Ultimate Fulfillment 24

by Christopher Lovejoy on September 21, 2014

This past week saw me make an attempt to organize the presentation and justification of a cosmic schema of mind-boggling complexity for the realization of the ultimate in personal fulfillment.

I could begin with any one of these three perspectives: (1) from a single vantage point, from the nexus of control that is the essence of ego, expanding into a True Self, a Self as Art, on a cosmic field of play; (2) from a cosmic field of play, on a continuum of pretense that conditions the character of human encounter and experience, with which to situate the True Self and understand the role of ego in relation to the True Self; or (3) from the perspective of a True Self, of a Self as Art, that pays due respect to the centrality of ego on a cosmic field of pretense replete with pride, presumption, and prejudice.

My preference is to draw on the second perspective as my starting frame of reference, beginning with an overview of the cosmic field of play (with its many interpretations and distinctions), and proceeding with strategic placements of a True Self with an ego at its core that is as fully in control of itself as possible.

About three and a half months ago, I wrote and published a brief post on pretense relative to presence.

I wish to acknowledge Michael Brown, author of The Presence Process and webmaster of The Presence Portal, for bringing my attention to this distinction between presence and pretense. I recall, when I first came across this distinction, that I felt rather taken by it, strongly sensing its significance in and for my future. Incidentally, if you haven’t yet undergone this presence process, I recommend it wholeheartedly.

At one time, I viewed pretense as a necessary evil, to be avoided whenever possible, for the sake of authenticity, in support of honesty.

My current view, however, is that pretense is not only necessary, it’s desirable, and by desirable, I don’t mean seeking to be lightly or grayly or darkly pretentious whenever and wherever possible; I mean exercising discernment with due respect given to realizing the promise of pretense fully by exploring and fulfilling its possibilities for learning and growth, expansion and expression, realization of soul and evolution of spirit.

If pretense is a product of a egoic conditioning, presence is the divine attribute from which pretense can be encountered artfully, skillfully, and mindfully and experienced fully, prompting this question: do we choose to be conscious of pretense (whether light or gray or dark), in ourselves and others, or do we choose to remain relatively unconscious of pretense, putting ourselves at its mercy?

Please be careful answering this question, as there is something to be said for remaining unconscious of pretense, in maintaining a positive yet fragile illusion of control, as and when pretense dominates a situation (or a life) lived in fear. Exposing someone’s pretense without adequate consideration of context is my definition of a brutal honesty exercised without genuine empathy or compassion.

In terms of personal fulfillment, here’s yet another tough question to ponder: do we allow ourselves to be fulfilled pretentiously (rarely, occasionally, often, or always?) or do we seek to fulfill ourselves only and always with divine presence in spite of pretense, as many if not most supposedly enlightened spiritual practitioners would have us do?

To help us negotiate these (and other) questions, I’ve conceived a field of play that not only has cosmic significance for The Life Review after souls pass into the Great Beyond but is also pretentious, on a gray scale running from light pretense to gray pretense to dark pretense.

A common example of light pretense is “pretending to be someone you’re not in a spirit of fun” (hallowe’en is over a month away and yet the department stores are already getting filled with goodies – how pretentious is that?); an example of gray pretense is “pretending  everything is okay when it’s not” (i.e., it is neither fun to pretend nor fun to be cunning to get your way and have it stay that way); an example of dark pretense is “pretending to be someone’s friend or lover to extract something of perceived value” (i.e., a dark performance, performed with cunning by way of deception, seduction, manipulation, or exploitation).

In the course of living our lives, any one of these examples might have value, depending on the situation or circumstances in which we find ourselves. None of these forms of pretense are necessarily bad or wrong, in and of themselves, if and when they’re employed to good effect with a good intention, consciously and conscientiously. When actors and comedians give virtual performances, by way of movies, films, or staged plays, they’re at liberty to be light, gray, or dark in pretense, either to make a point or to teach a lesson or to entertain possibilities on a virtual cosmic field of play. We can learn much from them, as and when we consciously bring divine presence to the play of pretense.

A rather interesting feature of pretense is that only we can really know whether we “mean what we say and say what we mean”, if and only if we are present to what we mean and say, say and mean. If we are not present to pretense, or if we are unwilling or unable to be present to pretense, we could very well fool ourselves into thinking that we actually “mean what we say and say what we mean”. I think it goes without saying that if you’re oblivious to your own pretenses, you’ll be oblivious to the pretenses of others, putting you at their mercy, which might serve to make a case for learning to be consciously honest with your pretenses or honestly pretentious with your presence (take your pick).

field-of-playIn light of these considerations, let us revisit my simplest version of a graphical representation of the cosmic field of play, which I introduced almost a month ago, in this post. Please note the labels to the left and right of the field: egocentric abandonment and egocentric entitlement. I’d like to discuss the second label first, as it’s the easier, more obvious one to understand and appreciate, as ‘egocentric’ is the hand that fits inside the glove of ‘entitlement’.

On the Shakespearean assumption that “all the world’s a stage” (i.e., all pretense is performance and all performance pretentious, whether light or gray or dark), we like to pretend (we need to pretend) because we (all of us, every single one of us) carry a strong, enduring sense of entitlement arising from a perceived need for relevance and significance in this world.

The argument for entitlement, with or without enlightenment, might be formulated as follows: “I see myself (my ego, my most intimate sense of me, myself, and I) as having relevance to this world and significance in this world, and this is important why? Because I have a need to survive and a desire to thrive. Yes, I constantly compare myself to others, and yes, I judge others harshly or unfairly because I need to know that I have relevance and significance. Therefore, I’m entitled to have my way and to get my way for the sake of maintaining an ongoing sense of relevance and significance; if I no longer have relevance, I can no longer survive, and if I no longer have significance, I can no longer thrive.”

As indicated above by way of emphasis, this argument from entitlement takes precedence over enlightenment. We can certainly pretend that the ego is not important (or even necessary, even if the baby gets tossed out along with the bathwater), and that the way to enlightenment is through spiritually bypassing entitlement, but again, this is just another form of pretense, one that features egocentric abandonment at its core.

So let’s talk about egocentric abandonment.

I’ll be the first to admit that this word combination might seem (sound) strange to the occidental ear, but not so strange to those in the West who have entertained oriental ways of thinking being.

We can play with this combination a bit by applying emphasis to one and then shifting it to the other, and we can do this because of the schizophrenic nature of egocentricity being perceived as predominantly and positively central for those who view the virtuous ego as having a mostly positive rule role in our lives and as predominantly and negatively central by those who view the villainous ego as having a mostly negative and deleterious impact in our lives.

Of course, both camps are right, depending on the lens through which the poorly understood schizophrenic ego is viewed. We can either be selfish (positively, virtuously speaking) or selfish, and we all seem to know what this emphasis implies.

If the emphasis is placed on egocentric to imply the dark side of ego, then egocentric abandonment is abandonment that is negatively egocentric in its intent or its effect. Think of those who drink themselves into a stupor, such that their egocentricity is abandoned, if only for a while, or think of those who curl up in their beds in despair after consuming a bottle of pills, having completely given up on themselves.

If, however, the emphasis shifts to abandonment, then egocentric abandonment is abandonment that is positively and spiritually egocentric in its intent or its effect. This emphasized combination assumes that the ego is already predominantly and positively central to who we are and who we become, to what we have and what we do. The abandonment of egocentricity is conscious, a ripening of the ego in relation to the True Self that comes close to transcending the cosmic field of play naturally and spontaneously. On this view, the ego can never be dissolved, only abandoned for as long as this is possible (or desired).

This shift in emphasis can also occur with this crafty word combination: egocentric entitlement.

Again, along the same line of reasoning, if the entitlement is dark entitlement – entitlement acquired or experienced at the expense of others – then egocentric entitlement would be at play. If, however, entitlement is light entitlement – entitlement acquired or experienced for the sake of others, in service to others – then the emphasis found in egocentric entitlement would seem to be justified.

field-of-play-2I present these emphases (and lack of emphasis) in this graphical representation. With this graphic serving as a basis for interpretation, I have found that many useful distinctions can be made with respect to soul and spirit and applied in service to the realization of the ultimate in personal fulfillment, which I’ll begin to explore in my next post.

Note: I applied a few tweaks to the outline below.

Next: Ultimate Fulfillment 25

Note: this ever growing perspective began here: Ultimate Perspective




a message for our times: “be true, be wise, be free; love is the key”




(Setting the context)


The syntactical nature of reality, the real secret of magic,
is that the world is made of words, and if you know the words that the world is made of,
you can make of it whatever you wish ~ Terence McKenna

consider this truth: “there is no truth”: true or false? if true, then false; if false, then true

words are powerful, as and when they are spoken in the light of truth, love, and wisdom




(A cosmic perspective)

First installment: the cosmic life review (learn more)
Second installment: a cosmic perspective on birth, life, and death

Current study: fate, birth, life, death, and destiny in context

View this page to explore the basic issues




The ethical imperative: guard guide your eyes, guard guide your thoughts, guard guide your steps

What the cosmic life review indicates we do in the earthly realm: (1) justify; (2) purify; (3) sanctify

Does “what does it take to be fulfilled?” = “what does it take to be justified, purified, sanctified?”?




Proposal: our prime directive as a species is finding the balance

  • finding the balance between soul (being) and spirit (becoming)
  • finding the balance between being perfectly full and becoming perfectly filled
  • finding the balance between living soulfully (truly, deeply) and living spiritually (wisely, freely)




(A context for living life to the fullest)

proposal to universalize human need:

need 1: “a safe place to eat and sleep”
need 2: “a way to satisfy all my needs”
need 3: “someone to love and cherish”
need 4: “a healthy, vital outlook on life”

a vital distinction to observe in daily life:
satisfaction of need v. fulfillment of desire

the body is but a vessel for soul,
serving to contain all that the soul needs;
the body is but a vehicle for spirit,
serving to convey all that the spirit desires;

how might body serve to contain and convey
both soul and spirit as vessel and vehicle?

soul spirit

unity harmony
peace bliss
love joy
being becoming
loving caring
intimacy ecstasy
quality vitality
encounter experience
sacred divine
promise possibility
realization evolution
truth wisdom
responsibility freedom
depth height
inward outward
descend ascend
contemplation evaluation
involvement engagement
satisfaction fulfillment
cultivation celebration
dwelling peacefully flowing blissfully
heart of soul soul of spirit
contains conveys
accepts expects
let it be make it so
receptive assertive
attuned to what is required aligned with what is desired
dignity integrity
awakening enlightenment
being alive being alive




(A practice for living life to the fullest)


exploring …

the ways and means by which I can be centred in love
the ways and means by which I can follow (or manifest!) a path with heart
the ways and means by which I can be love truly and wisely

if the first pointer serves to expose the truth of who and what I am,
and if the second serves to reveal the meaning, purpose, and direction of my life,
then the third serves to realize a dynamic balance between my soul and spirit


the three deep, dark fears of spiritual beings in human form

1) a fear of letting go during sexual orgasm (the sexual fear)
2) a fear of losing control, of losing one’s mind (the political fear)
3) a fear of dying in pain, in anguish, in misery (the religious fear)

dysfunctional, maladaptive, unsustainable ways to maintain personal control
(here presented as pairs: a passive matter of soul, an active matter of spirit)












when life gives you lemons, turn them into lemonade ~ a popular proverb

how people treat you is their karma; how you react is yours ~ wayne dyer




(a global perspective: why is humanity failing to fulfill its true potential?)

weaving a terrestrial narrative that aligns with a cosmic perspective, including historical, interdimensional, extraterrestrial, conspiratorial, and eschatological elements, is an exhaustive process

such a terrestrial narrative would have us explore and expose the causes and consequences of two widespread (and related) social phenomena: cynical detachment and egocentric entitlement

the story of Howard Storm: how a visit to The Other Side cured his soul and spirit of cynical detachment and egocentric entitlement, transmuting his contempt for humanity into compassion and compersion

If darkness is your problem, talking about darkness won’t help.
If darkness is your problem, nothing can be done about darkness directly.
You cannot throw it out, you cannot push it out, you cannot switch it off.
Darkness is an absence. Nothing can be done about it directly.
If you have to do anything, you have to do something with the light, not with darkness.

~ Osho (Fear: Understanding and Accepting the Insecurities of Life, p. 136)




1. “I just can’t stand it anymore … why go on?”

2. “Wrong body, wrong family, wrong planet … why?”

3. “Why am I making such a mess of my life?”

4. “What does it really take to be (become) fulfilled in this life?”

5. Soul: “a sound approach to being perfect: possible?”

6. Spirit: “a sane approach to becoming perfect: desirable?”

7. The ultimate in truth, love, and power: dare we ask?


Study Notes


  • incorporate the use of symbols with these elements: sphere (soul), spiral (spirit), pyramid
  • presence and pretense: best to view them as complementary, rather than as mutually exclusive?
  • follow these elements of perspective: form, structure, substance, orientation, appearance
  • the devil challenge (problem, difficulty, obstacle, inadequacy, struggle, conflict) is in the details
  • the privileged among us: a little too preoccupied with celebrity, technology, personality, positivity?
  • extroverts and introverts: “living on the surface” and “living from the depths with presence”
  • the cosmic life review: a representation of the ultimate in personal fulfillment for a life lived?


* TUiPF = The Ultimate in Personal Fulfillment

Previous post:

Next post: