Human Nature

El Practico, La dinámica, eso humanista.

“I have tried to explain how mind changes brain structure & function but nobody alive has yet properly defined mind and no one has explained properly how so-called ethereal thought can change so-called material structure. The whole subject is filled with wonder.”

Dr. Norman Doidge

The problem with doctors is that their fear of being wrong is so great that it takes a doctor of doctors to show them why they are attacking both themselves and their patients (and yer cannot see it). Such a person you might call a man.

A real man. Someone who cannot.follow the herd nor attack any one. Someone who has completely outgrown all illusions about who and what a man, woman and child actually are.

Someone who understands plants, insects, ecology, diet, seeds, the sun, what a virus is, what a very very very bright mind can do with energy that only one man before, in the history of mankind, dreamt of before (that man before being Nikola Tesla).

If you have the great faith and courage and profoundly deep patience to look into the eyes of a human being, be they man or woman, you are going to come to the realization that behind those eyes there is, more often than not, an unattended pain.

One might call the pain:

the mother wound


the father wound.

These pains are not new. They are among the oldest most persistent pains on the face of the earth.

No one that has walked the earth to date has understood this, not a single being I have encountered, but those pains block, well they block the most important set of discoveries in the history of mankind. Until, until, until, they do not.

Behind the eyes of the faces you see hides these wounds I now address. If you think of it as poison that has corroded what is most vital and beautiful in the human being you would not be wrong.

These wounds bring tremendous blindness. The wounded are vain and they are proud. The wounds are buried so deep that without tremendous attention they are not seen.

A greedy man or woman cannot see them. Insecurity is greed. Greed must be totally eviscerated for these particular wounds to be identified. “Call me by my name.” To identify is to disarm.

So to stop attacking and defending their positions and others, including those who do not know how to blame, and even the very wise cannot see this, but there is, thankfully, a wisdom beyond what the very wise comprehend, this wisdom is known to the most wise, to stop, to completely stop such attacks one must inwardly stop.

The evolution of the evolution of mankind depends exclusively on this. This stopping inwardly. When one can stop in this fashion the fountain that creates all victims, ALL of them, is seen. And not only that, the tap or spigot or faucet that turns off the fountain permanently Is instantaneously witnessed too.

When it is turned off, at the root, at the source, when the authority that argues it is justified in any way whatsoever, when that authority (it is not one, it contains multitudes, and yet, and yet: it has but one seeded root which can and absolutely must be uprooted) is totally destroyed, there is not a single problem known to man, woman or child, not a single one, that the radiant sun of this, this deepest human understanding, cannot, and does not, automatically deny, and in its denial, completely obliterate, for all time.

And in that total denial comes a new human being, a completely new child of humanity.

And it is this brilliant child who is granted eyes to see the elephant, that magnificent beast who stood at the gates of the city of the blind for so long, which had been for eons misunderstood, due to our pride and our vanity, which, in turn was blocked from being unraveled by our unattended insecurity.

It is the elephant of the deepest truths about the nature of the nature of creation; the multitude in one; standing there before this wholly faithful, courageous and powerfully patient human child, In all his grandeur, in all her genius, in all their stock still majesty.

© Copyright 2021 Nathan Curry

1 thought on “Human Nature”

  1. The comments in the above Facebook Post were –
    Nathan Curry commented :
    As Jung metaphorically expressed it, “A neurosis is an offended God.” What he meant is that an energy in us has been repressed, oppressed, split off, projected onto others, and thereby has been wounded or “offended.” – James Hollis
    Ted Wrigley replied :
    Not so sure about that Nathen..he might be closer to literal truth then we suspect…
    (Correction Nathan)
    Nathan Curry replied :
    Ted Wrigley my name is Nathan – not Nathen. A similar distraction informs your lack of certainty here.
    Ted Wrigley commented :
    Nathan Curry replied :
    Ted Wrigley yes.
    Nathan Curry commented :
    You are absolutely correct – my apologies
    Ted Wrigley commented :
    Would you like me to correct that?
    Nathan Curry commented :
    The evolution of language must involve greater discernment. By that I mean we have no need of gods when our humanity is fully embraced. Though stories are helpful.
    You are right – it is a literal truth that is being pointed at and labeled as metaphoric.
    But for millennia man has used metaphor to handle those depths.
    That is actually a healthy aspect of man, when catered to wisely.
    When it was not it created all the wars and pains of history.
    When it is seen into that bothersome fly has no more power to “anoint” us with our mad gurus and religions a moment longer.
    We find the line – ligio
    Not religio
    Of logos.
    The angle of the symmetry that accords with our deepest depths. And we discover we are men the children of women and the woke child of life itself.
    Nathan Curry commented :
    Ted Wrigley

    Johnny Cash – I Walk the Line (Man in Black: Live in Denmark)
    Ted Wrigley commented :
    (Love that song)
    This is fascinating ;
    If I correct the mistake then the thread makes no sense (?)…we would talking about something which does not exist!….but if we leave it the statement as is it is incorrect but the thread retains logic.
    The the mistake is logic. Or the mistake makes sense in the context of the thread.
    Can we say retro causality needs that everything must change in accordance.(at least if we wanted to retain common sense)
    Call it BS , could be, but where does the logic fail?
    Nathan Curry replied :
    Ted Wrigley logic is mad. Always has been. Only logos is sane.
    Ted Wrigley commented :
    I corrected that LOL..
    So I just may have invalidated my own logic…or decide.
    Nathan Curry replied :
    Ted Wrigley if you consider man to be a body I would say that was not sane, not fitting with logos.
    But if you see with actual clarity and total perspicacity that man is a body-heart-mind and that there is no separation – and it appears to you out of the mists of time, like an image that reveals itself out of a hidden magic stereogram then we are looking at the same man. And his capacity is not dim. Not remotely. Not scarcely remotely.

    Ted Wrigley commented :
    Logic does seem to be limited.
    If that were the only thing we used it seems to dead-end in circles.
    Nathan Curry replied :
    Ted Wrigley it is Ted. Parmenides was the last man who walked the earth to see into this. I see further.
    Nathan Curry commented :
    Ted Wrigley How to see into what matters:
    The thing that is important to see is that creation from the standpoint of the profoundly creative – it’s not about everyone. It’s not about generalization. It’s about what liberates you.
    And by inflection if you become liberated – then a toddler is going to scream and shout when you refuse to agree with their pained story – if you can no longer invest in a sense of victimhood then the mind goes to an entirely different plane – but it cannot evade what is true and what is exclusively true is the joy and the light and the brilliance in the human being and in nature.
    When that happens in the mind – when that aspect of man and nature becomes the only reality – one isn’t capable of becoming another’s door mat – there can be profound waves of emotion -but the new set mind that has become very very quiet is like a supernova- it can’t fall for any trap or deny what is real in another.
    It can’t attack anyone or self. Not as an idea but actually. But then a big part of what follows is this strange game where people around one try to self-sabotage and one just cannot support that so a wall goes up which refuses to support the self-sabotaging. It’s like a mother who acts to remove the sharp knife from a baby’s unaware hands.
    There is no condemnation mechanism left operating. But shame is used very wisely to end shame.
    So it is not about how long it takes for another to see beyond their pain. All that accounts is that you stay focused on the truth about another (which merely reflects you) that lies beyond that pain mechanism.
    That’s a holographic truth. When it’s lived fully it creates a supernova that ends all madness and attack. When it’s denied it cannot not create enmity and holocausts.
    That’s it. And the evolution of evolution recognizes that no one can sustain their enmity and upset when you don’t give the pain mechanism voice the power the screaming toddler believes defines their perception, then it’s not about how long a time it takes to heal from the madness. It’s about what cannot help erupt from that very still state that sees to the healed root and addresses nothing else.
    Remember, though, that you can still soothe the toddler with what they really need – love and connection – even while you refuse to agree with their pain…
    Yes, that is true.
    But the important thing is not to open the door until they have ended their screaming.
    Until they have seen the calm loving healed presence inside of them; the one that has forever given up the belief their mad fight and flight ever happened.
    All that you see is their loving presence embracing us.
    Ted Wrigley commented :
    Ok I read that..can’t say as get all …
    Here’s the thing; or the question; how is it that we/you arrive at this truth?
    Because they make sense?
    I can use logic for which would look for inconsistencies.
    Is logic always sense-ical
    It’s here; How do you know what you say is true?
    Nathan Curry commented :
    Sid Anand

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *