Original Sin, and Disease: Taking Responsibility for the Webs We Weave

Let’s dive into where the word “sin” came from, shall we?

Conceptually, “Sin”, as you probably are familiar with the term, is used to denounce the nature of an action, object, or person, on a moral level that is usually determined by some form of organized religion that the individual has been taught, or otherwise indoctrinated with, over the course of their lives. The majority of those who recognize this religious overtone to the word have come to know of it through the original works of Judaism.

“Chata'ah", “pesha", and “avone” are some of the many different verbs used in the original Hebrew writings that eventually found themselves narrowed down into one, singular word: Sin. Of all of these many words, the only one of them that refers to a direct intentional offense to the Hebrew deity was “pesha". “Chata’ah", in contrast, was used the most often and simply means “missing the mark"; it was associated with our idea of a simple transgression of any kind, not an intentionally executed transgression specifically against their deity. “Avone” refers to depravity or perversion; morally nasty things.

The Greeks later translated these old Hebrew texts into their own collections of different words for sin. “Chata’ah” became “Harmartia”, which was the Greek's blanket-term that encompassed six other sub-categories of misdeeds. “Harmartia”, just like “Chata’ah” meant to miss the mark, not necessarily as an intentional wrongdoing against a god or gods.

This distinction absolutely must be made clear, because the grotesque lack of understanding about what certain religious documents are actually saying has impaired the capacity for people to accurately pick up what certain texts are layin’ down. There were multiple words for "missing the mark" in both Hebrew and Greek, and they were all used accordingly with respect to the nature and severity of those individual transgressions. In our language, however, all of these words were sloppily lumped together into good ol’ “Sin”. The ancient conceptualization of sin was far more complex and intricate than our current translations of their words imply.

The linguist word “Sin” comes the old-english “synn”, which comes from the Old Norse “synd”, which comes from the Germanic “Sünde”. The etymology of these words show they've been consistently used for crimes of some sort and are associated with the concept of evil. Understand that there is no significant connection between the etymological roots of the word “sin” and the various greek and hebrew words we looked at earlier; the English language didn’t really start to incorporate Latin-based linguistics into it’s words until about 1,000 AD.

Humanity was dealt a catastrophic offense when the word “sin” was used as the singular translational equivalent to all of the various complex words the Hebrews actually employed in their writings. By simplifying the far more complex conceptualization of misdeeds of the ancient’s texts into a singular word that means “criminal” and “evil”, all the times where people in the Old and New Testament are discussing less-severe misdeeds that people do on accident instantly became CRIMINAL and EVIL.

The reality is that you can’t get the intended message of the authors of the Old and New Testaments by reading any English version of the Old and New Testaments. English ruined the whole thing. It’s like someone took every recording of Pink Floyd’s “Comfortably Numb” in existence and magically replaced them all with essentially the same thing, except the epic lead-guitar solo is now transformed into being one singular obnoxious note played over and over again for two minutes straight. From that point on, anybody who hadn’t heard that beautiful song before would never have the opportunity to appreciate it the same way those of us who have heard it can. Sure, you still get the overall idea from it, but it’s just not as awesome as it was. Sure, an English bible will communicate the main concept that "sin’s not very good mkay", but the intricacies of the conceptual nature of “missing the mark” are lost, and the etymological context of the word sin brings about a heightened level of guilt and fear that may or may not have been intended to be incurred in that particular passage by the original author.

So, if we’re to think of sin more accurately, we must begin to think with the conceptualization of it in a similar manner to the authors of the various religious texts that so many people currently believe in. “Missing the mark” was a term for archery, and that was how it was used for the most part in the culture at the time (kinda like how we use phrases like “kick the bucket” in different ways). It implied being absent from one’s actions, thus when the decision to loose the arrow is made, it is done in error. Interestingly enough, I’ve also read that when an arrow missed, the location of where it actually struck is the word that is translated into “evil”. Loosing the arrow at an incorrect trajectory due to being mentally absent at the moment of firing was the sin, and the mistaken point of actual impact was the evil. In the original Judaic texts, it is therefore taught that sin is an act; not a state of being. The archer was thought of as neither good nor bad, just as being fallible enough to at times lose focus in the moment, and miss the intended target. When you miss, you regain your focus in the moment and fire another shot.

Later on a religious revolution took place based on the words of a guy named "Josh, Son of Joe”. The New Testament claims that Joe adopted Josh after he was born to Mary through divine conception. Josh lived with his parents for eleven or twelve years, then took a hike. Based on texts from Hindu monasteries that speak of an awesome teacher they called St. Essa (where I think the name “Jesus” was adapted from) around this time period, I suspect he traveled East. He pops back up again in the Christian bible when he was about 28, throwin blasphemous teachings around in public and allegedly performing miracles like it was his day-job.

Josh was telling people that their physical lives were, by their nature, not quite “on target” with the nature of God. The Word; the OM; the I AM, according to Josh anyway, was that which resides beyond the polarity of “on target” and “off target". To illustrate this a little better, imagine a straight line on a piece of paper. Now imagine a sine curve that endlessly snakes above and below that line from negative to positive infinity. That straight line can be thought of as God; the unified perfect trajectory, and the curve that’s crossing the straight line over and over is the state of what the individual existence is. In order to exist in a physically polarized reality and universe, a deviation from the non-polar unified God line has to be adopted. This is what the concept of “original sin” was originally intended to be, that in order to live in this particular type of reality we must adopt a polarity; the top of the sine curve above the straight line, and the bottom of the sine curve beneath the straight line. This polarity, this “missing of the mark”, this “sin” that we’re born into, was never intended to have a moral connotation attached to it when Josh was speaking of it, just to explain how it is that we’re capable of inhabiting a polar universe of “+" and “-". Through the confusion of this monumental detail, millions and millions of people interpret the concept of “original sin” with the added baggage of an enormous guilt construct that they carry around on their hearts throughout their lives; a guilt construct that Josh never intended to be there, but was artificially added to the mix the day 7+ different words for misdeeds were all pigeon-holed into a Germanic-derived word for “criminal" and “evil”.

Now that we understand what Josh was actually talking about, we can understand why his words were indeed so blasphemous to the Hebrew religious leaders of the time. Whereas they taught that sin was an act, Josh taught that sin was our state of being, how we're physically capable of existence, and that various acts and thoughts have the capacity to increase or decrease the extremes of the individual deviation from perfection because each individual person has a direct connection to the I AM independent of religious leaders and authorities. Acts and thoughts that increase deviation from perfection stretch the peaks of the sine curve far away from the straight line, while acts and thoughts that decrease this deviation from perfection can be thought of as shrinking the amplitude of the sine curve down to where it dances closer to the appearance of the straight line. By these teachings, the most accurate way to realize the mind of the I AM is to work towards decreasing one’s own polarity, which is a task of understanding and patience.

To decrease how much the individual sine curve of sin deviates from the straight line it sprouted from, polarities of thought need to be brought into question, because it is through the adoption of further polarities that the individual is greater distanced from the unity of the Word. When a person seeks to further their decent into individuality, they are by definition furthering their decent into polarity. The polar distinction of self vs. not-self is, in effect, THE concept that launches individuality from unity consciousness; it’s the thought that pulls your strand of the straight line out like a rubber band and snaps it into vibration so that you are capable of perceiving two separate parts of the whole that you actually are: the part of you that you identify with as your ego-self (the “+” part of the curve above the straight line, the independent rational agent projecting action and intent), and the environment that you’re perceiving (the “-“ part o the curve below the straight line, the world that is the receiver of your projected action and intent). In reality the world around you IS you, and you’re looking at yourself through an illusion of separation.

By retreating from our individual descents into individuality, we begin to drop false ideas of being separate from the world around us. When you look into the eyes of a complete stranger, you are looking into your eyes. When you bask in the greatness of a beautiful scene of nature, you are enjoying the natural beauty of your nature. When you strike or wish ill on another, you're cursing an aspect of yourself that frustrates you, angers you, or you harbor guilt about. Understanding and assimilating this fact is how the amplitude of your sine curve can be reduced to more closely resemble that of the perfect straight line. When a person absolves all individuality and completely meshes their curve into the flawlessness of the straight line, they then cease to physically exist, because a polar universe requires some semblance of “+” and “-“ in order to inhabit it. I suspect that this is how Josh and a variety of other spiritually-acclaimed individuals throughout history “ascended” from the physical plane; they reached a point of non-polarity that cannot be translated or observed as three-dimensional forms or symbols.

In order to raise one’s consciousness to a point that closer approximates that of the All, a basic fundamental belief construct needs to be eradicated: the thought that you are separate from the Word and the world around you. This is the Grand Lie; the Grand Illusion that leads people to believe that they are an isolated phenomena in a reality that they have no control over. You are not separate from anything, ever. It’s impossible to be. Thousands of people were recently poisoned with formaldehyde in West Africa and are suffering a painful death to perpetuate the fear of Ebola while also maniacally curbing the population of the region, and though they might seem completely remote and unconnected to your life, they are a part of you. Granted, they are not nearly as large of a chunk of you as, say, your spouse or your best friend, but they are a part of who you are nonetheless because you have perceived the validity of their existence. This level of identification with everyone and everything around us leads to a variety of moral obstacles that each individual has to sort out on their own, because if one is to truly understand that the world they perceive around them is in fact just their inner-self turned inside-out and plastered in front of their faces using a complex set of three-dimensional dream symbols, they must then begin to take responsibility for the world they are projecting. This is a difficult thing to do, and very few people have ever mastered it (Josh being one of them), because it’s difficult to look at all of the pain, suffering, and atrocious things that have happened and that are happening in the world and accept that we, individually, are creating them. To observe a thing is to have a hand in the creation of it, otherwise it remains an ambiguity, a cloud of probability. By observing violence and suffering, you have had a hand in manifesting that violence and suffering. To observe a world wrought with violence and suffering is to observe that there is some degree of violence and suffering within yourself. You have allowed for the manifestation of these things in your experience through your implicit agreement that they are inevitabilities of human nature, and therefore inevitabilities of YOUR nature by default. When you generalize and say, “people are inherently selfish, brutish, and violent” you are implying that at a fundamental level you, yourself, are selfish, brutish, and violent, regardless of how strongly you want to hold on to the Grand Lie that “they” aren’t you.

To exist in a state of “missing the mark”, or sin, as we do here in this reality, is to imply that we are all in some way, shape, or form not at “ease". The truth of the matter is that we are all “dis-eased” by our very nature of existing in a polarity that has not yet resolved itself. Envision a guitar string at rest, not vibrating. This is the state of ease for this string. There is no back and forth pull of frequency disturbing it at this moment; it is at rest and silent. Now, imagine this string has just been plucked. It is now dis-eased and making sound, and is going to continue reducing in it’s polar extremes of vibration over time until it is back to it’s original, motionless, noiseless state of ease. The Word is this string at rest. It simply is (I Am); it makes no sound for our physical ears to perceive, whereas we are strings in motion. In order for ourselves to be perceivable, in order for us to come together and create glorious harmonics of thought and interaction, we must take on a state of dis-easement. You cannot have physical existence without dis-ease in the same fashion that you cannot create music without ever vibrating the string. Understanding this, it becomes necessary to explicitly state that our newfound (yet ancient) conceptualization of sin can also be linked to a broadened conceptualization of disease in a very synonymous fashion.

By understanding that we all, by definition, exist in some form of a state of sin (missing the mark) in order to inhabit the physical polar dimension of spacetime, we can also understand that to exist in sin is to exist in a state of disease. I’m not using the term in the traditional sense here; “dis-ease” in this case is simply a linguistic bridge to understanding how the degree of our polarity (sin) is equivalent to how far we are from a state of being at ease (unity, motionless, physically non-existent). In the developed world we think of disease in terms like “pathogens" or “carcinogens" or "nutrient imbalances”, but there is a fundamental flaw to this line of thinking that we have already addressed: We are not separate from the world around us. At all. It’s impossible to be. Therefore, the cognitive perspective of being assaulted by a pathogen or carcinogen is, at some intangible point, a fallacy that we must learn to see past because we’re not being assaulted; we’ve increased the amplitude of our “missing of the mark” sine curve of sin and are creating our condition. The pathogen, though very real, is not actually separate from you despite all physical illusions to the contrary. It is simply a part of your polarity, a portion of the “not-self” veil of separation that is being taken from the within and plastered on your physical experience of the without. Likewise, in the case of nutrient imbalances, we assume from our blind immersion in our drama that we must attain energy and life force from something that is “not-self”, when, ironically, it IS self and you’re just playing a game where you must consume three-dimensional symbols you’ve dreamt up to survive.

I suspect this is how the various authentic breatharians around the word get away with not eating or drinking, by realizing on a fundamental level that it’s kind of a silly waste of time to go through the middle-man symbol of consuming an article of food. Realistically, the energy that is manifesting the physical symbol (the food) first originates within the consciousness of the individual, and we’re just going through a song-and-dance ritual in order to place that energy back inside of us. Once again, by recognizing the fallacy of reinforcing the self/not-self illusion with these concepts of needing or fighting against something “out there” for the sake of the individual’s survival, the amplitude of the sine curve of sin is reduced closer to being the unified, non polar straight line; the absolution of sin.  You’re already dreaming the food into existence as a symbol of certain energies, so why not just assimilate those energies from within without going through all the work of digestion and elimination? In your dreams, do you need to eat to live? Of course not! Well, this life is a dream too, just a more complex one that’s all-too-easy to get wrapped up in and forget what’s actually going on.

Clearly, a person can starve to death. That tends to be the norm in situations where a person doesn’t eat, but starvation cannot be said to be an absolute rule either, because there are documented examples of people going multiple months, while being monitored, without ever taking a sip of water or a bite of food, while remaining in pristine health regardless the whole time. I am not implying that now, magically, nobody ever has to eat or drink again to survive, because this is just blatantly not the case. There are two different taps of life force that are available to the individual: one sprouts from the inside, and one flows to them from outside. We, as a species, almost ubiquitously utilize the flow from outside while ignoring altogether the existence of the tap that reside inside us. One cannot simply shut off the flow of life force from the outside and expect to survive when the inner tap hasn’t even been recognized, let alone turned on; that’s starvation. Obviously a West-African culture of people who are starving and dying of plagues are going to continue to do so, because they are so afflicted with physical torment, pain and fear that its rather unreasonable to ask them to think of anything other than how separate they are from the cold harsh world around them. Their worlds are as polar and “off the mark” as it gets on this planet right now, so they cannot be reasonably expected to suddenly jump to a state of profound spiritual non-polar enlightenment that is beyond the primal need for physical symbol sustenance from their current position. In the realities they are each creating, hunger and the need to feed their families are both extremely real things, and they therefore need to acquire that food to survive. If they cannot acquire this food, with their consciousness so enmeshed in the vivid tragic manifestation they’re creating, they will die, because in the game they’re playing (the same game the vast majority of all human beings are playing as well) not taking in energies from physically-derived symbols originating from “not-self” means death.

The fact of the matter is that each and every human being is capable of manifesting a world they desire, and a physical body to match. We become physically ill because we are projecting from inside a dis-easement. We physically degrade into senility because we pollute our bodies with symbols of death. We do not need to consume symbols within our dream to live, because we are the creator and architect of the dream in the first place. We play these games so that we can learn something about ourselves that would otherwise be impossible to learn if we just wielded infinite power all the time, so we blind ourselves from the vast greatness from whence we sprout to facilitate the learning process. The time has come, however, for Sapiens to rise above these mental traps and cyclic loops. We don’t actually need to die, we don’t actually need to eat, we don’t actually need to drink, and we don’t actually need to sleep. We tell ourselves that we do, and we perform daily ritual acts and regularly speak spells of affirmation to solidify these false beliefs, but in the end the option is still always available to become lucid in this dream and put down all the restrictive rules we’ve been playing by. I am not saying I am capable of these feats, but I have seen enough evidence to know that they are not only possible, they will one day be the norm for our race, and I will continue to grow towards this miraculous reality at the pace that is right for me.

Hunger, poverty, and war will become extinct; likely even in our lifetime. According to Mikey and Gabby, two friends of mine that have frequented my dreams here and there since I was young, the year 2038 is going to be quite a party; at least, that’s what they keep sayin’ anyway. The way they speak of it there is already bottles of champaign gettin popped in anticipation of the coming celebration. A few decades to a century or two after this, disease and global pollution will be completely eradicated. Following closely to this monumental evolution, human death itself will become unnecessary. Human lifetimes will span millennia in joy rather than a few miserable decades of strife and pain. Creativity will expound exponentially, and all will live in a state of ecstasy for the world they are creating because they, individually, have all purged themselves of the gross deviations from “the mark” of the I Am. I see no other way for this to unfold; the critical mass of consciousness has already been reached and the momentum will only continue to grow towards this inevitable outcome. Entities will one day come and go from this spaceship of Earth at will, abandoning the sloppiness of physical death for the more efficient route of exit taken by guys like Josh. Earth will again become the Eden it once was.

So, in conclusion, everything you’ve ever held to be true about the nature of sin likely needs to be brought under a bright light. Sin is to “miss the mark”, akin to the concept of a sine curve never quite straightening itself out, and is a requirement for any semblance of three-dimensional existence. Sin should not necessarily have the moral connotation of “criminal” or “evil” attached to it, and can accurately be related to the concept of being dis-eased. The origins of the spiritual conceptualizations of sin are vast, numerous, and intricate, and resemble in no accurate fashion the sloppy Germanic-derrived word we currently use today to summarize multiple different forms of misdeeds and transgressions. Sin is disease, and disease is sin, and through the depolarization of the self with expanding rather than limiting conceptualizations of identity the overall amplitude of the individual’s sin can be diminished. The closer the individual gets towards non-polarity, or unity consciousness, the less the individual will require impetus from the “outside” word for sustenance and the less the individual can be negatively influenced by things that are “outside” of themselves, but this requires by nature a divinely high level of responsibility to be taken with regards to what, exactly, the individual is perceiving in their reality, and therefore creating. Josh owned up to every piece of sin in the entire world he was perceiving. He understood that this was his reality, and that when he observed a beggar suffering in the street or mass amounts of people otherwise in pain, he was manifesting a world where such things occurred and that it was, at the end of the day, his cross to carry. He took complete responsibility for the sin of the world he created, and he did so like a champ. We can really all learn a great deal from the study of guys like Josh. Each one of us is personally responsible for the sin, the “missing of the mark”, of the world we’re individually perceiving. Each one of us has the weight of a world’s worth sin to own up to. We can no longer say to ourselves, “I didn’t kill that guy. I didn’t rape that girl,” and actually believe ourselves, because we intuitively know better. If you perceived it, you made it possible, and you did it. Take responsibility for the web you’ve weaved, and allow this higher responsibility to infuse you with the state of Agapic Compassion characteristic of the I AM.

We all have a cross to carry. Pick it up, and let's go.


No comments:

Post a Comment