DeDukshyn
22nd July 2011, 01:15
Here's something I wrote a few years back for something specific, but I wanted to share it here as well. I posted on here somewhere that I'd share some tips on communication - this can be considered part of that. I think that Ekhart Tolle, if I am not mistaken also has a similar view on language as does the spiritual author Ken Carey.
What if I told you about this conspiracy where there is a secret hidden "code" in human language that influences our behavior and our minds?
Language is a nothing more than a set of agreements. We’ve just “agreed” to call this colour “red” and that object a “tree.” They really are not those things at all, but those things are just the sounds and symbols we have agreed upon to represent those things in our communication.
So a tree is not a tree. The entity in which we have agreed to call a tree just is what it is. To claim it is anything more is just to make some noises or symbols in an arbitrary representation based on previous agreed upon symbols and noises. This is the downfall of all human language – it is at best a false representation of perceptions based on agreements under the assumption that we believe everyone has the exact same agreement as to what those symbols represent.
The biggest issue is that we believe that language is what is real, and that the universe is represented by our language and that if our perceptions don’t fit with the language, then it must be our perceptions that are wrong; the language becomes the structure for the belief system. This causes the filtering out of all perceptions that cannot be represented by the individual’s linguistic ability.
There is a native legend that says when the first Europeans arrived with their massive ships anchored off shore that many of the natives could not see the ships. The medicine man of the community noticed the problem and quickly used his language to create a word for “ship” (ship was previously a completely foreign concept – the natives had never experienced a “ship” in any of their perceptions or imaginings or language and therefore not a part of their belief system) and began describing these “ships” to the village people – who then began to perceive them. The language had become the belief system and “ships” did not exist in these beliefs, so the incompatible perceptions were thus removed by the brain. The medicine man would have had awareness outside of his belief system which is why he could perceive the ships and likely why he was the medicine man.
So a set of agreements of arbitrary symbols and sounds has become the basis of belief for humanity; any perception that cannot be represented by this belief system is automatically deemed as illogical / wrong / fantasy / etc. just for not being part of that belief system, which is arbitrary anyway. That’s not logical at all.
Thus, language can be and currently is a severe handicap for humanity and learning and growth in general.
Language and Belief:
We use language incorrectly and we train our children to use language incorrectly. To be responsible with language, we must not let it become a part of our belief system.
To do this is really quite simple: Know that it is an arbitrary system of symbolism and use it as an arbitrary system of symbolism. When you do this, the entity ceases to become a “tree,” and becomes once again just the entity that it is that we agree to call a “tree.” This way the symbols for tree stay as symbols and do not turn into a belief.
If everyone did this today, half of all the miscommunications in the world would instantly stop because we would all agree that our language is just a bunch of agreements and we could easily recognize all the problems that go along with this type of system.
For a stupid and simple example:
American man, “This is a tree!”
Foreign man, “No! it’s a bushkappa!”
American man, “listen here you idiot, it’s a tree and all options are on the table!”
Foreign man, “Bushkappa!!!”
Or:
American man, “I call this a tree!”
Foreign man, “I call it a Bushkappa!”
American man “fine, but all options are still on the table!”
Because it has been left out of their belief system, the disagreement in the second dialogue is no longer personally threatening to either party. People hold their belief systems very dear to their hearts. Each person has created their own belief system (some with extra programming added ; ) and it is what they see as defining themselves – it becomes the “source” of the Ego – the very thing that the ego uses to base its existence on. If the belief system breaks – so does the ego. So we tend to see our belief system as an extension of ourselves and thus defend it with our lives.
“This is a tree.”
- assumes that the sounds and letters that make “tree” is reality and the entity represents that reality
- is a blatant lie – the object is not a tree, but it is a God created or evolved entity that exists with or without my label or acknowledgment
- assumes that everyone else calls it a tree and has the same definition of tree as me
- reinforces all of the above to continue the perpetual cycle of miscommunication
- labeling on its own is a form of judgment
“I call this a tree.”
- assumes nothing, is not a judgment, leaves me an honest man, and makes my communication more clear.
Such a trivial thing yet with such profound implications because it causes a perception shift and reveals (forces rather) a true distinction between what something is, and what we give it as a label – we are never taught to make this distinction in life. Weird...isn’t it?
Correct use of language goes far beyond leaving it out of your belief system, and far beyond the scope of this writing (maybe another time), but doing just that is the first step that is needed in breaking free of the limitations that language has over each and every human on this planet. We have to stop treating language as structure for our belief system and start treating it for the tool as it was meant to serve us so that we may align ourselves closer with the frequencies of truth.
What if I told you about this conspiracy where there is a secret hidden "code" in human language that influences our behavior and our minds?
Language is a nothing more than a set of agreements. We’ve just “agreed” to call this colour “red” and that object a “tree.” They really are not those things at all, but those things are just the sounds and symbols we have agreed upon to represent those things in our communication.
So a tree is not a tree. The entity in which we have agreed to call a tree just is what it is. To claim it is anything more is just to make some noises or symbols in an arbitrary representation based on previous agreed upon symbols and noises. This is the downfall of all human language – it is at best a false representation of perceptions based on agreements under the assumption that we believe everyone has the exact same agreement as to what those symbols represent.
The biggest issue is that we believe that language is what is real, and that the universe is represented by our language and that if our perceptions don’t fit with the language, then it must be our perceptions that are wrong; the language becomes the structure for the belief system. This causes the filtering out of all perceptions that cannot be represented by the individual’s linguistic ability.
There is a native legend that says when the first Europeans arrived with their massive ships anchored off shore that many of the natives could not see the ships. The medicine man of the community noticed the problem and quickly used his language to create a word for “ship” (ship was previously a completely foreign concept – the natives had never experienced a “ship” in any of their perceptions or imaginings or language and therefore not a part of their belief system) and began describing these “ships” to the village people – who then began to perceive them. The language had become the belief system and “ships” did not exist in these beliefs, so the incompatible perceptions were thus removed by the brain. The medicine man would have had awareness outside of his belief system which is why he could perceive the ships and likely why he was the medicine man.
So a set of agreements of arbitrary symbols and sounds has become the basis of belief for humanity; any perception that cannot be represented by this belief system is automatically deemed as illogical / wrong / fantasy / etc. just for not being part of that belief system, which is arbitrary anyway. That’s not logical at all.
Thus, language can be and currently is a severe handicap for humanity and learning and growth in general.
Language and Belief:
We use language incorrectly and we train our children to use language incorrectly. To be responsible with language, we must not let it become a part of our belief system.
To do this is really quite simple: Know that it is an arbitrary system of symbolism and use it as an arbitrary system of symbolism. When you do this, the entity ceases to become a “tree,” and becomes once again just the entity that it is that we agree to call a “tree.” This way the symbols for tree stay as symbols and do not turn into a belief.
If everyone did this today, half of all the miscommunications in the world would instantly stop because we would all agree that our language is just a bunch of agreements and we could easily recognize all the problems that go along with this type of system.
For a stupid and simple example:
American man, “This is a tree!”
Foreign man, “No! it’s a bushkappa!”
American man, “listen here you idiot, it’s a tree and all options are on the table!”
Foreign man, “Bushkappa!!!”
Or:
American man, “I call this a tree!”
Foreign man, “I call it a Bushkappa!”
American man “fine, but all options are still on the table!”
Because it has been left out of their belief system, the disagreement in the second dialogue is no longer personally threatening to either party. People hold their belief systems very dear to their hearts. Each person has created their own belief system (some with extra programming added ; ) and it is what they see as defining themselves – it becomes the “source” of the Ego – the very thing that the ego uses to base its existence on. If the belief system breaks – so does the ego. So we tend to see our belief system as an extension of ourselves and thus defend it with our lives.
“This is a tree.”
- assumes that the sounds and letters that make “tree” is reality and the entity represents that reality
- is a blatant lie – the object is not a tree, but it is a God created or evolved entity that exists with or without my label or acknowledgment
- assumes that everyone else calls it a tree and has the same definition of tree as me
- reinforces all of the above to continue the perpetual cycle of miscommunication
- labeling on its own is a form of judgment
“I call this a tree.”
- assumes nothing, is not a judgment, leaves me an honest man, and makes my communication more clear.
Such a trivial thing yet with such profound implications because it causes a perception shift and reveals (forces rather) a true distinction between what something is, and what we give it as a label – we are never taught to make this distinction in life. Weird...isn’t it?
Correct use of language goes far beyond leaving it out of your belief system, and far beyond the scope of this writing (maybe another time), but doing just that is the first step that is needed in breaking free of the limitations that language has over each and every human on this planet. We have to stop treating language as structure for our belief system and start treating it for the tool as it was meant to serve us so that we may align ourselves closer with the frequencies of truth.