Sometimes thinking, as an instrument of consciousness,
is criticized. Some people may be solely enveloped in their
own thought. They actually appear separated from their own
experience and distanced from the rest of the world. Instead
of being with their own experience, they seem only to be thinking
about it. We view such people as being detached from their
own feelings or emotions. Indeed, this is possible and maybe
even common but I can’t say that thinking in itself is
to blame. Thinking is only a vehicle of identification of what
is currently transpiring. It is more likely that one’s
individual thinking is to blame, that it is not expansive enough
to see the whole panorama open to one which includes the breath
of experience. (Page 2)
One may then claim that we cannot know reality for what it is, that all
we can know structurally or metaphysically is relationship-in-process,
the process that is inclusive of thinking. But why not instead say that
from the reality of relationship-in-process thinking occurs as an aspect
of it, identifying what is, so that one may be conscious of reality. Thinking
(as an endowment of what is, as being something that does exist and must
thereby be included in our conception of what is) can only see reality
as reality, for thinking is part and parcel of reality. This is to say
that thinking is immanent to reality, or shall we say that the concept “reality” is
immanent to thinking? Thinking does not distort reality because thinking
itself in intrinsically aligned to reality, being a part of reality. To
suggest that thinking by itself distorts reality is nothing less than to
suggest that we, as living beings, distort life. We do not distort life;
we are life. (Page 5)
What this thinking process represents is the creative process itself,
which is also our own sexual process of existence. The fact that thinking
is actually sexual in nature is a crucial fact that, to date, has been
overlooked. We will be looking closely into this as we proceed. But, for
the moment, wouldn’t it be realistic to say that all processes are
the same, a relationship between the division of the one and the unification
of the two? Isn’t this process of division and unification the sexual
process, and isn’t this also the same as the concentrative-decentrative
interchange that constitutes thinking? Having not viewed thinking as sexual,
we have failed to delineate male and female mentally as we have, to some
degree, physically. In failing to make the sexual delineation in the mental
realm, the mind, we are not able to understand consciousness or creation.
(Pages 7-8)
The power of thinking is due to the fact that it is evaluative and proceeds
to a position. Thinking results in a conclusion. To make a conclusion about
something is to actually say something about something, i.e., this is the
way this is. It is to make a statement, to declare, or to take a stand.
Thinking is positive in this respect. It is never neutral. In this fact
resides the potency of thinking. (Page 11)
To know creativity is to know cause, source, principle, standard, structure,
order, imagination, inspiration…is to know balance. The creative
process becomes (because it is) the exact process through which we integrate
all information into order. It is our standard or base of interpretation
holding true to its own process of creation. It is the breath or scope
of our expression, ever deepening in clarity and immediacy. It is the anchor
of our imagination ever reaching out in new creation. It is the source
of our inspiration, a man and woman reaching out to each other. It is the
one touch of love. (Page 21)
