What does it mean to be whole? How do I define it? Why do I feel the need to achieve it? Who will I be when whole?
Fundamental to any discussion about wholeness is the belief that wholeness can be defined. Further, I can know the definition of wholeness. How true is that?
A Definition of Wholeness in Terms of Separation
What if a sense of separation from wholeness is intentional? That separation could be a limitation of awareness that results in an awareness of this experience from my perspective. Wholeness might then be defined in terms of that limitation of awareness. Thus, I might define wholeness in terms of a percent of awareness –
% Wholeness = % Awareness
Might wholeness be who I am as I am that creates the metaphoric reality that represents that being? That is, I am complete and whole as I am in order to have the experience I’m having. Thus,
Wholeness = 100% of my limited current awareness
Who is the “I” or “me” to whom I refer so often? Why do I view my reality from this perspective rather than from yours, others, or all perspectives? From this perspective, I measure and compare from one perspective. I cannot fathom wholeness beyond that perspective. I can only comprehend wholeness through the lens of individuation – from my perspective. Thus,
Wholeness = A Measurable Commodity to ME
Wholeness as a Process of Elimination
If I just eliminate or replace enough wrong behaviors, thoughts, etc, I’ll BE whole and complete. This is based on the religious dogma of the “imperfect soul” who’s conceived in sin and fallen from grace. The fallen one feels the need to dig their way out of the pit into which they’ve fallen.
This is the “I’ll never be enough” principle. Thus,
Wholeness = Not Me
The Need For Borders
My limited awareness demands that definitions have borders I can perceive. My senses must have enough contrast between this and that in order for me to perceive them as comparable. Perhaps I need a border around wholeness in order to perceive it.
A border serves as a line of defense. I can’t defend a concept I can’t define. Thus, my definition of wholeness must defend itself against rivals to continue. Thus,
Wholeness = Defense
Wholeness By Comparison
What if I don’t need to achieve absolute wholeness in order to experience wholeness? What if I could perceive wholeness relative to others? I’d just have to be more whole than I perceive you are. No absolutes or standards of perfection to measure up to. This is the essence of the wholeness measurement problem. Thus,
Wholeness = Me Compared to Not Me
Comparative Measurements (More/Less Whole)
In such a reality of relative wholeness, I might consider myself whole when I compare myself to a variable standard. In this comparative measurement, “wholeness” becomes a judgment call based on intent. Have I achieved less, enough, or more of what I intend?
In this case, I might view wholeness in terms of somewhat, more, and most. Thus,
Wholeness = Enough
Wholeness By Agreement
I feel more whole when others agree with me. This is a defensive definition based on a need to be right, proper, and/or justified.
This is the essence of groups. My group is the IN or right group and all others are outsiders. I feel whole in my group and unwhole outside it. Thus, when agreement satisfies a need for rightness,
Wholeness = Rightness
How do I define wholeness from within limited awareness?
Perhaps we might conclude that wholeness is indefinable. As soon as I define it, it’s no longer wholeness. Maybe wholeness is NOT a concept – and all concepts. Everywhere and nowhere. All and none.
Meanwhile, I’m having a great time exploring all that I think it is and isn’t!