It is truly meaningless, because life itself is a cycle and blocking the cycle will prevent life from sustaining itself. This is an important lesson, which seems to be lost on modern society. We program ourselves in a linear fashion. Human life is a biologic manifestation and is so constrained. There is no purpose in children and offspring if the parents do not die. Birth is only sustainable in the presence of death. Living organisms can be only sustained in a cycle, a cycle including birth and death. Otherwise the resources that sustain life cannot be re-cycled. The 2011 movie “In Time” addresses this idea peripherally.

It is useful to remind ourselves that our very survival depends upon our sharing. We may superficially think that this means sharing resources with other countries and other humans. But our sharing is dependent upon our resources being sustainable.
Sustainability does not become possible without recognizing the interdependence of everything in the cycle of interlocking living organisms. Inherent, in this cycle, is the death of interdependent organisms which create the sustainability of the cycle, as it allows another organism to sustain life from the use of the dead organism for sustenance.

You might well think that the algae, which are one of the basic organisms that fix the carbon dioxide to create the building blocks of carbon based life, do not need animal life. You would be wrong as without animals, which shift oxygen to carbon dioxide, the other half of the equation would be missing. Plants cannot survive without animals and animals cannot survive without plants. They are in an interdependent dance of balance. Humans it turns out require a multiplicity of plants. First, they require enough of an abundance of plants which can convert carbon dioxide to oxygen, then they require a variety of plants, from which they can glean the nutrition to make their life possible so that birth, growth and death can be supported. They require the bacteria which process plants and animals in the environment, as well as those which are symbiotes in the intestinal tract and other places. They also require the multiplicity of animals which live in balance in the environment to maintain it exactly as it is.

The idea that animal life or human life is somehow more valuable than plant life fails to acknowledge their interdependence. They cannot possibly survive without each other. Thus an agreement about water has to see that water is a resource that is needed by humans, plants and animals with each variety of one or the other having a unique place in the survival of all in entirety, as it allows for the respiration of the planet (the exchange of oxygen for carbon dioxide and vice versa).

If this is so, then when outcomes fail to be what we desire or what serves, then since we have no responsibility then we can blame someone else. If, when we assign blame, we investigate and find that blame does not reside there, we can shift the blame to someone else. We can keep doing this serially and none of the blame comes back to us, since we bear no responsibility. From this it can be seen that from the very first opportunity we choose not to accept any responsibility.

Following assignment of blame, usually we have the feeling that others whom we blame should be held accountable for their actions. So we shine the light of accountability on everyone else.

It does turn out however, that events are not unidirectional. They do not start there and move here solely on the basis of what the other person is doing. Events are really interactive. There is some degree of give and take, action and reaction, a literal back and forth. That means always the responsibility is shared because there is action and reaction on both parts forming an interaction.

By accepting the culture of blame, we become powerless to change our experience for we fail to recognize the interactive nature of things. To change our experience we must become responsible for it. If we become responsible then we cannot blame others for it. It this state of responsibility, we can see that we are affected by what others do, but they are not responsible for our outcome. We can choose our response which in turn defines our outcomes. We in that way can shine the light of accountability upon ourselves.

The lesson here is that every outcome in our society is based on this. If our society is to have different outcomes, then we collectively will have to choose different responses which will lead to different outcomes. But, foremost we must accept responsibility and hold ourselves accountable for all of our outcomes.

A near death experience is, however, interesting. It has certain characteristics. Perhaps, the most significant is that at the onset of the near death experience, one has the awareness that life is about to end and one simultaneously has no fear of death. In other words, one is not in a state of thinking or processing in thought. One is simply in a state of knowing. This knowing is from a place of awareness and observation. So observation is not simply visual, but it is also a state of feeling, that is accompanied by a state of calmness. After becoming aware that life is about to end, one becomes aware of the expansion of awareness to include multiple simultaneous happenings. One can easily become aware of events proceeding in a stepwise fashion to the evolution of the end of life. In the same moment one can be re-living all the events in one’s life from birth to the current moment in a timeless instant. Yet even as this is happening in a split second one is aware of all the events that are taking place around one. One is participating from a place of observation and knowing. The interesting thing is that is happening in the moments up to the event that is the end of life. It becomes a near death experience when this event does not occur or does occur but does not end life in way that it was going to. Indeed, what does take place prior to this is that even before the final event of life one has begun to shift awareness and expand it. In fact some do expand awareness to include relatives and others nearby, becoming aware of their feelings. Interestingly enough these persons have these experiences from a place of observation and knowing.

Then there are those who do experience the event that ends life and do experience a seeming portal that they traverse. These individuals tell of meeting relatives who have previously died. They often tell of being informed that their life is not complete as they will need to return to finish incomplete business.

It is difficult for most physicians to understand this as they have not had these experiences. Perhaps the most interesting knowledge that one has after these experiences, is that the ability to have multiple awareness of many events or things, even as one is having an entire life review with complete recall of each feeling associated, is confirmation that our awareness does not exist in time but only in our experiences.

The importance of sharing near death experiences in this way is to help us remember who we really are. It is in this moment, when we remember that we are consciousness awareness and that we have bodies but we are not bodies, that we remember who we really are.

It may seem like endless abstraction, when we start to talk about this place, but imagine the place from which you begin speech, just before you formulate the idea of which give voice to in speech. This is the place of pure potential, the wellspring from which your idea bubbles before it finds voice. Because of the nature of mathematical operations such as addition and subtraction, we have created the concept of zero, a place void of value or any content. Unfortunately, it leaves us with the idea that, in the absence of measurable content, there can exist, only emptiness.

This is, however, not a place of emptiness, as this is the place that all arises from and is therefore a place of potential. In physics we talk about a body having potential energy simply by being in a place. Shifting from this place enables the body to gain kinetic energy as it moves. In a similar fashion this is a place of potential, as form arises from it to assume existence, even as the body gains kinetic energy as it shifts position.

It is much easier to see this space when we talk about the place from which ideas arise in consciousness. To us this is a simple abstraction. However, when we shift this idea to the material world it becomes much more difficult as we have a much different idea about things that we can touch. The idea that something physical could manifest from an abstraction is a remote concept to most, to say the least. Yet this is exactly what quantum physics at its most basic level would say. Yet we have the most difficulty with this, simply because we have difficulty with the idea of the absence of the measureable within the void, believing it is the same as saying the void is empty. It is now obvious that the universe and what it arises from is not that simple, either in concept or in how or if it may be measured.

Of what value is this to us anyway? Does this mean anything to us in our daily lives?
It is difficult to see, if we believe that our daily lives have the sole purpose in our continued existence of providing food and shelter. If there is some greater purpose to our existence, as would be demonstrated by our connection to all that exists in a quantum fashion, then we will have to acknowledge that information regarding this can only be available from the space in between.

Whether or not we attempt contact with the space in between will be determined by who we see ourselves to be. If we see ourselves as puny simple entities which are blown by the winds of time, we will indeed have little interest and restrict ourselves to ceaseless activity chasing food and shelter. If on the other hand we can see ourselves as a piece of the quantum connected universe, then every choice of activity we make will have a bearing on the quantum outcomes possible in the universe and the greatest satisfaction will come from having an idea of how each choice can and will affect such outcomes. This information is available in the space in between.

On top of this we have to add the fact of the sophistication of the biologic machinery versus the level of sophistication of the persons making changes. The difference in the level of sophistication of the designer would be as if a carpenter were trying to fix a modern computer driven automobile engine with his tools, a hammer, nails, saw and a screwdriver. Pieces could be removed to alter the behavior of the car without any idea of how this would affect overall function. This is analogous to the state of our medicine, yet we have the arrogance to say, because we are carpenters equipped as we are with the equivalent tools, the problems are all solvable with screws and screwdrivers, nails and hammers because we are simply unaware of electric tools we simply say non-mechanical tools do not exist.

A far better approach is to measure output and to change the inputs to determine the characteristics of the biologic black box. We have determined that it is self-regulating and self-healing. There are enough spontaneous cures to tell us this. We should change our approach in experimenting with the black box by leaving it intact and studying its characteristics. We may be able to glean more information about generating the behavior that we want from it based solely on input. It is far more likely to be effective.

There are a number of reasons why the bottom up approach is not successful. All systems are governed by Newton’s Laws whenever attempts are made to produce local changes. In effect Newton’s Laws are created at the point of resistance, within the system, to local change. The system permits small local changes, but as these increase in magnitude so does the resistance. This eventually becomes energy prohibitive on a local level. Such effects create a circumstance that dooms such attempts to failure. Each new generation of antibiotics becomes more cost prohibitive and usually despite promise, showing only marginal improvement. This is an example of Newton’s Laws within a biologic system. These can be bypassed only by looking at input/output where the shifting balance within the system depending on input is able to generate the desired output.

The lesson here is that unless, as individuals or as society, we approach problems from the perspective of restoring balance then we will inevitably fail.

In a sense we can become one with the experience in the temporary fashion, because all experience has a beginning and an end, so therefore it is temporary. It is also temporary because it changes; it is this and then it is that. Here, the sense is the same as the ‘estar’ version of the verb ‘to be’. If it is changeable in form, then it cannot truly be permanent. If it is not permanent, can it be real?

The answer is actually no. For it to be real it must be permanent. All we have discovered about the universe leads us to believe that it is not permanent as it is ever-changing. If it is ever- changing it cannot be everlasting, having therefore, a beginning and an end.

So as a matter of course only the sense of the ‘estar’ version of the verb ‘to be’ can be used to describe anything that has form, since we know it oscillates between form and non-form. The only sense of permanence associated with the verb ‘to be’ is legitimately is the state of potential from which all temporary oscillatory being arises. That is to say, I am nothing, yet have the potential for everything, is the only way to use the permanent sense of the verb ‘to be’. This represents the only unchanging state which exists and, therefore, the only state that is real.

What does this mean to us? It means that we have to acknowledge and claim this sense of the permanent state of potential which then enables us to create any additional state that we may deem necessary or may desire to have experience of.

So Leonard Susskind’s twenty year journey to find a hole in Stephen Hawking’s argument was important in order to hold on to the belief that reality is real. He conjured the idea, what if we considered the universe to be a hologram in three dimensions? Then, the information to represent the universe could be encoded to a two dimensional surface existing outside the universe. This surface would exist outside the universe in the form of a film with the universe contained inside. This would make the universe finite, however. This would allow for information to be conserved as the black hole consumes the universe, leaving information at the surface of the vortex, representing the hole consuming the entire universe. This does create the problem of, if so then what is outside the universe? And, where is the information to be stored? What is then the difference in starting from the point of defining everything as arising from nothing?

This is in essence the concept of the singularity of the big bang. If we start with nothing, and are only looking at probabilities of finding certain effects, then the sixteen fundamental particles do not exist as particles but only as unique probabilities of certain effects. When these effects are placed together and aggregated they seem to have the effects of becoming three dimensional holograms that can be observed. It stands to reason though, that as three dimensional holograms, arising out of nothing, they can only be observable illusions and the information regarding the holograms themselves and their behavioral changes can be recorded only by observation and therefore have to be in consciousness. It is clear there is no way out of the mathematical and logical implications that lead back to the realization that all of this takes place only in consciousness and awareness. It goes back to the conversation between Einstein and Bohr when Einstein states that he would like to believe the moon is still there when he is not observing it. Bohr’s answer was that it may not be possible to prove the opposite either. The essence of this is that the reality is based on observation and then dependent on consciousness.

What does this mean to us in the average everyday world? It would mean that our world is holographic and created by our consciousness, which would allow us to modify it at will and to enable any outcome we desire to be within reach. Simply we need to put ourselves in the position where we are enabled to make changes in our consciousness. This implies we need to practice exercises of consciousness. This speaks to activities such as meditation and visualization. These would in this model augment our ability to observe so we interact holographically with the subatomic particles.

The process of choosing a quality and oscillating about it, allows one to know the quality. At the lower oscillation frequency it may be perceived as soft versus hard and as the frequency of oscillation rises, it may become known more as the quality of texture. In that state it is neither, but has the potential to be experienced as those contrasting qualities. It is easy to get so lost in becoming acquainted with the experience itself that one thinks of one being the experience instead of being one with the experience. This is what enables us to think that we are something and then accept this illusion, failing to remember who we actually are, being the potential for experience.

In this state of being we are everything and yet we are nothing. This is the ultimate paradox and seems to be a paradox only because we are wedded to the material state. For even the material state is an experience and, therefore, an illusion also, having no reality beyond experience. The zero state is neither form nor is it formless, as form can exist only in the presence of formless and vice versa.

Consequently form as well as formless are illusions and abstract, no more and no less than good or evil. They can exist only in consciousness and be generated in experience. I realize that this is also a difficult thing to wrap yourself around, as in a material experience, and being one with the experience will inevitably create the tendency to believe you are the material experience.

Such concepts and beliefs create the idea of ghosts which have no more reality than your actual material self, both manufactured from the oscillatory state that produces all experience. This also gives birth to the idea of spirit (non-material) and material. Yet, truly as we have discussed these are oscillatory states that you experience. Can you then stretch yourself to remember who you really are? Can you remember that you are neither form nor are you formless, but only potential?

Well, for all intents and purposes, a frequency is an oscillation. An oscillation is a motion that occurs between two positions on either side of a central position. Thus a pendulum, as a part of a grandfather clock oscillates about a central position. In this sense sound is also an oscillation. Light itself is also an oscillation. Both light and sound move about a central neutral position. Sound involves an oscillation that creates positive and negative pressures about a zero point which is neutral, such as a drum vibrating when struck or a guitar string vibrating when plucked. Light is much more interesting as it oscillates between bright and dark. Bright is the presence and dark is the absence. The neutral or average is actually light. Most people would think that light is positive and dark is negative. Consequently light is the neutral or zero-point state, the average of the peak and the trough. It is the point around which bright and dark oscillate.

So we can characterize a vibration by saying, that it is an oscillation between that which is and that which is not and arises from a neutral state of potential which is that which is neither. We can pick any attribute to see that which is in contrast to that which is not. Vibration, therefore, allows the discrimination between what is and what is not. The lower the frequency is, the more apparent the distinction between that which is and that which is not. The higher the frequency, the more blended that which is with that which is not, allowing an approximation of the primary state of origin, that which is neither. The state of origin supports the discrimination of any attribute. This is the state we call love, for it supports all without discrimination.

Yet it is clear from this analysis, that what we are, is the neutral zero state, that which neither is nor is not. This state of who we are allows us to experience any attribute.

So we can oscillate between good and bad in experience, but actually cannot be good or bad, for we are neither. It is not actually possible for us to be anything other than the zero state in actuality, but it is possible for us to experience any state. So in essence we are one thing. Now this idea may offend some of the religious, but remember this is analysis about what really is, not about religious perception.

So it is possible to experience the state of the adversary, by resonating with that vibrational state, but it is not possible to be the adversary or even for the adversary to exist, since there would be a requirement for it to actually be something and that is not “vibrationally” possible.

So, in everyday language, it is possible to choose to experience evil or to share the experience of evil, but it is not possible to be evil as that would have to be the neutral state of origin. In this way it is possible to know the experience of good and evil. We are always the thing that is neither and it is out of this neither state that experience arises. It is a difficult concept to wrap yourself around because you have always thought that you are something, rather than the eternal possibility of everything.

Most modern cultures have changed that relationship into the nature of metastatic malignant disease. Most have embarked on a linear consumptive process that belies a symbiotic relationship with the planet. Western culture has been the most powerful of these both in its effect on the planet and the speed with which it has spread.

Energetically this has the quality and flow of a black hole. In terms of the physics, as soon as material approaches the event horizon, it is drawn in and then consumed. In much the same way modern developed culture pulls in persons from less developed cultures as well as resources and then reproduces itself in the undeveloped culture down to the linear consumption.

This follows the pattern of the metastatic spread of a malignancy throughout the body, where each malignant cell is able to set up a colony in a new as yet unaffected area. Here an established colony quickly grows consuming local resources much beyond the capacity and rate at which they can be provided or replaced. The result is consumption and destruction of abnormal as well as normal tissue. It creates the same black hole energy flow or pattern as soon as resources enter the “event horizon” and they are consumed leading to an entity that attracts even more resources and so on.

This is a typically revealing recognition that energy patterns repeat themselves in the universe on small as well as large scales. It is only with the recognition of such patterns and when they shift from the typically sustainable cyclic pattern, as with the cyclic pattern of a solar system where there is balance between the forces pulling planetary bodies toward the sun and those moving them away, that there is an ability to maintain sustainability. In other words sustainability requires recognition of the underlying energy pattern that produces it and its subsequent creation.

In order for modern cultures to move through this transition, this has to be acknowledged on the individual level as these same energy patterns are present in our individual lives. This indeed is our task ahead. If we are able to recognize these in our lives and make the shift, this will follow on a larger scale.