What's in a Cycle
Welcome to the ‘New Year’s Message’.
This particular series of communications has comprised of a very basic use of numerology and revelation. Though rudimentary, yes, the science does not hold or cater for any insubstantial contribution because neither of the two disciplines provides less than the whole each originates from. There is therefore advance even at its most basic transmission. That said and in further respect, the ‘New Year’s Message’ is also part of a corpus of periodic (yearly) presentations. And while each stands on their own with regard to the presented content, it is the whole and the nature of the specific set of definitions that one must not discount when reading and evaluating the presentation.
The following is inspired from what has already been penned. Enjoy.
Our most recent entry saw the 2020 New Year’s Message present on the ‘factor of cycles’. What should be of interest to every human being is why we are taught, trained and hence attuned to live in lineal-based sensibility when in fact we cannot exist free of cyclical movement. As I have shared and written on numerous occasions:
What does not complete will re-occur to complete. And what completes will shift to embrace the preordained augmentation. And therein is the revelation of why the current human model fails to correct at the level of prevention with regard to what can be attributed to the word ‘malaise’.
A straight line cannot be a circle. Of course, if the straight line bends enough to form sequence such that the assumed end point returns to its starting mark then it is that the once straight line becomes round due to the returning nature of its pathway. The parable is in the fact that it is not that a straight line has to bend to form a circle or that it should bend at all but that it was never truly straight to begin with because no undertaking, I repeat, no undertaking, is free of cyclic movement. Add into the parable’s disclosure the fact that the central significance of any cyclical movement is the factor of recurrency, and you will soon conclude with a definitive on why it is that Energetic Integrity and Energetic Responsibility are key foundations for all interactions.
Consider, outside of our great management skills and proficiencies, curative and ameliorating as they successfully are, the element of sickness, exhaustion, unease, dissatisfaction, constant tension and the fact that discontentment drives the unceasing thirst for entertainment and distraction. Are any of these global daily torments linked with living what is impossible to live i.e., living absent of cyclic receptivity by instead focussing on life moving lineally forward when it does not?
No one can be blamed for assuming or even insisting that our path through life is ‘straight and narrow’. That’s our trained perception. Accordingly, and the question is asked free of critique, is it likely that we are holding incorrect primary emphasis such that we are living what cannot be lived? The answer here rests in further examination. As I posed in late 2014:
Could the inordinate rise in illness and disease across the globe have some connection to the fact that -- our way of life and all that that means is not being lived cyclically?
Could the roots of our illnesses, and particularly our ill mental health, have a connection or rather a genesis in the fact that we are not adjusting our way of being so that psychologically we understand that we are living in a manner that is designed for us to experience all that we need to in order to evolve by making wiser choices?
Is it possible that it is un-healthy to live lineally?
As made very clear, the questions are not dictatorial in any way. Instead, they are posited for you to be able to consider for yourself what is not generally if rarely asked of you to ruminate.
And so, the words ‘what’s in a cycle’, viewed as a question of life, translate to the subject of repetition.
Life, human life, is recurrent. Our many interactions, despite the seeming different characters and or subject matters discussed or attended to, are structures of recurrency. Very few people opt to admit the fact, but no circle of movement is left (moved on from) until it completes. And the word ‘complete’ or ‘completes’ is not and cannot be governed or controlled by any human intervention, demand, imagination, arrogance or rule. Put simply: the greater order we all belong to determines the type of cycle you are on and the type you will move on to next by the manner of the responsiveness that completed the previous stretch … when in fact it completes by the measure of what offered to advance and not by our assessments. Therefore, there is much more to a cycle than its recurrent trail.
Could it be that the factor of recurrence indicates that it is the nature of movement within and with respect to a particular class of responsiveness that determines whether the element of completion reaches completion or not? If this were so, we do not move on or move away from the presented trail (offered pathway of expanded realisation) until the offered advance or set of enhancements becomes mastered (realised) in some way.
For some, that is, for those who know the fact that the cyclic trajectory is not merely the act of recurrency but one of attentive responsiveness, it is a trained alertness to know that you do not move on from any matter by the movement of reaction. Reject what is in front of you with respect to the order’s offer to align, harmonise and advance, and much longer will be the recurring pathway thereafter; but free of the same offering, it will not be.
We can kick, scream, deny, challenge, disobey and or ignore as much as we like but it will not alter the fact that we belong to a greater order that supersedes (over commands) whatever depth of ignorance and or vigour of arrogance we can contrive. We simply belong and cannot but belong to a greater environment of co-existence. The fact that we have not made the fact our primary emphasis is part of a greater revelation not particularly assigned to these periodic presentations.
All in all, and as you can clearly gather, the over commanding aspect referred to is neither autocratic nor imposing; rather, it is loving of all equally. Eventually we all are sanctified uniformly. It is therefore never a question of challenge or of disbelief or belief but a relationship with sensibilities that require sense and sensitivity along with appreciation and ever unfolding sagacity with respect to what in-truth is offered and what is directed and driven to deter.
