Chop Wood … Carry Water

by Christopher Lovejoy on January 7, 2018

I flow and I rest, I rest and I flow, resting into flowing, flowing into resting, here and now buoyed by this moment, and this moment, and this moment, feeling into calm, clarity, composure, and contentment without forcing, without obsessing and compelling, and without resisting.

In my buoyancy, I bless the other to take note of the knots ~ not calm, not clear, not composed, not content, not comfortable ~ and as the note is taken, the contrast offers me a taste of me by taking a bite out of me, chewing me, and if I be true and wise to let it, digesting me.

In time, with time, the note is taken when the bite is given.

I slow down, I look deeply and I feel deeply: “thank you”.

A Preamble to Broaching the Big Four

Tragedy, malevolence, tyranny, and complexity: to say that these four indicators of the human condition are not pleasant topics would be an understatement. Curiously, at least in my mind, these topics are also not unpleasant, which to is not to say that they are pleasant.

I must confess, these topics fascinate me, but only when I do not oppress myself in the face of them, although I could be fooling myself into thinking these challenges are central to the human condition, and so, to acknowledge this, I treat their centrality as a working hypothesis.

Collectively, these four challenges are (a) perennial ~ enduring or continually recurring; (b) existential ~ affecting what it means to be human, offering deep contrast for understanding the meaning of being human; and (c) ontological ~ affecting the quality and vitality of being.

In making sense of these challenges, it helps to examine the meaning of condition.

The term condition is a complex one, doing double duty as both a noun and a verb. As a noun, a condition points to fate: “this is the way it is”; as a verb, condition points to destiny: “we can change the way it is” or “we can improve the way it is” or “we can affect the way it is”.

The human condition is a condition marked by tragedy, malevolence, tyranny, and complexity, ebbing and flowing with myriad expressions of despair, vengeance, arrogance, and indifference, respectively. In saying this, I marvel that human beings and human societies can even function at all.

Where does one even begin to approach these challenges inside a transpersonal space?

I already gave a response to this question (see above), but I know that more can be said.

This world, like all third density worlds, is alive with the play of duality, although said duality is neither readily nor easily construed as play, but more like work by way of fight, flight, and freeze, and this becomes all the more obvious when troubled worlds transition into fourth density.

In worlds of duality, potencies and polarities of contrast catalyze relations and realizations. Where there is despair, there is hope; where there is vengeance, there is forgiveness; where there is arrogance, there is humility; and where there is indifference, there is compassion.

Personal interest influenced by interpersonal interaction yield (eventually) to transpersonal integration.

Lenses for Viewing the Human Condition

Each challenge ~ tragedy, malevolence, tyranny, complexity ~ is viewable through four lenses.

Directly or indirectly, these catalysts contribute in their own way to learning and growing, catalyzing learning and growth in accordance with three basic orientations: serving the other more often than not; serving self almost exclusively; and serving neither self nor other, while being at the mercy of these four conditioners when they bite. I invite you to keep these points in mind as you pick up each lens.

The first lens is personal: “this ____ (indicate challenge) undermines/overwhelms my sense of safety and security, making it about me: me and my needs, me and my values, me and my goals, me and my interests; it triggers me, deeply affecting me and my cares, my concerns, my complaints.”

These challenges can get personal: “I feel hopelessly alone in my despair” in reaction to a tragedy; “my feeling of resentment simmered to a boil in bitterness until it overflowed with a thirst for vengeance” as an expression of malevolence; “I am arrogant enough to believe that I can dictate the fates of others and get away with it” as a precursor to tyranny; and “I am compelled to forgo compersion and compassion, to confront and conquer the complexity of this world in my own way” as a confession of being undermined/overwhelmed by complexity.

Sidenote: a deep interpretation of compersion with the other includes compassion for the other

I will be the first to admit that the temptation is strong to gloss over these statements, to minimize or normalize them, to set them aside or dismiss them and get on with your life, but I would suggest switching lenses whenever these temptations arise (more on this soon).

Realize, too, that in keeping your attention on these conditioners, a host of dark forces will (most times indirectly) present themselves for your consideration (easily triggered people, offensive acts, unusual delays, strange occurrences, and near misses, for example) as efforts to bring them to light pose a threat to those who depend on their perpetuation. I recommend patience, persistence, and perserverence.

Any emphasis on the personal dimension of life is characteristic of a third density consciousness seeking to deepen, broaden, and heighten awareness of self through what self can be and know, think and feel, give and take, say and do. When conscious persons can gather enough gravity of wisdom to move beyond themselves and turn their attention to others, a new lens is brought into play, a lens that is interpersonal.

To wit: “this _____ (indicate challenge) confronts our association or partnership in meeting our needs, values, goals, and interests through mutual attunement and alignment; this challenge triggers us both to address and resolve our mutual cares, concerns, and complaints.”

In association or partnership with another being, we do not feel so alone in the face of tragedy, malevolence, tyranny, or complexity, and even less alone when a strong sense of trust is present with and through the other with respect to intentions and judgments. This trust is challenged to the core of being, however, when tragedy, malevolence, tyranny, or complexity makes a sudden, unwelcome appearance.

These challenges are interpersonal: “I can feel you in the depths of your despair” in response to tragedy; or: “I can feel the slow burn of your resentment morphing into bitterness ~ I alarm myself by your thirst for vengeance” with the appearance of malevolence; or: “I can see through your arrogance in believing that you can dictate my fate and get away with it” with the rise of tyranny; and last but not least: “I concern myself that you are being compelled to forego compersion and compassion, to confront and conquer the complexity of this world in your own way.”

The interpersonal dimension of life and love characterizes a move into a fourth density consciousness to deepen, broaden, and heighten awareness of the other through what the other thinks and feels, says and does. As and when conscious shepherds hold the light of love to move beyond the other and turn their attentions to others in general, a new lens is brought into play, a lens that is transpersonal in nature.

Through a lens of consciousness that is transpersonal, the four perennial existential challenges can be viewed as subtle or obvious in their nature, origins, and outcomes; slow or quick to appear and develop; and readily apparent or carefully concealed, at least for a time.

With a 5D lens, one can be a mirror of consciousness through compersion and compassion, a mirror that is secured by a compersion that is broadly extended and by a compassion that is deeply expressed.

A more refined lens is impersonal in nature and is beyond the scope of this post. Suffice to say, where a 5D transpersonal lens is global in scope, a 6D impersonal lens is cosmic in scope. Consult the Law of One index if you wish to view this world through a 6D lens.

I will now broach the Big Four by turns, starting with tragedy.

How Best to Broach Tragedy and Malevolence?

In our collective attempts to keep tragedy in perspective, we write stories about it.

This response to tragedy tends to be inadequate, and for good reason: this is a challenge that is difficult to talk about at length, and because it is difficult to speak at length about it, much is missed in addressing it collectively with a view towards minimizing it radically, and by minimizing, I do not mean minimizing its gravitas. By the same token, too much gravitas can add too much weight to tragic consequences.

I find it quite interesting that tragedy is defined in the particular, as a cautionary tale or as an event that causes much suffering, distress, or destruction, and not as a matter of general interest to be studied and contemplated with a view towards a deeper understanding of life.

In sharing this observation, I recall a tragic event from my childhood.

One late afternoon on a cold wintry day with a ground covered in snow and a roadside spotted with ice, the school bus had just dropped us off at our usual stop. It all happened in a matter of seconds. My little friend’s older brother was suddenly pounding the door of the bus, pleading and screaming for the driver not to move the bus, but to no avail. As the bus moved, a wail of alarm and despair pierced the chilly air, forcing me to turn my attention to the side of the bus where my little friend’s head had been flattened. I had to move closer to examine what was left of his head and the brains that had been spilled. As my little friend whimpered, a question in the form of a feeling crystallized inside my heart.

What kind of world do we live in that would allow this accident to occur?

In sharing this story, I realize it is but one of millions of such stories percolating throughout space and time that are told in the wake of serious accidents, heinous crimes, and natural catastrophes.

Tragic events ultimately serve to penetrate and activate the heart of soul in a dense form. When I told my mother what happened, she broke down and sobbed with a depth and intensity that puzzled me. My assurances that my little friend was going to heaven didn’t seem to help.

Some years later, after I had matured somewhat, my recall of this event struck me hard, and in a moment of intense sorrow and grief, I could finally realize the gravity of what had happened to my childhood friend and to those deeply affected by this tragedy, for better or worse.

What kind of world do we live in that would allow this kind of accident to occur? As a response to a tragic accident, this question is pivotal for the soul. If the heart of a soul cannot emotionally process a tragic event, the life and spirit of the soul remains muddied or darkened by it.

Serious accidents and natural catastrophes confront and challenge the very heart of relationship itself with sorrow, grief, and anger between a surviving victim or witness and the loving, caring Source of life, however this source is construed and cultivated by the heart of soul.

Being a victim or a witness to a heinous crime, however, intensifies this challenge, involving as it does not just one relationship but two or more, prompting this question: benevolence or malevolence ~ which one will prevail in the wake of intense sorrow, grief, and anger?

The orientation of serving the other more often than not will favor the retention of benevolence, whereas the polar opposite orientation of serving the self most of the time will favor the prudent exercise of malevolence as a motivating factor in the life of the STS soul.

In my experience, malevolence serves as a kind of protective emotional shield against letting the heart of soul be squashed completely by helplessness and hopelessness, and comes in two flavors: hostile-aggressive or passive-aggressive; in other words, fire or ice.

I dare say no one is immune to its potency to protect or defend the heart of soul.

Tragedy as a subject of inquiry extends far beyond crime, accident, and catastrophe. The cartoonish character of its common definition melts away in the heat of this realization by way of extension.

From my point of view, which is considerable given the relentless pursuit of my truth, the overall state of humanity at this time is very much a mixed bag, with those in service to other (STO) and those in service to self (STS) being in a fight to the death. Whether they know it or not, whether they care to know it or not, this battle for the soul of humanity is simultaneously oppressive to STO and regressive for STS.

Tragically, directly or indirectly, the spiritual potential of every soul on earth is adversely affected by this polarization, leaving in its wake a spiritual wasteland of lost, missed, and compromised opportunities that is colder, darker, and more barren than any desolate landscape on earth.

At the heart of this ancient cosmic battle is a fundamental way of being that seeks to make good on the potential to be alive to come alive to stay alive to pleasure and desire with purpose and passion.


Benevolence comes alive and stays alive to the extent that it serves the other with joy.
Malevolence comes alive and stays alive to the extent that it serves the self with love.

Where light workers favor the pleasures of joy and benevolence to inspire the other, dark workers favor the love and passion of malevolence to motivate the self to conquer being, knowing, having, and doing.

my true name could very well be Ecstasy,
for I am Lover of Serendipity with Serenity

In reviewing this couplet in view of what I’ve written so far, I am reminded once again that polarized individuators have a distinct advantage over those who have yet to polarize in the direction of either STO or STS. Polarized souls can appreciate the intention of this couplet.

The Light Ones know of what I speak, but then, so do the Dark Ones. As they each find their own rest in the glow of contentment, basking in feelings of calm and comfort, how can they not be carefree?

How Best to Broach Tyranny and Complexity?

In worlds of duality, tyranny is the purview of the Dark Ones in their service to self in relation to other selves acting in service to self. By contrast, liberty is the purview of the Light Ones in their service to the other in relation to other selves acting in service to the other.

Each of these actors have their own Achilles’ heels: STS arrogance and STO ignorance make for some interesting dynamics as and when naïve ignorance is crushed by the weight of dark realization even as willful arrogance is exposed by careful and skillful investigation.

As the world grows increasingly complex, tyranny grows ever more soft with greater subtlety, which makes it all the more dangerous to those who would resist it and expose its machinations. Where political tyranny oppresses from above, social tyranny oppresses from below.

As the Light Ones counter complexity with simplicity, the Dark Ones invest ever more deeply into complexity at the expense of simplicity, such that engagement with complexity becomes a kind of gauge to measure the genetic and mental fitness of those who can handle it well.

Not to be outdone, the Light Ones engage the complexity of this world to keep up with the Dark Ones, but because they do, they become too busy and too preoccupied to help the other to keep up, inadvertently undermining or overwhelming their original intention to serve the other.

I have no easy answer for this conundrum.

I suspect, however, that the answer lies in which vision of unity is taken as inspirational.

my true name could very well be Ecstasy,
for I am Lover of Serendipity with Serenity

the more I act as if I am, the more that I be,
for don’t you see, I remain symbolic of Unity

Unity presenting as a hierarchical synthetic order is simply not compatible with unity presenting as a spontaneous organic order. Where the first favors service to self, the second favors service to the other.

Speaking more concretely to drive this point home: where the rise of Bitcoin is a likely precursor to the elimination of humanity in a posthuman world of STS aspirations, reintroducing the gold standard is a likely precursor to the articulation of humanity in a world of STO inspirations.

The Light Ones know of what I speak, but then, so do the Dark Ones. As the first find their flow in the golden glow of contentment, and as the second find their flow in digital streams of bits and bites, both basking in feelings of calm and comfort, how can they not be carefree?

Meanwhile, the unpolarized ones are left behind to languish in anguish.

How Best to Make Peace with the Big Four?

The occurrence of a tragedy opens a fork in the road: “in my despair, do I surrender and go deep, finding a renewed sense of composure in benevolence? Or, in my despair, do I begin to simmer in resentment and boil over into bitterness even at the risk of becoming vengeful?”

Aside: such questions can arise in a single lifetime or carry over from previous lifetimes

In choosing to be fragile and vulnerable in my grief, I circumvent the risk of vengefulness.

Some, however, are not so fortunate. For some, this surrender is simply too much to ask.

A wound can be touched and tapped only so many times before the ensuing resentment and emerging bitterness become too much to bear. A wound need only be slapped once by betrayal before someone is pushed over the edge into a deep dark realm of seething malevolence.

The rise in malevolence opens yet another fork in the road: “in my wrath, do I surrender and go deep, vowing to serve the self with a love deep and true, even at the expense of others? Or, do I fall prey to a pure hatred, vowing to crush the very life out of being itself?”

“In choosing to serve the self with a love deep and true, even at the expense of others, I keep hatred at bay, but in choosing to fall prey to a pure hatred by vowing to crush the very life out of being, I render myself susceptible with a vicious tendency to be tyrannical.”

The dark pulsations of tyranny demand absolute allegiance.

If such pulsations could speak, they would say something like this: “you will obey me, or else, and if necessary, I will find every excuse that I need to have you obey me, and by whatever means, have you get down on your knees and kiss my feet (hissing with malevolence).”

In their arrogance, the tyrannical ones among us feel that they are entitled to existential compensation, especially from those they deem too weak to stand up and defend themselves, for the humiliations that they suffered at the hands of those who injured and betrayed them.

The rise of tyranny as a tendency opens a fork in the road: “in my hatred, do I make it obvious to everyone that I am out for blood, thereby risking revenge from others? Or, in my hatred, do I conceal a psychopathic lust for vengeance behind assorted veils of complexity?”

The telltale sign of this concealment is profound indifference to others masked by a counterfeit spirit, and here I am not talking about a casual indifference that comes from being inattentive for reasons not personal; taking offense to casual indifference is yet another telltale sign.

Profound indifference to the cares and concerns of others is a deeply pathological frame of mind that craves complexity at the expense of others, as a weapon to conquer and control others.

Under the crush of complexity, people feel uneasy: is this really as complicated as it seems? They wonder: at what point will my life get too much to bear? They worry: how can I keep up? In failing to cope with such complexity, the lure of robotic complacency is not far away.

* * *

The first step to making peace with tragedy, malevolence, tyranny, and complexity as a mosaic in a world polarized to the breaking point is to take a side: who and what are you ready, willing, and able to serve?

The second step is to find your place, have your way, and make your peace, moment to moment as you go about your days, with navigating the potency of this submissive-transmissive continuum:

let it be ——————————————————————————— make it so

fall in love with fate ——————————————– rise in love with destiny

allow invite welcome permit agree <  > expect insist compel demand coerce

Go too far in one direction and you risk becoming an ignorant doormat for others. Go too far in the other direction and you risk becoming an arrogant monster at the expense of others to the detriment of others.

The third step is to gauge quality and vitality of life in view of finding serendipity with serenity on the way to ecstasy: as I find my balance between rest and flow in contentment, how can I not be carefree?

The final step is be mindful of these four agreements: be true to your word and always do your best, no matter how you feel, and by the way, be sure to make no assumptions and take nothing personally.

Easier said than done, I know, but truth be told, they serve, like nothing else I know, as an unusually effective gauge of your fitness and vitality for making peace with the Big Four conditioners of fate.

In taking these steps, remember, as the need arises, chop wood … carry water.


To share information and inspiration on what is happening on this troubled yet promising world, I drew up two lists of sites that are serving the causes of personal, global and/or cosmic awakening.

This post has been filed under Application in the Ultimate Outline.

Note: my evolving outline on approaching a realization of the ultimate in personal fulfillment can be found here, accessible from the nav menu under the page “Be Here Now”.

Note: this ever growing perspective began here: Ultimate Perspective

Previous post:

Next post: