Oct 14 2007
Turmoil Inside, Trouble Outside - The Circle of Unconscious Creation
Cyrano’s Journal Online and its semi-autonomous subsections (Thomas Paine’s Corner, The Greanville Journal, CJO Avenger, and VoxPop) would be delighted to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to subscribe, type “CJO subscription” in the subject line and send your email to
“In a nutshell, the mistake we are making is that we fear crime and hate the criminal. We should shift towards simply protecting society by disarming the criminals and removing their access to society while treating them with genuine compassionate during their detention. We should keep them in custody until they shift their attitude. Their confinement is not meant to be a punishment. We don’t want them to suffer; we just don’t want them to be able to do any more harm.”
By Tom Razzeto
10/14/7
I’m not one of those people who believes that there is no such thing as evil, at least from the human perspective. I look into the world and see endless examples of innocent people being intentionally harmed by others.
City after city is troubled with high crime rates and even with all of the money and effort that is spent on the problem, it remains a significant issue. Is there a better way? Is there something that we are missing? What should we do with people who do harm?
I would like to start my answer with the following vocal skit.
Imagine that you are a woman walking back to your car at night. You see a suspicious man up ahead and you start to worry. Suddenly, he leaps out at you and pushes you into the bush while you desperately scream for help!
Fortunately, a police officer is cruising right by. He jumps out of his car, rushes over to you and proclaims, “We are all one! Everything is beautiful! Everything happens for a reason!”
You frantically shout, “Hey, if I wanted to listen to that kind of nonsense, I could go to one of those crazy churches on Sunday! I need help now! Get this guy off of me!”
Now, in a strange way, the things the officer said may be true. From the mystical perspective, everything is ultimately the eternal divine essence in various forms. But that doesn’t fully address the question about what to do with this attacker, does it?
Of course the officer should grab the guy, handcuff him and take him to jail! He shouldn’t be allowed to run around in society and attack people! He’s dangerous! I believe that it is good and proper for us to protect society from dangerous people.
But that is not all there is to the picture. In my opinion, the most important part has to do with the thoughts that we choose to think while we deal with these people and the emotions that we experience as a result of those thoughts.
Our example may also have a racist aspect to it with some people thinking, “Those dirty, no good people always come into our neighborhood and cause trouble! They are so worthless that they don’t even deserve to exist!” Actually, as you know, in situations like this, many of their thoughts would be much harsher than that.
And what are the results of these judgmental thoughts? Do they themselves have an effect? Do these thoughts immediately affect the person thinking them? Do they attract more crime in the future?
This is the process of creation. I believe that most people would greatly benefit by learning what I call “conscious creation” rather than using the habitual, reactive “unconscious creation” seen all throughout society.
The first step in conscious creation is to make a distinction between “inner creation” and “outer creation”.
Inner creation is the creation of your emotions, your personal subjective experience of the immediate moment. The significance of this cannot be overstated since these are the actual experiences that make up your entire life!
Inner creation instantly creates any human emotion from pure agony to total ecstasy. Each and every human being can experience all of these emotions. And, while we all can create these emotions consciously by choosing our thoughts and attitude, most people unconsciously create them with habitual thoughts and reactions.
Outer creation is a process that unfolds through time. It’s the attraction of people, things and events into your life. These are all outer conditions.
Your thoughts and attitude instantly create your emotions of the moment and your thoughts, attitude, emotions and beliefs, which are habitual thoughts, attract the conditions of the outer world as time unfolds. The outer reflects the inner and it all begins with a thought. When you are aware of the process, you can consciously choose. When you are unaware of the process, you just react habitually, usually following the dictates of society.
If I hold emotional judgment in my heart in the form of frustration, anger or hatred regarding the current conditions of the world, those emotional seeds will, in time, bring forth new corresponding disharmonious outer expressions such as tension between other people and perhaps even violence or war.
Since I may also emotionally reject the new outer conditions that arise, I may find myself stuck in a circle of unconscious creation, a circle of disharmony. This is basically what is happening all throughout the world today in every aspect of society.
It is important to note that the circle of unconscious creation is a private, personal experience under the direct control of each individual. Yes, there are also dynamic energetic connections between people but the important point is that each individual has control over their own thoughts, which is the origin of their emotional experience, which, in turn, attracts the outer events as time unfolds.
In our earlier example, the attacker may have felt anger towards society for various reasons, perhaps because he did not feel accepted. This anger may have churned within him every day and continually dominated his inner experience. Finally, one day, he snapped into action and lashed out against an easy prey. This is not meant to justify his actions, only to help explain them.
Meanwhile, what is going on in the hearts and minds of other people?
The community may plant seeds of hatred towards criminals as the media expresses anxiety about the crime rate and sensationalizes violent crime. These seeds are nurtured over time with habitual, judgmental thoughts and grow to attract new troubling events into the community.
In addition to feeling anger towards these criminals, people may also have an acute fear of crime in general. This fear may start out with thoughts such as, “I am always vulnerable to dangerous criminals everywhere I go. I am not even safe in my own home!” This steady thought of ever-present danger creates an unnatural, constant fear.
Both fear and hatred work together to act as a powerful magnet to attract difficult events. It’s not that God or the universe punishes people for thinking bad thoughts, it’s simply that they are attracting what they focus on. It is also important to note that our culture has an overwhelming focus directly on violence itself as revealed by what we see on TV and in the movies. These are disharmonious seeds and they can only produce troubling events.
Presently, we try to deter crime by adding more police and taking other measures, but this does not really remove the fear. In fact, these things usually confirm the belief that danger is always everywhere and that the constant fear is justified.
If the real cause of crime is the attraction generated by fear and hatred, then no matter how many officers you have, there will always be crime until the fear and hatred are removed.
Today, there is little concern for the health and well-being of people who have stumbled in the eyes of the law. If we think that criminals are permanently defective people and treat them with scorn, we create a situation that has little chance of getting better.
In a nutshell, the mistake we are making is that we fear crime and hate the criminal. We should shift towards simply protecting society by disarming the criminals and removing their access to society while treating them with genuine compassionate during their detention. We should keep them in custody until they shift their attitude. Their confinement is not meant to be a punishment. We don’t want them to suffer; we just don’t want them to be able to do any more harm.
If we shift our thoughts and attitude to genuine compassion, it will change the seeds that are planted into seeds of harmony.
We don’t hate our children just because they sometimes behave badly. They need to build their own character with our guidance. If they see that we really do care for them even though they might misbehave at times, they are more likely to correct their attitude and actions in a way that goes to the core of their being. They can truly transform themselves. Only they can do it but they may need us to provide the essential guidance to do so.
We should treat our misguided adults in a similar fashion.
And these same principles apply to war. Generals, politicians and common people frequently fear and hate their enemies. Even peace protestors often fear war and hate the war establishment. All this fear and hatred attract dramatic outer conditions that match the turmoil felt within. In order to reap a peaceful future, seeds of peace need to be planted in the present.
We are all one family. When we work together, when we stop competing and start cooperating, we will bring forth the fruit of cooperation, which is peace in the outer world. We can all work towards this goal by using our own power of thought to create personal peace within each of us now.
If you are inspired, start meditating and study the works of mystics and non-dual teachers. I suggest that you take a few minutes once or twice a day and do your own meditations for both personal and world peace.
You can learn more about Tom Razzeto and his worldview at www.useyourmagic.com or you can reach him at
===============================================================
We at Cyrano’s and Thomas Paine’s Corner need your help! Our editors and writers work hard to provide you with the most original and diverse progressive content on the Internet. We are fiercely determined to provide enough people with a sound political education so that, in authentic democratic fashion, the will not only liberate their minds, but eventually cure the economic and moral disease afflicting our nation.
We derive no financial remuneration for our efforts to build a social order based on justice, democracy, compassion, and humanity. Isn’t that your desire as well? In fact, it costs us money to maintain our Internet presence.
If each of you donated a mere $5 a month—a trifling sum these days, the price of pack of smokes or a fancy beer—we would have enough money to cover our overhead, upgrade our server capacity, expand our audio offerings, and begin to provide you with compelling video content.
By helping us in this fashion you will be assisting the birth of a new type of American democracy, one which, genuinely rooted in the ideals we profess to honor, will finally measure up to its promise.
For you, for us, for everything that you think needs defending, make a donation that fits your budget today by clicking
The US has a history of going into other countries, destabilizing or removing governments who will not help us steal their wealth or take advantage of their cheap labor. Then when there’s “blowback” and we are attacked we call the attackers terrorists and criminals. “Blowback” is when there are reprisals against American interests which are not understood by the American public because the American public has been kept in the dark about the secret, criminal activities that we’ve been engaged in that undermine other peoples, countries and cultures, and which has motivated them to fight back.
So when these reprisals take place, our government with the help of corporate media, calls the perpetrators terroists and their behavior evil. And in fact, we are forced to defend ourselves because we really are in danger. And in defending ourselves our children die and become disabled. But it is our own government that perpetrates this evil and forces us to defend ourselves when we would rather live in peace, because they are the ones who consciously set out cheat other people in the first place. So you have to be very careful who you call evil. It’s not always so easy to see where it begins. And if you can’t see where it begins, or refuse to look because you are brainwashed so that will not see where it begins, there’s no chance that you will really take responsibility for it. This is apparently where we are now. Fighting for our lives but not fighting the worst of the criminals.
Sow a thought
Reap an action.
Sow an action
Reap a habit.
Sow a habit
Reap a character.
Sow a character
Reap a destiny.
This is an excellent article. You very clearly make an important distinction between living consciously, and total spiritual passivity, or what I call “jumping to the higher perspective.” Yes, the higher perspective may be the ultimate truth, but here, in life, we have bodies and possesions to protect, and the ability to set boundaries is a key to a long and healthy existence.
One important point, however, that needs to be addressed, is about the set of values that we use to guide our perceptions of what is right and wrong. What constitutes “damage” or “harm” to another person, or their possesions? The example you used, of the woman being attacked is a very uncomplicated one that any sane person would agree is a clear criminal act. In our society, however, the concept of “victim” has become broader and broader over time, and not just actual violent acts, but even the apparent (subjective) threat of violence can bring criminal charges, not to mention actions that are entirely non-violent, and not harmful to anyone or anything.
I would offer that how we define our rules is in and of itself in desperate need of being addressed, and the society we aspire to, where criminals are treated with compassion cannot be fully realized until we find a way of defining what a criminal is that is truly fair and just. In a society where peacful anti-war protestors, to give one example, are routinely arrested for being a “threat,” it is clear that We, The People have completely lost control over the right and ability to define criminal activity. Some “criminals” today are only threats to the status quo, and the law is being used to protect the worst criminals among us, who are those who make, and enforce the laws.
I am an advocate for a return to a common law system, where there are two simple rules: do not harm anyone, and honor all contracts. How these rules are interpreted is the task set to We, The People, in the form of juries, to not only enforce the law, but to create the law, case by case, in an ever-evolving system of precedent according to our expanding consciousness as a society. Laws today are made by politicians, who are in the pockets of special interests, including their own, who constantly stoke the fires of the the very “anti-criminal” rhetoric that you point out. It is Marketing 101:
1. Identify (or manufacture) problem -”The criminals are everywhere!”
2. Introduce solution -”Elect me, because I’m ‘tough on crime!’”
And what does being “tough in crime” mean? Pass broader, stricter laws with more and more draconian punishments.
It is imperative, if we are to see a truly just society, that We, The People take back the power to create he law from the inept, and conflict-of-interest ridden politicians, and embrace the right and responsibility to shape our own lives.
love your articles.
Your articles are wonderful.
Actually, I must call myself out on something in my reply…
I realize that I fell into some pretty negative projection towards the system and politicians, and it is certainly a lesson to me on just how easy it is to continue the cycle of unconscious negative thoughts and feelings that create the problems in this world.
No need to read this emergence as it merely pokes an invisible finger in the eye of philosophy, burns the foam peanuts of dogma on the slippery altar of the Void, and drops mythical, atomic angels on the hallowed, titanium-lined halls of science. Then it doesn’t do that! Intellectual blasphemy, (by dummies for dummies) ahead! Where’s the point? There is no point! Is that the point, then? This is not communication.
Perhaps the author above will leave this here, just because it appears to be here?
It seems that the current world paradigm abounds, (and is bound in) classic, positive thinking approaches. In the past, it was a form of intellectual hucksterism that emerged as response to cracks in the conceptual walls that hold us. That example appeared to be an example of pyramid-scam exploitation where, if everyone would only apply the principles, everyone would prosper/win/benefit. Yet, it is difficult to see how that kind of positive thinking then appears to support and create “negative” scenarios for those who did not practice it or failed in doing so. From there, we have the neo-newage continuation of that fantasy that comes in a box of ornate, nicely scented, spiritual band-aids. Any apparent solutions as as good as emergent phenomena as an aside in contrast to the support of cultural dogmas and imperatives. It appears to be more of a feel-good about what you want and do, more than the kind of transformation and actuality that it alludes to, in practice.
Now, I am not negating or criticizing the practical, reactionary ideas that the above, well-written article suggests in the sense that the article offers a bit of Yin to the overabundance of apparent Yang where things seem to be so koyanisqqatsi that it would make a Zen Monk think twice about No-Mind. No, my spiel is more on about a brutal, uncompromising stance akin to an uncomfortable, even initially depressing, honesty and concerns about nature, both personal and phenomenal.
For us, there is only the realm of thought, i.e., our abstractions of what we believe to be real.
As thinking beings, we abstract what may be actual. In other words, we live in an illusory world in the sense that all thoughts we have about sensory information and everything else is not at all concrete or tangible, but our species is able to live comfortably in a projection of substitutions that tend, for the most part, to function for us.
There may be a world that may exist “as it is”. In fact, it may be boundless, holistic, formless, etc. The distinction is that we are, like fish in water, are both comfortable with and largely unaware of our predicament of being buffered and bound in thoughts — which leads us to speculate on ideas of positive and negative thinking and other forms of mental, word magic. We talk about senses, scientific data, etc. and while our ideas may correspond with what appears to be external to us, the fact that we can only represent and experience it through facsimiles transcends our comprehension.
Mimicking our observations and ideas that relate to our organism, our natural inclination is to comprise our self-concept with various boundaries that seem to originate as categories of “me” and, “not me”. Being literally lost in thought, we fail to see that whatever that process may actually be, it is most likely naturally emergent and the results we experience are merely thoughts based on those rather arbitrary concepts.
As an illustration, in our understanding, our organism has a defense system that naturally distinguishes between “this organism” and “not this organism”. To underscore the predicament we are in, asking certain questions about our analog, symbolic self-definition clarifies the essential problem of mind and our belief in and encapsulation within, it. Does the organism require thought or emotion to perform that function? Though we cannot know for certain, (about anything really) we can assume that, even if the brain, (which I would distinguish from mind as far as what we can tangibility goes) is vegetative and consciousness is lost, the immune system can still function.
Mind is the solution and the problem all wrapped-up into one. It is certainly able to imagine a will and a self based on a rather precise separateness that, ultimately, is purely a convenient hypothetical. It tends to obscure itself, even to the point of designing transcendent, mystical ideas, gods, demons, heavens, and hells. It wraps itself in as many guises as possible in order to perpetuate its value as more than a tool that emerges from the organism itself. Science and philosophy, regardless of their apparent impact on the emergent behavior and dynamism we seem to observe, are similar divergences into conceptual reality layered on actuality. A simple insight into this comes from the mind’s creation of the word, “metaphor”, as if there were something special about the very essence of the mind’s reality and function. On careful inspection, everything we think and think about is nothing more than a metaphor with varying degrees of substance with assignments of objective or subjective placement in the thoughtsphere.
The assumption that we have will and that we can and do impose it on existence is supportive to the notion of a concrete, (as opposed to emergent and ephemeral) self. In that case, along with ideas about immortality, consciousness, and existence, we find the cultural imperatives give rise to personal identity and then, in a cult-like fashion, we have no other choice but to reinforce that notion using a slew of available tools that are provided once personal boundaries and the concept of responsibility and cause and effect are established.
Positive thinking and acting is comforting and appears to be constructive and uplifting. It appears to be a solution. I have no qualms with that stance, (after all, all I offer is more strings of abstraction here so hypocrisy abounds). It still smacks, in its current incarnation, with the aroma of moralism, relative reactionism, and religion-like belief in word magic that is relativistic and unbalanced, essentially. While such notions are fine and dandy in the tragicomedy of the mental matrix, they don’t hold-up well, just as wax wings begin to melt with proximity towards the Sun.
In this scenario, there is no need for reform or counsel. It merely seems that the idea of the Tao holds closer to the essence of what may be real where what we call nature and our own nature is merely an integral part of a dynamism of emergent behavior, regardless of our symbolic layer of thought patterns.
It may be self-evident that, if you have an automobile, you can see it, touch it, and drive it. It has a concreteness to it that most would agree on. Yet, this is not the case with the mind and the self, at all. You may have evidence concerning both, but evidence, in a scientific sense, is not meant to be a substitute for proof. The same concreteness that one applies to a car or other objects disappears upon close inspection and careful scrutiny. You may have a brain, but you cannot hold or touch the mind itself, nor are thoughts that connect and link and define everything imbued with any substance. When you try to find the very self, (the observer) that you supposedly are, you can look within or without and it always escapes observation.
And so, feeling good is important to us, even though our feelings are also more abstract thought disguised as sensory and sensual actualities. Once we imagine positive or negative, the opposite arises. Try putting a self-styled, “positive” thinker in a room with a few, (normally not self-labeling) “negative” thinkers and see how that goes. Often, positive thinkers exhibit various tendencies that some could consider negative, egocentric, egotistical, elitist, hypocritical, and the list goes on. It behooves the positive thinker to inflate their concept of will and self and then, logically, to not only reform others, but to begin to impose a “better way” and solutions that prove, once again, to be purely relative, situationally, and not necessarily Universal or consistently applicable — somewhat like what is called neurosis.
This is not anti-positive, or pro-negative rhetoric. It is merely a futile attempt to posit a glaring problem that is far greater in scope and more intrinsic than answers proposed in the traditional, meritocracy inducing, power of thought approach. It is an attempt to delineate the obviously impossible problem at the core of the predicament we all experience without resorting to historically obvious repetitions of thought applied to thought equals valid solution. It is there that we might be brave and bold enough to see that our problem is our need for solutions and that the entire scenario is a self-contrived dilemma by our species based on our unquestioning belief in and subservience to mind itself. We can imagine nothing other than its boundaries and nature. Without thought itself, what is there for us and how could we place ourselves at the center of everything and ascribe the powers of free will and individuality to our own perspective?
That is totally heretical thinking, but with it comes a very troubling and dissociative insight that has no particular purpose in itself and begins to stand as a negative counter-point to every concept abou things in themselves. This is, for most, the final taboo and the least likely place anyone would ever look for any semblance of truth — it is the end of solutions that create problems, at least personally. Without that, the cycles repeat and our capacity to record and remember the exploits of mind over time constantly reminds us that no idealism or spiritual diversion has yet to transform the world into what we imagine, hope, and believe it should be.
With this one, final step, perhaps, just maybe, something might actually happen that is not merely a repetitious dealing of hackneyed permutations within the context of human culture and as the penchant of an animal that may be different from other animals, but cannot even begin to see itself, primarily, as an animal/organism.
Faith, hope, and belief may be essential to tribes, cultures, and illustrious, industrial undertakings, but they stand to serve as time-based distractions from the only moment of existence that we can realistically abstract — taking us sometimes frighteningly close to a seemingly foreign, ineffable, and immediate “thinness” that we trade, (perhaps instinctual) for the world, (quite literally) that we KNOW about. Every human endeavor requires that trinity and, pragmatically, they serve to keep the wheel turning lest ignorance be bliss within the folly of wisdom.
If you labor, long enough, even informally, on the question of free will versus determinism, (after casting your cupidity for self and will into the crucible of moth and candle truth-seeking) the supporting arguments for both can be compelling and convincing and are historical gems that become the mote in the eye of humanity as it gazes upon itself. The two sides of the quesiton of personal action versus providence are polar opposites and persuasion towards either side can be lengthy, unsatisfying, recursive, and, eventually, moot. In fact, the dualist might merely note that as conceptual polar-opposites, they simply arise together and their fusion is merely a resolution to the analysis, (dissection) of the mind’s contemplation of them.
Minuscule “hints” about this strange and contrary negation abound through literature, religion, and philosophy, but it is so glaringly obvious and direct that we cannot help but miss it and overshoot it with every attempt we make. In fact, you cannot understand it, find it, or hold it, because, well, those are all ideas about it. Even hints “about” are misleading, in this case and what is contained herein is acknowledged to be futile, pointless, and other than being a phenomena that you think you are encountering as you read, without function or merit or a pragmatic result.
A lot can be said by and about someone who does not exist at all, to the point that it signifies absolutely nothing. Can you not think positive or negative about this?
Of course, logically, we can poke holes in anything: Identify that positive thinking is a productive solution, and point out its benefits by noting the negative aspects of conscious or unconscious thoughts. No matter how you slice it, the process is cyclic and we deal with our internal reflections and proclivities that tend to be escapist, idealistic, progressive. We easily accept the psychological premise of “unconscious” thought as if they are thoughts and not merely aspects of the current pattern, at large, that we seem to be unaware of. That creates an imaginary subset for an entire bag of divisions and definitions to which we then subscribe on an “as if” basis. The implication is that one has thoughts that one is not conscious of, (therefore, they are magically influencing me as if I thought them even thought they are not thoughts that I am currently thinking) therefore, they are volitional and not merely a part of my nature. From there, we go on to volition, choice, and responsibility based on, absurdly uncontrollable, unconscious motivators that are obviously based on a “past” related to nature and hurting that, for the most part, was/is out of one’s control. We must conclude then, that now, it is merely a matter of “choice” for the facade that emerges from the presence via the process in the pattern.
“We are such stuff as dreams are made on, rounded with a little sleep”. The Tempest - William Shakespeare
“There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so”. - (Act II, Scene II) - William Shakespeare