Integrity, Power, Immunity

Copyright 1998, Gene Poole. All rights reserved.

In general, my use of 'immunity' is as follows: Immunity is essentially
synonymous with 'integrity'. If one 'has' integrity, one has immunity. I
use 'immunity' in the all-encompassing sense here; if the body has
integrity, it has immunity. If the body's skin and all membranes are intact
and functional, immunity prevails, and sickness cannot find a home in that
body. Similarly, the 'special definition' of immunity which you now ask
about, is integrity of Being. "I am Being in integrity" is a way of saying
that I am succeeding in checking and maintaining and if necessary repairing
my 'psychic membrane', or as it is called, my 'ego'.

This is a complex topic, one I have written a lot about.
In short, I treat 'ego' as simply an 'existing
organ of Being'. Sure, one can say that 'there is no ego', and I agree. But
all of this is simply an elaborate metaphor or map of words, used to
accomplish something, like self-understanding. Like a stepstool used to
look on a high shelf. Once having looked, I know. I can then put the stool

Anyway, I am referring here to integrity of ego, asking, "does (my) ego
have integrity?". It is exactly like asking, "do the cells of my pancreas
have integrity?" If the answer is "no", then I have the disorder called
'Pancreatitis' or inflammation of the pancreas. Organically, inflammation
is a condition of hyper-activity and over-heatedness. It is also a
condition of _hyper-reactivity_.

It is entirely possible to 'have' a 'condition' of 'inflammation of the
ego'. In this common-enough condition, ego is indeed, 'hyper-reactive'; it
NEVER rests, it is always scanning, examining, and calling for remedies...
exactly as it should, as dictated by integrity and immunity-factors, which
are entirely natural and to be expected. (This kind of picture of human
Being-nature is exactly what we get when we diverge from the 'traditional
paths of self-understanding via spiritual languaging', BTW.)

One with an 'inflamed ego' is one who suffers, but this suffering one may
seem intensely happy, or intensely sad. The factor which is central to
understanding here, is the behaviour of 'hyper-reactivity'.

Every single thing which enters the senses, impacts the ego; that is
normal. But the hyper-reactive ego will react to every single thing
entering the senses, in exactly the same way a wounded and anxious dog
reacts to anybody entering it's owners yard, or even walking or driving
past that yard. And that hyper-reactive dog is bound to someday bite
someone, an innocent party, a child, even the owner of the dog. Do you get
my analogy here? A loved, nurtured, and healthy dog, will observe and wait
and only react defensively to an actual threat, not to every noise and

People who have been abused, wounded, betrayed, and fed poison instead of
nurturing food, inevitably go through a phase of 'ego-inflammation'
characterized by hyper-defensiveness, which is an agonizing and embarassing
period of intense suffering. All too many of those sufferers 'lock-into' a
self-protective stance of 'preventive agression' and can remain stuck in
that agressive mode of Being for many years, or a lifetime. We know these
sufferers as 'assholes', and have compassion for them, even as we wisely
avoid them, like we wisely avoid the hyper-reactive guard-dog.

We see happening in the 'spiritual community' the entry of those wounded,
to be embraced by those who have found healing. We do not rub salt into
their wounds; we instead feed them nurturing food, and wait until they feel
like talking about the battles that led to their shell-shock (PTSD or
Post-Traumatic Stress-Disorder). It may take a long time for the wounded
one to be able to overcome their fear of _opening and sharing_; and during
that time, the new arrival may attempt to take-on the colorations and ways
of healing and spirituality, to be seen as 'family', to be embraced and
accepted by those who have given them refuge and love. This happens and it
is natural and should be tolerated.

Do you see how integrity operates? The wounded have integrity, and search.
The search is not a disease, but it is a symptom of wound. The search is
actually for immunity, and also for 'True Family', safety, belonging, and
most importantly, for _renewal of integrity_. Integrity seeks integrity.
And integrity is "of being integrated" or being non-fragmented.

The rejection of evil is itself a self-fragmenting act to commit, but it is
done (the rejection of evil) in defense against evil. One who (especially
at a young age) has been aggressed, betrayed, and violated, will _in and
with_ integrity, reject the violators and their ways. But there is a
problem here, and it makes me sigh, and actually cry, to think about it. It
is this; the wounded one, by _properly and with integrity_ rejecting
something, has divorced themself from a real part of themself also. And
what grieves me, is the knowledge of the length of time, and the intense
suffering, which is inevitable as that one then begins the search for
themself, the search for their own wholeness. Do you see this?

Integrity itself _is what is_ doing the searching; and integrity is
immunity. Immunity continues life, does it not? That is a simple and true
definition of immunity.

One of the glaring and ghastly 'side-effects' of 'spiritual ways' is the
defining of the wounded and searching one as being 'out of grace'. This is
especially common in Christian circles. In fact, several experts [1] have
plainly stated that the 'bipolar disorder' ('manic-depression') is a direct
effect of this 'meme' or belief/assumption that 'one who is
seeking/suffering is _separate from God'_. The exact same 'meme' has
infected the 'new-age movement' and thus has corrupted all of what this
'new age movement' has touched. "You who suffer, come and smile with us!"
becomes "You who suffer, suffer because you are not with us". Is that not
exactly the same as the message of the 'Bogus Family'? "We will include you
_IF_ you do it our way" is the message. And to think, that there is any
dispute as to why children run away to join 'cults'! "You are _real_ when
you are like US" is the message of the totalitarian, authoritarian family
and 'cult'. The 'gift of identity' can be a Trojan Horse.

Do you see, that we are all individuals here, fighting for integrity, each
in our own way? Our guide is integrity, and we seek true immunity.

Integrity is wholeness; wholeness is immunity.

One who is betrayed, is rejected. One who is rejected, rejects the
rejector. Eventually the betrayed one 'becomes whole' upon discovering that
they have become the rejector; by accepting the rejector _as themself_ they
re-integrate and become whole. Suffering and the path are the time between
those two events. The key, is understanding that it is rejection itself,
exclusion or choosing, which is the actual 'disorder'. "Duality" is
characterized by dichotomy and by a mythical 'principle of exclusion', and
hyperreactive ego guards and chooses (discriminates) . "Nondualism" shows
the seeker the already-always wholeness and integrity of 'everything' and
thus shortens the path to that of a single step, which is _SELF

More: Integrity, power, and immunity

Here is one of my favorite quotes:

For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not
thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it
may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater; it shall not return to
me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper
in the thing whereto I sent it.

For ye shall go out with joy, and be led forth with peace; the mountains
and the hills shall break forth before you into singing, and the trees of
the field shall clap their hands. Instead of the thorn shall come up the
fir tree, and instead of the briar shall come up the myrtle tree; and it
shall be to the lord for a name, for an everlasting sign that shall not be
cut off.

-Isaiah, 1v. 10-13

For me, this is the song of a man of power.

In the first paragraph, he compares his _intention_ to the life-giving
rain, saying that both shall bring forth fecundity. He demonstrates that he
is aware that his intention has potency; he states that his intention
'shall not return void' , but "shall accomplish that which I please".

In this statement, he shares knowledge of his potency as a man of power,
and in effect, invites the listener to share in reaping the benefits of
this power. Futher, in paragraph-2, he goes on to state, literally and
symbolically, the perceptions of a man of power; he describes 'how' the
world 'looks to him'. He describes the mountains and the trees as being
sentient; in so doing, he states that 'everything is actually alive and
aware'; he contrasts his viewpoint with that of the listener, and again,
invites to his state.

Lastly, he says the he cannot name 'what it is', that only the Lord knows,
and that such name, pronouncable only by the Lord, shall be always
available to us. [1]

This invitation, put forth by a man of power, clearly distinguishes between
two radically differing perceptions of the world; the ordinary, and the
extraordinary. In the ordinary, the rain is rain, and the trees are trees.
In the extraordinary, the rain is intention, and the trees are applauding
this intention, this manifest power of intention, which 'does work' and
'shall accomplish what I please'.

There has been the question raised, asking of what 'good' is the 'Nondual
perspective'; and can it be turned to practical purposes. One inevitable
and true answer is of course, that only one so-realized can grasp the whole
issue. One answer is given in the above quote; this confession and
invitation clearly contrasts two perspectives.

One who is capable of perceiving that which is specifically denied as a
possibility, is one who can appreciate the advantage and uses of the
Nondual perspective. Such a one is capable of manifesting a potent
intention, which bears fruit, which 'does what he pleases', and which is
applauded by the entire living universe, as being appropriate and

I have previously discussed factors of immunity and integrity. The
traditional literature of spiritual life states repeatedly that only the
righteous shall be 'given power'. Integrity is seen to emanate from
righteousness, and righteousness is seen to be a choice, always. The issue
of choice is central to all discussions of righteousness, integrity, and
immunity. And the exercise of choice is the exercise of will or intention.

History shows us that the 'will to power' is not enough; we see, if we
study carefully, that it is the 'will to righteousness' which manifests as
the integrity and the wholeness which are the prerequisites to being able
to manifest intention in such a way as to align with the ongoing intention
of the living universe, and thus bear good fruits.

That one who wishes power, and is not righteous, cannot effect desired
change in the world except by means of applied force, is a clear and
telling pointer to the difference between force and _power_. Power enables
intention, but intention without power may result in application of force.

Here we come to the telling of the difficulty in describing any practical
application of the Nondual perspective by any realizer of such; that one
so-realized, seeing the innate harmony of that which is, thus sees no need
to exercise intention in any way which would effect any particular change.
That such a one is able to see and appreciate the true One Being, as
one-and-the-same as oneself, recognizes that the only imperative is to
maintain integrity, thus to maintaining alignment with the nature and
direction and momentum of that true One Being which is the All of What Is.

Now, such a one, living among others, shall maintain integrity by an honest
(righteous) expression of Being as that one. This 'means' that such a one
will, inevitabley, come to be seen a 'different' by those others with whom
such a one associates. The story of Jesus illustrates the dangers to
mortality which such honest expression of Being may attract; Jesus abject
honesty led to His demise. But His Realized 'non-alive/non-dead' condition
was revealed to the populace as his apparent 'ressurection'. The depth of
His realization was such that not only had death lost any reality, but life
also. His power is such that he existed outside of the 'dualistic
universe'; the dichotomy of apparent 'life and death' had been resolved as
being neither life nor death, but something else entirely, which is the
'Kingdom of Heaven' itself. Already being there, in that Kingdom, Jesus
thus had neither life nor death, but instead, Divinity, which is 'beyond'
the life-death dilemma.

That Jesus intention was potent, is well-known; his intention brought forth
the very fruits he summoned. Wine now but water before, life now and death
before, as honest expression of His way of Being, which is that of
righteousness (integrity). Jesus demonstrated the potential within
integrity as power beyond life and death, beyond the assumptions of the
world of duality. His life was thus of our salvation, if it can but be
seen. That He is seen as God is no suprise, and is as good as true, to
those who are still laboring in the sweat-mines of duality. That Divinity
is defined as exclusive, embodies or exemplifes the
isolationist/separateness of the false principle of exclusion upon which
duality rests.

Jesus life is a signal that integrity empowers. Jesus exists as a timeless
beacon, in the timeless realm which is the Kingdom of God, which is this
realm. His intention, once implemented, continues to bear good fruit; His
intention is to alert us to the way of integrity, which if implemented,
opens the gates of That Kingdom. Thus the truth of his assertion that He is
the way to the father and His Kingdom; his 'life/death' are an enactment of
the potential or possibility open to anyone who realizes.

The choice-factor is clearly emphasized in the story of Jesus; choice of
how _will/intention_ is manifest, _either_ to integrity, or to gains 'of
this world' of duality, is a clear choice that is made. That one would
choose, is the first step in the direction _either_ of the gaining of the
power which is the result of 'having integrity', or to the direction of
trading one's 'soul' for worldly gain. 'One may not serve both God and

Here then is the answer to the question of the practical application of
Nonduality; that the only application of Nonduality is the maintaining of
integrity, which is something which can be done only for oneself.
Nonduality is an individual experience; an imagined community of Nondual
realizers is thus a community of individuals 'in integrity'. I leave it to
the reader to imagine the possible fruits of such a community. That such a
community as a possibilty is imaginable, and thus possible, is intuitively

When the rewards of this 'world of duality' are finally seen to be fickle
and empty, what then? The story of Jesus remains, as a hint to the
direction which one may move, to the 'final reward' of Heaven. The
'finality factor' is not to state an end, but timeless beginingless endless
already-always Being. Momentum is thus converted to stillness, and
direction becomes one-point-only, nowhere to go, having already arrived,
from here to Here.

Jesus life [2] is thus a statement of Be "Here" now [3]. Jesus pointed to
himself as an example of our own potential to be able to enter where He
dwelt then and now, the Kingdom of Heaven, which is not gained, but
received by Grace. I might say that Grace is our natural state, and thus
that our worries of insufficiency and mortality are the very fetters which
bind us to the world of duality.

Leaving attachment is not detachment, but an acknowledgement of our
weakness of succumbing to attachment; and is thus properly stated as

Detachment is denial of weakness; non-attachment is confession of weakness,
which confession itself points to integrity as a way of Being, and is thus
strength. Thus the confession of weakness, is the means to the entry of the
Kingdom of Heaven, or as can be said, the Nondual perspective. This
confession can be stated as "Not my will, but Thine". [4]

If we look within, and see God's outlook, we see our innate Divinity, and
that we truely dwell in the Kingdom of Heaven. To adopt the Divine is not
to reject the profane, but to accept that our Divine way is that of
_choice_ of how _intention and will_ shall be manifested by us. The profane
thus provides the contrast which makes choice possible; and thus the
profane is Divine. The simulatanaeity of the Divine and the profane is the
Nondual perspective, and is a dynamic or movement which is the eternal
conversation which creates 'the universe'. How we surf this movement is
either by the Grace of surrender, or by the struggle of resistance. Grace
carries, while struggle exhausts and produces frustration and bitterness.

"The sage swims effortlessly in the same ocean in which the psychotic drowns".

==Gene Poole==

[1] That Name is aliased as "Jesus". Perhaps there are other aliases.

[2] Here we see how our cultural conditioning has biased us. If I speak as
I have here, have I confessed that I am "a Christian", or have I 'merely
used' the life of Jesus as an example of the way of

I have tried to intermix the terminology of Nonduality with the classical
symbolisms of Biblical speech, to attempt to draw parallels where I see

[3] Here is hear; hearing is "Here-ing". By saying 'hear me', I am saying
'be here with me'.

[4] I post this as a tribute to the birth of Jesus. Although His reality,
and the date of His birth may be in dispute, this is my season-specific
For a clue as to how the speech of Nondualism is said and heard, go to this


I would like to emphasize the reality of 'Divine Anarchy'; I observe that
many on this list, participate from that 'standpoint'. The willingness to
'leave it all behind' and to thus 'find everything' seems to be underlying
much of what is shared here.

"Fractuous impulses" may arise, when specific criterea are asserted to be
necessary ingredients in any implied 'recipe for awakening'. Yet,
'fractuous impulses' are the very force which is needed to crack the shell
of the egg. Further, I observe that when such crack-producing energies are
successfully exerted, that the 'newborn one' may find themselves in a new
shell which is considerably smaller than the one which would have been
provided, had that one been using a Nondual Beak, rather than a
criterea-bound one.

A 'newborn one' as Divine Anarchist discovers a realm of No Rules; this is
important to note. If such a one, casts about for the security which rules
_seem_ to provide, the outer boundaries of experience suddenly move closer,
thus re-initiating the entire process.

If a 'newborn Divine Anarchist' is born, and remembers the intensity of the
struggle as veritable suffocation and escape from constraint which it is,
such a one will 'be wise' to realize that to _abide_ in the Realm of No
Rules, is to live as a native in that realm.

One such, abiding, perceives the outer boundaries to move closer and away,
a fluctuation similar to breathing. By such a one's abiding each such
'breath' of the larger egg, the egg expands and expands. This new and
larger realm, is thus 'room to grow into'. One such, abiding, thus
perceives that by abiding the fluctuations of the apparent universe, each
breath draws a richness and complexity which itself then 'abides' or dwells
as greater space. Abiding the Breath of the Universe is thus to expand into
the Universe, and to eventually adopt that breath as one's own. The
Universe is always ready to perform this 'CPR' for the newborn; it is
important for the midwife to remember this.

If the midwife begins an argument with the newborn, the newborn is thus
limited to the scope of that argument. This is a restatement of what is
called 'social conditioning'.

Now, if one is casting about for a superior midwife, one which will not
argue or limit, one may choose a midwife whose nature is that of silence
and also of abiding; abiding speaks loudly of 'what is as what is', and
gently calls for acceptance of 'what is' as the means to breath freely in
any universe, no matter how constraining. In any universe, one who breaths
freely, moves freely. The Divine Anarchist is only as free, as they are
able to abide freedom. Improper self-definition (ultimately, even as a
'Divine Anarchist') serves only to limit the size of one's universe, and
thus to reinitiate the cycle of suffocation and breakout.

I would point to popular conceptions of 'reincarnation' as being
metaphorical to the series or sequence of 'breakouts' which _one who
grows_, indeed experiences in one apparent lifetime. Such may be seen then,
as 'breaths' , no matter how maddeningly widely spaced such breaths may be.

Attempting to abide by 'rules' is the same as 'holding one's breath';
eventually, such holding of the breath may lead to a 'blissful euphoria',
which may be mistaken for 'nirvana'; this is what Judi expended so much
breath to say. And if those 'rules' are the positive-imaged versions of
'love', anyone who argues against such rules is then likely to be cast as
'against love'. That is (one part of) the dilemma in which Judi is now

Of what place in the teaching of wisdom, has chastisement? It is possible
to teach wisdom, but the teacher, by example, must exercise that same
wisdom which applies overall, or the teaching is negated by the example of
the teacher. This can be said. It is the wisdom of immunity, which appears
as the argument against wisdom-teachings which are valid, yet which are
delivered in a manner which is _expedient to the situation_ and ignore the
long-term effect of method of delivery. Better the teaching of wisdom
unheard, than to negate wisdom by overly-expedient methods of teaching.

Of course, the Universe is a large place; it can and does absorb the
emanations of all Beings, no matter the intent of those Beings; the
reflection of intent, back toward the point of emanation, is a conversation
which may be eavesdropped upon.

I have always had a very sensitive 'sense of hearing'; I was
measured to be able to hear beyond 40kHz, several years ago. This has been
a blessing as well as an annoyance; at times, I have been unable to sleep
at night, because I am able to hear the 'raster' noise (the high-pitched
'ringing' sound which emanates from the cathode-ray tube) of a neighbor's
TV-set, right through the walls and twenty feet away.

I have attuned myself to the 'sound current', which is what is heard when
there is no other sound to hear. An E Indian religion uses meditation on
this sound, as a form of devotion. If I listen carefully, the sound splits
into several sounds, again and again until a full spectrum of harmonious
sound is heard.

The above is for background. Your question refers to my (condensed) version
of an experience I had last summer, while camping on the wilderness coast
of Washington State, on the Olympic Pennisula (Shi Shi beach, to be exact),
with my most excellent friend, Princess Dharma (no relation to 'our'

I always camp on the sand, among the large drifwood logs, rather than up in
the moist, bug and mouse-filled woods. As a result, I have discovered that
if I lay down on the sand, the rather overpowering sound of the breaking
surf diminishes to a whisper, and other sounds can then be heard, such as
the tiny movements of animals in the woods. I have been suprised by this,
assuming that the sound of the surf would 'drown' all other sounds, but I
found that they all coexist; what I hear, depends upon exactly what I
listen for.

Anyway, I always spend a lot of time in deep meditation while I am on the
ocean beaches. It is never boring, and is the finest place that I have ever
found for the effortless gathering of deep impressions and insights. It is
being immersed in the richest possible symphony of what is spontaneously
occuring in this world, and a total massage of my senses. I can really 'let
go' while I am there, and I go every year.

Last year, after participating in this ongoing conversation (the Nonduality
solon, I AM list, and all of my close and intimate friends who also share
this), I undertook the trip. I found myself in a perfect environment. The
summer climate on the Oly Penn is ideal for humans; I am usually able to go
naked much of the time, due isolation imposed by the rigorous backpack
required to reach the beaches. There are no motor vehicles allowed, no
guns, dogs, etc. It is very peaceful and as private as I would like.

So I find myself on the beach on this sunny day, gentle wind, gulls,
pleasant companionship indeed. I am meditating.

I go deep, deep, deep. As I do, the sounds change from 'present' to
'background', as Self becomes foreground. This is all as usual. I surrender
to the flow of my nature, and lose all boundaries; I am as big as the sky,
and become aware of the Urth as my body. I look out into virtual space, to
see the universe that my Karma manufactures. It reflects back on me, and
the insights pour in. I am breathing it through me; lightning and gentle
thunder accompany my experience. I transform and transform, form solid to
liquid to gasseous states, find myself living in the spaces between
gravitons (weightless). I become an ancient metallic Buddha-stature, hollow
bronze; tiny mothlike souls spat wetly against my inner surface, to slid in
bliss toward the pool of warm blood at my base. All is well, all is normal
(for me).

Suddenly, I become aware of an argument; it is intense and is going on
nearby, 'disturbing' my meditation. In fact, it is an agrument between a
man and a woman, but I am not familiar with the voices. As I allow my
attention to genlty settle on this event, I become aware that this is an
unusual conversation that I am hearing; it has the character of music, of
strings and percussion and piano, but very tightly perfomed, with atonal
overtones. There are no echos; it is crisp and tight, and very energetic in
execution. As I listen, intrigued and in fact rapt (never having heard this
before!), I wonder what this really is.

I sense a stong male presense; also a powerful and reactive female. The
male seemed to be quite confident, and the female quite pissed. It went on
and on and on, endlessly. It was apparant that the male, confidant as he
seemed, would NEVER stop his attempt to 'convince' the female, and that she
would NEVER stop being critical of his programmed and unconscious male
'tendencies'. (Later, the implications of this knowing, were deeply
embarassing to me. I suddenly had the female perspective, and knew, deeply,
why it is that women 'argue' the way they tend to do. )

I was temped to remove myself from my chosen meditative state, to more
closely observe what was going on, but as I moved in that direction, the
agrument blurred into mere noise. It was at that point that I realized that
I was actually hearing something that was always going on, but that I had
never before heard. I decided to deepen my state, to better tune in to the
process which I had 'discovered'.

It dawned upon me that I was witnessing an 'elemental' conversing with
another 'elemental', and that in that process, a tiny bit of 'reality' was
being negotiated into being. I saw this clearly. I cannot explain how such
is done, but it was clear that such conversations are responsible for 'all'
manifestations of what is; this realization dawned with a thunderous
clarity. I experienced a passion then, very deep and profound; I realized
that I was in the process of an initiation.

Shiva (Siva) and Shakti (Sakti) are creating and holding this apparent
universe in the configuration which is appropriate to the purpose of our
incarnation. Our 'gender' manifestation somehow regards our bias in the
polarity-factor of this ongoing creation. I find it exceedingly
strange/significant that the micropoles of reality itself (the basic realm
of interchangable modules) so closely resemble our 'gender-character' as
human men and women.

Since this described initiation, I have been able to hear the conversation
in every sound; every sound is a complex composite of these conversations,
in constant negotiation. It is the 'separate' nature of the polarity that
makes a discreet universe possible; this universe, then, is the result of
an ancient disagreement, which is in process of being resolved. I do my
part to resolve this ancient disagreement, but it is a very deep
displacement that is resposible for it; it has to do with the use of force,
versus abiding in power.

Our 'dilemma' is defined thus; if we use force, we lose power. If we do not
use force, we make no 'gains' in the world, but we retain our power.
Expenditure of power occurs when power is converted to force; one who uses
force, gives that force as power to the one upon who force is used.

The question becomes this; do we strive for worldly gains, and lose power,
or do we retain power, and let the apparent world pass us by? That seems to
be the nature of the disagreement, and the answer seems to be this; abide
in power, and be open to receiving the gifts of others, freely given. This
is the point of view of woman, and her basic objection to the forceful
nature of man. Man desires and uses force, but loses power as a result,
while woman abides in power, unable to give what has already been taken by
desirous and reactive man. Woman than must also abide the nature of man,
while perpetuating his line, hoping all the while for the kind of
resolution which would allow the spontaneous dissolution of this 'material'

I cannot hope to have explained this all, to the satisfaction of everyone.
It is offered as my experience only.

I also offer this; that Krsna's FLUTE is my breath, and the sacred DRUM is
my heart. The eternal dance of life is so played into Being, accompanied by
the clanging of the symbols which are these words.

Gene Poole's Home Page