An Essay on Science and Spirituality

Hi Ken,

I awoke thinking about our conversation/Skype yesterday.   Obviously, I see the cream of our relationship rising to the top of the milk.  Yet I see two significant areas that are curdling before we have met in person.  Nothing too clever or insightful on my part--you pointed out what we both saw.  I thought, however, that I would attempt to put words to it today. 

Like you, I see a great deal of commonality between us.  Individual passions such as music/ art/ writing, valuing intimate unconditionally loving relationships, priority for self exploration and hence self awareness and the resulting ease, self-love and acceptance leading to happiness, a delight in the art of conversation and philosophising, well-developed listening skills, deep curiosity, appreciation and the continual drive to explore and learn.  This is no small package and I've yet to describe it fully.  But I will stop here.

What caught my attention acutely this morning upon awakening after pondering and talking about our conversation last evening with a close male friend were two things.  One that concerns you deeply about our differences--your science-based and my metaphysical/spiritual (I make no differentiation between the divine, hence "above the physical" and God) perspective and how this might be the yardstick by which I make my life decisions.  And the other which I did not share fully with you, but what puts concern in my heart and mind is health—how to achieve, maintain and thrive.  I choose a wholistic natural methodology and you choose allopathy and prescription drugs.

We both have obviously equally viable and fundamental concerns that surfaced immediately upon getting a slightly deeper glimpse of one another beyond that initial Skype in 2016.  The chemistry was obvious for me then and again yesterday.   And I sensed it was for you as well.  Yes, I am taken by your impish handsome smile and feel at ease in conversation with you. And sense a great deal of interest to engage more.

However, these two fundamental differences continue to be present in our exchanges.  They are truly significant to both of us.  And I ponder, perhaps differences we cannot or should not compromise. And yet, how is it possible then to move forward with full acceptance of one another?

I sense from what you say, that you are a man fully capable of loving deeply, spiritually. And you spoke about a willingness to change when in a meaningfully committed relationship.   Change when necessary.  Yet that is the importance here.  Is it possible with fundamental belief systems, yours science-based, mine spirit-based, to find harmony and acceptance of one another.  The very differences and aspects that define our beings?  That align who we are.  Building blocks of our essences.  Or are they?  Of course I think mine is.  And I sense you think yours is.  Hence……well, this is fundamental.

I know that each person has a limit to the extent they can change before their change turns into self-sacrifice that erode into a loss of personal integrity.  When their own wholeness becomes the fuel for the fire that constitutes the synergy of two lovers.  Imploding.  I experienced this and have learned the edges of my soul.  And understand both emotionally and physically what mental and emotional conflict will do to the body.  I know this to be true of all illness of the mind and body--we are sensitive creatures, thankfully.  It allows us the beauty of being so loving and compassionate.  And offers us a gift to see our malalignments if and when such happens.  And the possibility to adjust and realign. 

I know that my desire to explore new avenues unfolding in a relationship is great.   I enter into a committed relationship with complete willingness and commitment to explore with ruthless honesty to myself and the other.  That when I commit I am loyal, devoted and trusting.  And trustworthy. 

I am here to evolve in this lifetime into a higher spiritual vibrational being, day-by-day—with unconditional love at the pinnacle of this lifetime journey.  I came to understand reincarnation through this.  From a young age, I sought wisdom.  Not understanding the meaning that request from the Universe could render.

Today, after standing repeatedly in the eye of the storm, so-to-speak, unflinchingly, unwavering, I do not intend to reincarnate again.   I have experienced lifetimes through past life regression and can say today that my courage to stand and acknowledge my own wild woman is profound.  The heart and center of the raw unleashed part of my humanness.  It seems quite unfathomable to die and have to come back yet again.  I am ready to reach enlightenment in this lifetime instead!  :D

I have yet, as you know, spoken to the actual areas of departure that became so vividly clear in not only yesterday’s conversation, but in the previous ones.

Ken, to me, this relationship between the two of us is not only about unconditional love, but it is about our capacity as two individuals and how we each express this to one another.  And if our own integrity is torn asunder in our desire to reach that, then it is false and we have not entered into the relationship correctly aligned. 

In your science-steeped mind, a career fully embracing the wisdom that the double blind study proves existence—of everything with meaning, value, truth.  And the ethereal aspects, including the Divine, all outside that context, I venture to challenge you on this exclusivity.  This compartmentalization. 

And this, my entire singular point of this long-winded essay.  It will and would always be between us as long as your science-based perspective embraces the divisiveness that speaks to this exclusivity.  In my embrace of the spiritual path, I embrace oneness.   The entire cosmos—our interconnectedness without an hierarchical structure, but a linear one representing equality rather than an pyramidal rise with overarching empirical science at the top.

I see this difference always being at the core of our conversations, as it is today.  Our philosophical differences in how we both walk in this lifetime.  I suppose I could figure if I presented the finest metaphor or discourse, I could change your perspective, but I wouldn’t and couldn’t.  That is the curious thing about humans.  We change when and only when we are ready and choose to. It is an inside transformation, not an external one.  And I can assure you, while I would enthusiastically engage repeatedly in philosophical conversations, my need to change your perspective would not be anything but in the art of debate and its engaging and mind-opening exchanges.

When the rules of discourse are fully understood—and I am well aware that passion on both sides can lead to a few knock downs and anger, when holding true to the basic tenants, I believe that respect and admiration for the diversity of belief systems is possible.

I believe it was John Trudell, Native American author, poet, actor, musician, and political activist. who stated that belief systems divide.  Ouch.

As a woman, thoroughly studied and researched wholistic practitioner who holds health next to godliness—an herbalist, homeopath, reflexologist, my body “my temple,” I walk this lifetime using no allopathic medication and apply the wisdom I have accrued from ancient healers whose cures work symbiotically with the human body—gently, respectfully healing, bringing back harmonic vibrational homeostasis

 to our being.

When I engage in a committed relationship I want my man as healthy and vibrant as I am—as he can be.  I want him to choose to hone his senses to their peak performance as I do mine.  I understand that the way to access our greater spiritual transformation begins with balance—mental, emotional, physical.

I would ask him to consider embracing a healing perspective that resulted in safe treatment without toxic side-effects that allopathic medications present.  To seek complete health and not settle for chronic/mediocre.   What he ingests, so do I.  And that would trouble me.

As share with you, I know that I am going through the rest of my life as Joan Erikson embraced, with all my senses fully alive. 

And I know that I desire this with my lover, partner, friend, et al.  For all the obvious reasons – with the vigor we will need to engage fully in everything we do—our mind, physical, emotional, and spiritual engagements together and individually.  This I know for myself, underlies my sense of freedom—this is so important.

I apologize for this laborious essay.   If you have read thus far, perhaps there is hope for us.

And I postulate, the issues of science and its empirical nature vs the metaphysical divinatory ways in which I explore will continue to be our gap, along with our differences in our direction of healing modalities. 

Change—the crux of shifting a posture—I know that I am no doubt as certain as you are that how I walk in this lifetime is as correct for me as how you walk is correct for you.  That while I understand your posture, the logic of science and its advancements, I do hold the spiritual/metaphysical life as my path, the very lenses through which I see life unfolding.  And that my health consciousness for my mind, and body is the portal through which I access this.

Of course I would desire the same for you.  Change?  Would you?  I see myself asking you to change.  Understanding the hugeness of this.  If you asked me to change, I could not. I would not.  It would be akin to offering my life. 

Yet I see that without one or the other changing, each conversation would devolve into our strongly divested postures though which we walk our paths in this life.

I do believe that you seek the same spiritual awakening as I and along the way, to experience unconditional love and a deeply loving relationship through which to express oneself fully.   And that your way to it, unique to whom you are, as mine is to whom I am.   

Does any of this make sense to you, Ken?  I am not certain that I have succeeded at all.

After writing this I looked in a Chinese astrology book about you, born in the year of the Tiger, and me, the year of the Dragon.  And it said:

“Both colourful, action-loving personalities who are basically sincere and well intentioned.  A shared idealism could unite them into a powerful team capable of bulldozing any opposition with their dynamic ways.  Each may constantly struggle for dominance, but if the two of them can share the burdens and define their areas of expertise they will achieve much together.  Mutual respect and cooperation can only follow if they worked hard to resolve their differences right from the beginning.”

Most curious, do you think?

Smiles,

Kathleen

Kat

28 September 2018