical objects and trying to arrange them in a way that will evoke a wanted emotional experience.

 

When we create experience from the bottom up, we choose the emotion we create and let that emotion act as the foundation from which physical reality extends and upon which physical experience is built. 

 

People consider modern art to be actual art, even though it is mostly just the juxtaposition of already existent objects intended to make some sort of statement, because they consider creating experience from the top down to be the way experience is actually created. Therefore, modern art, i.e., the juxtaposition of already existent objects, seems to be an equally valid form of artistic creation because it is created in the same way that most people are trying to create what they experience emotionally, which is by trying to arrange already existent physical objects.

 

When one does not know how, or has forgotten how, to create wanted emotional experience from the bottom up, in the way it is actually created, one is then left to try and create wanted emotional experience from the top down, in a way that it only seems to be created. Likewise, when someone wants to create art but lacks whatever it is that allows one to create art from the bottom up, they must resort to the only thing left, which is to try and create art through the arrangement of already existent objects.

 

The physical always follows the emotional, and the emotional is always being created de novo, out of the formlessness of pure Beingness, as Beingness flows in relation to Itself, and as we, as Beingness, apprehend from our perspective how we are flowing in relation to Beingness.

 

One is free to create actual art de novo, from the bottom up, or one is free to create the appearance of art, by juxtaposing already existent objects. Likewise, one is free to create emotion as it is actually created, which is according to how one is choosing to flow in relation to Beingness, or one is free to try and create emotion in a way that it only appears to be created, which is through the arrangement of physical reality.

 

When one tries to create emotion through the arrangement of physical reality, it may seem or appear that it is the particular arrangement of physical reality that is responsible for the emotion one is feeling, that is responsible for creating that emotion, but this appearance is only an illusion. It is always the flow of Beingness relative to Itself that creates emotion. All the particular arrangement of physical reality does is cause Beingness to choose reflexively how it will flow in relation to Itself, and thereby reflexively create what it apprehends as a particular emotional experience. But it is still the flow of Beingness relative to Itself that creates emotional experience.

 

Thus, there may seem to be two ways to create experience, from the bottom up or the top down, but there is really only one way that experience is actually created, and that is from the bottom up. Likewise, there may seem to be two ways to create art, from the bottom up or by juxtaposing already existent objects, but there is really only one way that art is actually created, and that is from the bottom up.

 

I believe that humanity has, to some extent, embraced the faux art that is much of modern art because it parallels the false and illusory way we ourselves try and create what we experience as emotional reality, which is through the juxtaposition of objects and arrangement of physical reality with the intention of causing a reflexive reaction that produces a particular emotional reaction.

 

We all want to create a wanted emotional reality, a wanted emotional experience. Likewise, all artists want to create art.

 

We have lost sight of how emotional reality is actually created, and so we create it in the only way we now know how, which is by trying to arrange physical reality in a way that will cause us to reflexively choose to flow in relation to Beingness in a way that produces a wanted emotional experience. This is clearly going about creating wanted emotional experience the long and hard way.

 

The way that emotional reality is actually created is according to how we are flowing in relation to Beingness, and how we are flowing in relation to Beingness is something that we choose, either consciously or unconsciously, either deliberately or reflexively.

 

The easy and direct way to create wanted emotional experience is by simply choosing to flow in alignment with Beingness. Either way, what you apprehend as emotional experience is the result of how you are choosing to flow in relation to Beingness, its just that that choice can be made consciously and deliberately, or unconsciously and reflexively.

 

When the choice is made consciously and deliberately, one has true control over what one creates as emotional experience, and one then truly creates. When the choice is made unconsciously and reflexively, one does not actually control what one creates as emotional experience, since one is constrained in their creation by the way in which physical reality can be arranged, and so one is then not truly creating.

 

When the way to create emotional experience directly has become lost and forgotten, one is then left to try and create wanted emotion in the only way that then seems available, which is as a reaction to physical experience.  When the way to create art directly is not possible, one is then left to create art by arranging already existent objects.

 

These parallels between the two ways in which emotional experience can be created and the two ways in which art can be created are not coincidence, but are a product of the outer always reflecting the inner, a product of the fact that regardless of what seems to be, experience always flows from and is created from the bottom up and not the top down.

 

Thus, the inner situation, which is the two ways in which Beingness or Consciousness is able to create emotional experience, which is directly or indirectly, consciously or unconsciously, deliberately or reflexively, is reflected in the outer situation involving the two ways in which Beingness or Consciousness, in human form, creates what are referred to as works of art, which is by creating something out of nothing, from the bottom up, or by creating something by just rearranging already existent somethings, and so creating from the top down.

 

Modern art is, as a whole, reflective of the way in which most of humanity creates emotional experience, which is as a reaction to the way in which physical reality is arranged. Modern art is creation through the juxtaposition of already existent objects and most of humanity creates emotional experience by trying to arrange physical reality in a particular way.

 

All art is a creation, and all creation is art, the question is, what is the nature of the creation and so what is the nature of the art? Has it been created de novo, from the bottom up, or has it been created from the top down, through the arrangement of already existent objects. Likewise, we create everything we experience as emotional reality, the question is, are we creating what we apprehend as emotional realty from the bottom up, by consciously choosing our involvement in the relation that creates what we apprehend as emotional experience,  or are we creating what we apprehend as emotional reality from the top down, by unconsciously choosing our involvement in the relation that creates what we apprehend as emotional experience as a reaction to some arrangement of physical reality.

 

Both ways of creating art and both ways of creating emotional experience each result in something being created, but in each case, one way of creation involves freedom and the other way involves limitation. When we create art or emotional experience de novo, from the bottom up, we are free to create whatever we want, but when new create art or emotional experience from the top down, we are restricted in what we can create by the objects that are available, and the ways in which they can be arranged.

 

Thus, modern art as a whole is itself an expression, in that it expresses both the way in which humanity is, by and large, trying to create emotional experience, which is from the top down, as well as the limitations that are unavoidably inherent in this method of emotional experiential creation.

 

And people are therefore able to relate to modern art because it is reflective of or related to the way in which they are themselves going about trying to create their emotional reality, which is from the top down, as a reaction to some arrangement of physical reality, even if it is not reflective of the way in which emotional reality is actually created, which is always from the bottom up, as the result of the way the Individual is choosing to flow, consciously or unconsciously, deliberately or reflexively, in relation to their more fundamental Individuality.

We are like painters, and what we are painting is what we experience, and we can draw our paint from either the palette of allowing or resistance, and so paint experiential wantedness or unwantedness.

 

In each moment we are free to choose from either palette, but we can limit that freedom by choosing which palette to draw from based not upon what we want to paint in this moment, but rather based upon what we have painted in a previous moment, so that our choice now becomes coupled to and so constrained by a previous choice. Or we can become overly concerned with what will be the appearance of the finished product, and so not pay attention to which palette we are drawing our paint from.

 

You can know which palette you are drawing your paint from in each moment by paying attention to how you feel, because emotional experience, in its wantedness or unwantedness, is the first experience we create with the paint we have drawn from the palette of either allowing or resistance, respectively.

 

We are engines of experiential creation, and our very Existence, which is itself unavoidable, makes unavoidable our creation and apprehension of some experience. And although we have no choice but to create some experience, we get to choose the most important aspect or quality of what we create as experience, which is its quality of wantedness or unwantedness.

 

And we choose that quality of wantedness or unwantedness by choosing what I refer to as our in the moment mode of being. Our in the moment mode of being refers to the way in which we are choosing, in any given moment or now, to be in relation to what I refer to as our more fundamental Individuality.

 

Our more fundamental Individuality is the Individuality that is projecting Itself from a less iterated level of Existential self-relation and experiential creation into this more iterated level of Existential self-relation and experiential creation as our Individuality.

 

Thus, as the word itself indicates, our Individuality is really an Indivisible Duality composed of two inseparable Individuals. We are as much our more fundamental Individuality as we are the avatar Individuality that is being projected by our more fundamental Individuality as our Individuality. And yet our perspective is that of the avatar Individuality, because we are the Individuality that is creating and apprehending experience from this more iterated level of Existential self-relation by becoming involved in relations with other Individualities at this more iterated level of Existential self-relation.

 

However, as we become involved in relations with other Individualities at this more iterated level of Existential self-relation and so create what we apprehend as physical experience, our involvement in those relations unavoidably places us, as the avatar Individuality, in relation to our more fundamental Individuality, and it is that unavoidable relation that is the source of all experiential wantedness and unwantedness.

 

The relation that is unavoidably created between the avatar Individuality and the more fundamental Individuality as we, from the perspective of the avatar Individuality, choose to become involved in any relation with any other Individuality, is a relation of flow, and it is that relation of flow occurring between the avatar Individuality and the more fundamental Individuality that is what we, from our perspective as the avatar Individuality, apprehend as the quality of wantedness or unwantedness associated with any experience we create.

 

The relation of flow that is unavoidably created between the avatar Individuality and the more fundamental Individuality as we, from the perspective of the avatar Individuality, choose to become involved in any relation with any other Individuality, is a relation of either aligned or oppositional flow. That is, as we project ourselves into relations with other Individualities as we create what we apprehend as experience from the level of the avatar Individuality, the more fundamental Individuality is also projecting Itself into relations with other Individualities to create what it apprehends as experience from the level of the more fundamental Individuality. And the way in which we are projecting ourselves as Individuals into the relations that create experience from this level of Reality or Existential self-relation can be either like or unlike the way in which the more fundamental Individuality is projecting itself into the relations that create experience from its level of Reality or of Existential self-relation.

 

And if the way we are projecting our Individuality into the relations that create what we apprehend as experience is like the way the more fundamental Individuality is projecting itself into he relations that create what it apprehends as experience, then there is an alignment between the direction of flow of the avatar Individuality and the direction of flow of the more fundamental Individuality, which alignment of flow we, from the perspective of the avatar Individuality, apprehend most directly and immediately as a wanted emotional experience, as the experience of wanted e-motion, as the experience of aligned and so attractive Existential motion.

 

Conversely, if the way we are projecting our Individuality into the relations that create what we apprehend as experience is unlike the way the more fundamental Individuality is projecting itself into he relations that create what it apprehends as experience, then there is opposition between the direction of flow of the avatar Individuality and the direction of flow of the more fundamental Individuality, which opposition of flow we, from the perspective of the avatar Individuality, apprehend most directly and immediately as an unwanted emotional experience, as the experience of unwanted e-motion, as the experience of oppositional and so repulsive Existential motion.

 

Emotion is thus the product of relative Existential motion, the product of the motion or flow of Existence or Consciousness relative to Itself, and more specifically is the product of the flow of the avatar Individuality relative to the flow of the more fundamental Individuality, as that relation of aligned or oppositional flow is apprehended from the perspective of the avatar Individuality.

 

The avatar Individuality is like a drop in a River that is the more fundamental Individuality. But unlike a drop in an actual river, the Drop that is the avatar Individuality has the innate ability to choose its own direction of flow, regardless of the direction in which the River that is its more fundamental Individuality is choosing to flow.

 

The Drop that is the avatar Individuality not only has the innate ability to choose its own direction of flow, but has the obligation to do so, in each moment, in each now. And the choice that the Avatar Individuality makes in each moment regarding its direction of flow creates in each moment a relation of either aligned or oppositional flow between the avatar Individuality and the more fundamental Individuality, creating in each moment what the avatar Individuality apprehends as either a wanted or unwanted emotional experience.

 

However, the relation of flow between the avatar Individuality and the more fundamental Individuality as aligned or oppositional does not just determine the wanted or unwanted quality of emotional experience; rather, it also determines the wanted or unwanted quality of what the avatar Individuality creates and apprehends as mental and physical experience as well, since every relation in which the avatar Individuality becomes involved that creates every sort of experience at every level places the avatar Individuality in a relation of aligned or oppositional flow relative to the flow of its more fundamental Individuality, thereby imparting upon every experience an Individual creates and apprehends a degree of wantedness or unwantedness.

 

And so we are like painters, and what we are painting is what we experience, and we can draw our paint from either the palette of allowing or resistance, from the palette of aligned or oppositional flow, and so paint experiential wantedness or unwantedness.  And you can know which palette you are drawing your experiential paint from in each moment by paying attention to the emotional experience you are, in that moment, creating and apprehending.

 

If you are happy while you paint, i.e., experiencing emotional wantedness, then the mental and physical experiences that you paint while you are happy, while you are in a relation of aligned flow with your more fundamental Individuality, will themselves have the quality of wantedness. But if you are unhappy while you paint, i.e., experiencing emotional unwantedness, then the mental and physical experiences that you paint while you are unhappy, while you are in a relation of oppositional flow with your more fundamental Individuality, will themselves have the quality of unwantedness.

 

In each moment we are involved in different levels of relations that create and so paint our emotional, mental, and physical experiences, but in each moment we can only be in either a relation of aligned or oppositional flow relative to the flow of our more fundamental Individuality, and so we can in each moment only create either experiential wantedness or unwantedness, since involvement in the fundamental and unavoidable relations of aligned and oppositional flow are, for a single avatar Individuality in a single moment, mutually exclusive of each other. 

 

An avatar Individual's choosing to be in one relation in one moment makes it impossible for that same avatar Individuality to choose to be in the opposite and so mutually exclusive relation in that same moment. Therefore, while choosing to be involved in the relation that creates emotional wantedness, it is not possible for the same avatar Individuality to be involved in the relation necessary to create emotional unwantedness, nor is it possible for that same avatar Individuality in that same moment to be involved in the relation that creates either mental or physical unwantedness. Likewise, while choosing to be involved in the relation that creates emotional unwantedness, it is not possible for the same avatar Individuality to be involved in the relation necessary to create emotional wantedness, nor is it possible for that same avatar Individuality in that same moment to be involved in the relation that creates either mental or physical wantedness.

 

For this reason we do not need to micromanage our physical experiential creations in order to create experiential wantedness at the mental and physical level; rather, we only need pay attention to the palette we are drawing from as we create what we apprehend as emotional experience, and adjust our choice of palette accordingly, i.e., according to the wantedness or unwantedness of what we are, in this moment, in this now, creating and apprehending as emotional experience.

 

And if in a given moment we paint something that we do not like there is nothing other than our own Individuality that can stop us from making a different choice in the next moment and painting something that we like instead.

 

And the way our own Individuality can prevent us from making a different choice in this moment than we made in a previous moment is by basing our choice in this moment upon an experience that was created as the product of a choice we made in a previous moment, by making our choice in this moment as a reaction to and so reflection of a previous moments choice.

 

There is nothing that actually constrains or dictates what we choose as our mode of being moment to moment, as we are free to choose a mode of being in one moment that is the  complete opposite of the mode of being we chose in the previous moment. But we ourselves can constrain that choice by linking our choice regarding our in the moment mode of being to a choice made in a previous moment, which we do when we try to create a wanted experience by trying to modify an already created experience, as this links the choice we are making now to a choice made previously.

 

If we would remain free to choose our mode of being without any self-imposed constraint it is necessary to let already created experience be, to not choose our mode of being according to how we want to try and modify a painting that has already dried. The canvas upon which we paint experience in each moment is as pristine or cluttered as we choose. What we have created before has relevance to what we are creating now only to the extent that we ourselves choose to make it relevant, and to the extent that we choose to make it relevant it constrains what we are able to create now, as choosing to make it relevant links what we are choosing as our mode of being now to what we chose as our mode of being then, as we created the experience that came before.

 

When we try to create emotional wantedness by modifying external reality, by trying to arrange external reality in a particular way, we are not choosing our mode of being according to how we want to feel, not choosing our mode of being according to the emotional experience we want to create; rather we are choosing our mode of being according to how we want to try and modify external reality. And even though in our attempts to modify external reality we are always trying to create emotional wantedness, the mode of being we choose in order to try and modify external reality is often not the mode of being that creates emotional wantedness, but is quite often the mode of being that creates emotional unwantedness.

 

However, swimming upstream will never get you to where you want to be. Everything that you want lies downstream. Everything that you want can only be created by projecting yourself in alignment with the flow of your more fundamental Individuality because the alignment of that flow is the source and basis of all experiential wantedness.

 

There is only what we are and what we create as experience. Experience is a virtual reality. If you would understand why you feel as you do and why you experience what you experience as mental and physical reality, then it is necessary to understand what is happening beneath the surface of the virtual reality we call experiential reality, because it is what is happening there that creates what we apprehend as experiential reality.

 

What we are are avatar Individualities that are being projected into this level of Existential self-relation and experiential creation by a more fundamental Individuality. And what we create as experience is, in its wantedness or unwantedness, completely a function of the fundamental and unavoidable relation of aligned or oppositional flow occurring between those two Individualities, as the more fundamental Individuality chooses to project or flow Itself into this level of Reality as an avatar Individuality, and then as we choose, as that avatar Individuality, how we project or flow ourselves within this level of Reality.

 

The direction of flow of the more fundamental Individuality is constant, as it is always choosing to be in a mode of allowing and therefore always creating for itself a wanted experience. Our direction of flow is not constant, as we sometimes choose to be in a mode of allowing, in which case we flow in alignment with our more fundamental Individuality, thereby creating wanted experiences, while at other times we choose to be in a mode of resistance, in which case we flow in opposition to our more fundamental Individuality, thereby creating unwanted experiences.

 

Our very Existence, which is itself unavoidable, makes unavoidable our creation and apprehension of either a wanted or unwanted emotional experience in each moment. There is no third choice. Put another way, we have no choice but to choose to create, in each moment, in each now, either a wanted or an unwanted emotional experience. But we do get to choose which we will create, and which palette we choose to draw from, i.e., aligned or opposed, allowing or resistant, wanted or unwanted, sets the tone for what we create as mental and physical experience in that same moment as well.

 

Therefore, if we would create more of what we want and less of what we do not want, it would be to our advantage to pay less attention to our previous experiential creations and the palette we chose to paint them, and pay more attention instead to the palette from which we are drawing in this moment as what we paint what we create as experience now.

 

But it is not the wantedness or unwantedness of what we are thinking, nor the wantedness or unwantedness of what we experience as physical reality that lets us know with certainty from which palette we are drawing in this moment, in this now. Rather, it is the wantedness or unwantedness of what we feel, the wantedness or unwantedness of what we are creating and apprehending as emotional experience, that is the most direct and immediate indicator of whether we are, in this moment, choosing to flow in alignment with or opposition to our more fundamental Individuality, and so whether we are, in this moment, choosing to draw from the palette of allowing or resistance, alignment or opposition, as we create what we experience as reality.

 

Experientially there is nothing more important than how we feel, because how we feel indicates our in the moment involvement in the relation that determines whether what we create as any type of experience in that moment will have the quality of wantedness or unwantedness. However, when we choose to let what we have already created as experience determine how we feel, as we do when we react to already created experience, then we are still choosing how we feel, still choosing the emotion we create, but we are not doing do freely in that moment; rather we are then choosing in a way that is being dictated by a choice made either freely or not in a previous moment.

 

We all have free will, we all have the innate ability to choose without restriction our in the moment mode of being, our in the moment relation of flow to our more fundamental Individuality. But sometimes, in exercising that freedom, in exercising that ability, we inadvertently and unknowingly limit and constrain ourselves, so that it then seems that we have no choice but to feel a certain way depending upon the circumstances. We think that if something unwanted happens then we have no choice but to feel bad. Likewise, we think that if something wanted happens that we have no choice but to feel good.

 

And so it is that we spend our lives trying to arrange external circumstances in a way that will allow us to reflexively create emotional wantedness rather than emotional unwantedness. And this is certainly one way to go about trying to create wanted emotional experience, but it is not freedom, and it is not in accord with our nature as Beings that possess free will. It is bondage, but it is bondage to nothing other than our own experiential creations. It is making already created experience the determiner of what will be created as emotional experience now, rather than just deciding directly what one would like to create as emotional experience in this moment and then being able to become involved in the relation that makes that creation possible.  

 

We are always free, because there is nothing outside ourselves that can constrain what we are choosing as our mode of being in any moment, in any now. And as it is we, as Individuals, that inadvertently cage ourselves, by choosing our mode of being as a reflexive reaction to already created experience, it is only we, as Individuals, that can release ourselves from the cage we have constructed, by instead choosing our mode of being with the conscious intent to create a wanted emotional experience, regardless of either external or internal circumstances.

 

Of course this is easier said than done, else we would all be doing it. The difficulty is not in making the choice, the difficulty is in recognizing that such a choice even exists. And the reason it is difficult to recognize that such a choice exists is because we do not realize the extent to which we are responsible for creating what we apprehend as experiential reality.

 

Everything that we experience as reality requires our involvement in a relation in order to create what we apprehend as experience. What we experience as reality, emotional, mental and physical, simply does not exist in the absence of our involvement in the relation that creates it.  Experiential reality is a virtual reality, and it is a virtual reality created and apprehended by what does actually Exist, and what actually Exists is Consciousness.  The Reality of Consciousness flows in relation to Itself and creates what it then apprehends as experiential reality. Consciousness is the River, and it is also the Drops, experiential realities of every variety are just the swirls that come into relative existence where that River and those Drops flow in relation to each other.

 

We are the Creator that has mistaken itself for its own creation, the Painter that has become lost in their own painting, and in so doing we have also lost sight of how it is that we create the creation, and in losing sight of how we create the creation we have also lost sight of the fact that it is we and we alone, as Individuals, that get to choose whether what we create as experience has the quality of wantedness or unwantedness.

There is the reality of experience and there is the Reality of the Beingness that, through relation to Itself, creates what it then apprehends as experience. The Beingness is what actually Exists; the experience is what only seems to exist. The Beingness is the Creator; the experience is the creation. The Beingness is the actual Reality; experience is the virtual reality.

 

Our situation is such that we are Creators that have become lost within our creation, lost to ourselves, oblivious of our True Nature, as we have taken our creation for being what actually exists, and in so doing have relegated What We Actually Are to a secondary status, making What We Actually Are appear to be something that is not as real as our creation. In this we are like painters that have become so mesmerized by our creation that the painting seems to have become more real than the painter.

 

What We Actually Are literally creates what we, as Individuals apprehend as reality. And so, if What We Actually Are takes what we have created as reality for being what actually exists, then that becomes our reality, that becomes and is the reality we are creating and apprehending, not because that is the actual situation, not because what we have created as experiential reality is what actually exists, but because that is the reality we are choosing to create. 

 

And in assigning to our creation the status of what actually exists, that which does actually Exist must take on a different role, must appear as something other than what actually exists, since that role has already been given to an imposter. So it is that What We Actually Are, in this drama we have created where our creation has been assigned the role of what actually exists, takes on a lesser or secondary role, appearing not as what actually exists, not as the creator, but instead appears as the creation, as something that is created by that to which we have mistakenly assigned the role of creator, created by that to which we have mistakenly assigned the role of what actually exists.

 

It is as if we are directing a play where there are two characters, let us say an inventor and their creation. And we go in as the director and for whatever reason we decide to assign to what is actually the creation the role of inventor, leaving then what is actually the inventor to play the only other role available, which is that of the creation. This is precisely what we have done to Consciousness, to What We Actually Are, to the Beingness that actually Exists that creates experiential reality, as we have mistakenly assigned to physical experiential reality, to our own creation, the role of what actually exists, leaving Consciousness then to play the only other role that is available, which is the role of the creation, the role of that which does not actually exist.

 

And so it is that we have become lost to ourselves, lost to our true identity, lost in the virtual experiential reality that we ourselves, as What Does Actually Exist,  are creating, as we assign to physical experiential reality the role of Reality, leaving then that which is actually Reality, i.e., Consciousness, to play the role of reality. Physical experiential reality does not appear as what actually exists because it is what actually exists; rather physical reality appears as Reality, as what actually exists, only because that is the role that we ourselves, as Reality, as That Which Does Actually Exist, as the actual Creators of reality, have assigned to it. We are in charge, we are the Creators of reality, and reality will therefore take on whatever role we assign to it. But in this drama of Creator and creation there can be only one Creator, and once that role has been assigned that leaves the other actor in this drama to play the only other role available.

 

So it is that our True Nature as Consciousness, as Beingness, remains hidden from us while still in plain sight of us, appearing as something that is being created by the actor to whom we have mistakenly assigned the role of creator, i.e., appearing as the creation of physical experiential reality. Consciousness appears to us as it does, i.e., as the creation of physical reality, as something less real than physical reality, not because it actually is created by physical experiential reality, not because it is actually less real than physical reality, but only because that is the role we have inadvertently relegated it to, having given away the leading role, as the actual Directors of the drama we call experiential reality, to the wrong actor.

 

And once we have assigned to that which only seems to exist the role of what actually exists, and so simultaneously assign What Actually Exists to the role of what only seems to exist, then everything gets turned upside down and inside out, so much so that we lose sight of the fact that we ourselves are the Creator and Director of the drama, because in assigning What Actually Exists to the role of what only seems to exist, in assigning What Actually Exists to the role of creation, we are ourselves, as What Actually Exists, taking on the role of what only seems to exists, taking on the role of that which is created.

 

And although we are the actual Creator of experiential reality, in taking on the role of creation, we forget and lose sight of how it is that we are creating experiential reality. It then seems to us that experiential reality is something that happens to us rather than something that we ourselves are creating.

 

But no matter how it may seem, we are always the Creator of what we apprehend as experiential reality, because everything that we experience as reality, emotional, mental and physical, requires our involvement, as What Actually Exists, in some relation with some other aspect of What Actually Exists in order to create what we, as What Actually Exists, apprehend as a particular experiential reality. But we are the Creator of what we experience as reality not just because what we apprehend as reality requires our involvement in a relation in order to create what we apprehend as reality; rather, we are truly the Creator of what we experience as reality because we and we alone, as What Actually Exists, determine whether what we create and apprehend as experiential reality in any moment has the quality of wantedness or unwantedness according to how we are, in any moment, in any now, choosing to be in relation to the rest of What Actually Exists.   

 

It does not matter what we think is happening, it does not matter how we think reality is or is not created or how it is or is not arranged, it does not matter how confused or deluded we are regarding our nature, because no matter what we think is happening, we are, as What Actually Exists, always creating the wantedness and unwantedness of what we apprehend as experiential reality according to how we are, consciously or unconsciously, deliberately or reflexively, choosing to be in relation to the rest of What Actually Exists.

 

The vast majority of Conscious Individuality, the vast majority of What Actually Exists, is not confused with regard to the actual relation between Itself as Creator and experiential reality as creation, and so simply chooses consciously and deliberately to be in relation to Itself, in relation to What Actually Exists, in a way that creates for Itself the apprehension of wanted rather than unwanted experiential realities. On the other hand, the vast majority of Conscious Individualities that refer to themselves as human beings, or appear to themselves as human beings, are confused with regard to the actual relation between themselves as Creators and experiential reality as their creation, and so choose unconsciously and reflexively their involvement in the relation with the rest of What Actually Exists that determines the wanted or unwanted quality of what they, through those relations, create and apprehend as wanted or unwanted experiential realities of the emotional, mental, and physical varieties.

 

There are only two ways for an Individual to be in relation to the rest of What Actually Exists: allowing or resistant. Relations of allowing create experiential wantedness and relations of resistance create experiential unwantedness. It is in our Nature as What Actually Exists to want to create experiential wantedness rather than experiential unwantedness, and so it is in our Nature to choose to be in a relation of allowing rather than a relation of resistance with respect to the rest of What Actually Exists. And yet, once we lose sight of our Nature, by mistakenly assigning to physical reality the role of Reality, by mistakenly assigning to physical reality the role of What Actually Exists, we get turned around and inside out and start trying to create experiential wantedness by involving ourselves in relations of resistance, thinking that the way to get what we want is by pushing against and getting rid of what we do not want, when all that involving ourselves in this sort of relation actually does is create more of what we do not want.  

 

It does not matter that we have lost sight of what we actually are, as we still act according to what we are, according to what is our True Nature as the Creator of reality, by always trying to create a more wanted experiential reality. Everything we do, everything we want, we do and want because we think that in the doing or the having of it that we will feel better, that we will create for ourselves a more wanted emotional experience. This is the prime directive of all That Actually Exists by virtue of its very Existence. It is not possible to Exist without being in relation to what else Exists, and in that unavoidable relation what Exists must create an experience that is either wanted or unwanted, an experience born of a relation of either allowing or resistance. There is no third choice.

 

And as What Actually Exists must in each moment create either a wanted or unwanted emotional experience by virtue of its unavoidable involvement in a relation of either allowing or resistance with what is ultimately Itself, What Actually Exists quite naturally chooses to create that which is wanted rather than that which is unwanted, naturally chooses to create that which is attractive rather than that which is repulsive, as it is attracted to creating the wanted and repelled by creating the unwanted.

 

And we, as human Individuals, are What Actually Exists simply doing the same thing, i.e., acting according to our Nature by always trying to create a more wanted emotional experience. Its just that we are doing it blindfolded, so to speak, turned upside down and inside out as we are by our confusion regarding the nature of reality and the relation between Reality and reality, so that we often inadvertently create what we do not want rather than what we want, because from this state of confusion it seems to us that the way to get to what we want is through some sort of resistance, i.e., through our involvement in some relation of resistance.

 

And so someone does something we do not like and we get angry at them and think that they are the one causing our anger, causing us to experience unwanted emotion, and so we tell them to behave differently, and try to get them to behave differently, and if they do we feel a little better and if they don't we get more angry, making it seem as if their behavior is the cause of our emotional state when in actuality our emotional state is always something that is being created according to how we ourselves are choosing to be involved in the fundamental and unavoidable relation with What Actually Exists that creates emotional and really all experiential wantedness and unwantedness. It's just that when they behave as we would like them to behave we reflexively and unconsciously involve ourself in the relation of allowing that creates a more wanted emotion, and when they behave as we would not like them to behave we reflexively and unconsciously involve ourself in the relation of resistance that creates an unwanted emotion.

 

And the same is true of all external circumstance. When we look at what we like we reflexively and unconsciously enter into a relation of allowing and so feel good, and when we look at what we do not like we reflexively and unconsciously enter into a relation of resistance and so feel bad. It seems to us that what is making us feel good or bad, experience positive or negative emotion, wanted or unwanted emotion, is the external circumstance, but what is actually always creating our emotional experience is the allowing or resistant mode of being we are choosing, consciously or unconsciously, deliberately or reflexively, in each moment as we are in each moment involved in the fundamental and unavoidable relation with the rest of Beingness that creates emotional experience.

 

However, from our perspective of confusion regarding the relation between what is creator and what is creation, it seems to us that external circumstances are what create our emotional reality, and so we spend our lives trying to arrange physical reality this way and that so that when we look at it we will reflexively enter into a relation of allowing and so feel good as a result. But this is really going about trying to created wanted emotional experience the hard way, and in a way that is quite often counterproductive, as it often produces unwanted rather than wanted emotional experience. Much easier it is to simply choose to be in a mode of allowing  rather than resistance regardless of external circumstance and create directly a wanted emotional experience, thereby cutting out the unnecessary and often uncontrollable middle man of external circumstance. 

 

The relation of What Actually Exists to Itself that creates wanted emotional experience is the precursor and necessary foundation for the relations of What Actually Exists to Itself that create wanted thought, and the relations of What Actually Exists to Itself that create wanted thought provide the foundation for the relations of What Actually Exists to Itself that create wanted physical experience. Likewise, the relation of What Actually Exists to Itself that creates unwanted emotional experience is the precursor and necessary foundation for the relations of What Actually Exists to Itself that create unwanted thought, and the relations of What Actually Exists to Itself that create unwanted thought provide the foundation for the relations of What Actually Exists to Itself that create unwanted physical experience.

 

Physical experience does not produce emotional experience. As with so many things, we have it completely backwards, owing to our placing the creation in the role of creator and vice versa. Emotional experience is the precursor to mental and physical experience, not the other way around. Therefore, learning to create experience by paying attention to how you feel, and choosing your involvement in the fundamental relation accordingly, not only has the advantage of making it more likely that you will create wanted rather than unwanted emotional experience, but also increases the likelihood of your creating wanted rather than unwanted mental and physical experiences as well, owing to the progressive way in which experiential reality is created.

 

All experiential reality is a virtual reality. What actually Exists is a river of Consciousness, and we are drops in that River, and we choose in each moment whether to flow with or against that River. And based upon how we choose to flow we become involved in relations with that River and create the swirls in that River that we apprehend as wanted or unwanted experiences. The River is the Reality, we are the Reality, experiential reality is our creation.

 

When we do not understand our role as the creator of what we experience, we become the slaves of our own creations, the slaves of experience, erroneously thinking that we must have this or that thing, be in this or that circumstance, before we can be happy, before we can allow ourselves to feel wanted emotion. The truth is we can feel wanted emotion whenever we want, but to do so it is necessary to uncouple what one is presently creating as emotional reality from what one has previously created as physical reality. Physical reality is the finished experiential product, emotional reality is its precursor. You cannot create something different from what you have created previously if you are stuck using what you created previously as the basis for what you are now trying to create, i.e., when you construct the precursor reality of emotional experience on the basis of the wantedness or unwantedness of some previously created physical reality, which is what we do when we create our emotional reality as an unconscious and reflexive reaction to what we have already created as physical reality.

 

Physical reality is like a painting, and we are always painting a new picture. Whether or not you are going to like what you paint depends entirely upon how good or bad you feel while you are painting it, because how good or bad you feel indicates the nature of your involvement in the fundamental relation that determines experiential wantedness and unwantedness. If you feel bad while you are painting then you will not like the finished product, and if you feel good while you paint then you will like the finished product. The key is to not get too hung up on any one painting, good or bad, liked or unliked, but to enjoy the process of experiential creation, since it, like What We Actually Are, never ends.