Exclusiveness is incompleteness, and inclusiveness is completeness

Updated November 10, 2022

If a feeling, such as irritation, is not excluded but included in your awareness of yourself, it is intense but short-lived. Unfortunately, this intimacy often seems so scary that most prefer to avoid their feelings. Photo © Alexius Jorgensen.

When you do not try to escape the moment as it is by excluding what you perceive as unpleasant from your awareness, you enter a state of not-knowing. Should you, out of habit, exclude something from your experience, you do not have to correct it. Instead, you include your mistake.

WHEN INCLUDED, ANNOYANCE UNDOES THE BELIEF IN DUALITY
You cannot avoid irritation when you believe to be in a world of duality because it is a world of polarity. That is why you cannot have satisfaction without annoyance. Nevertheless, most people suppress irritation to feel only satisfied. But since satisfaction cannot be defined without irritation, what you get is confusion.

Irritation is enhanced when justified because blaming somebody or something else for what you feel is only possible when you believe in separation, which is the cause of irritation.

To hide this is your own doing, you blame somebody else for having caused it. But making others bad to make you look good makes you feel more disconnected. So to hide this discomfort, you judge something in the world as wrong and try to make it right. But since this boosts the belief in separation, you feel cut off whenever you do the right thing.

No worries. That is simply a warning saying do not suppress feelings. Therefore, irritation is short-lived if you do not separate yourself from feeling irritated but include it.


Justifying feelings is painful because it disassociate you from feeling complete in a world of duality. But if a feeling is included to the extent that you are nothing but that, there is nobody to feel incomplete. Photo © Alexius Jorgensen.

Inclusiveness is not about owning your flaws since that confirms the belief in being someone definitive. Neither is neither about accepting the dark side but about not being defined, thus in the bliss of nothing.

Including uncomfortable feelings in this way may seem similar to the Jungian idea of integrating the shadow side of the personality. But inclusiveness, as described in Alexius’ Enlightened Non-Teachings, is not about becoming whole but being nobody.

But while believing in being somebody, you act accordingly. For example, if you feel disturbed by your neighbours, you blame them for upsetting you. By doing that, you become aware of how irritating it is to judge them. Being grateful that your neighbours make you see that you are free to move forward without excluding your uncomfortable feelings from yourself by blaming others for having caused them. Instead, you include the feelings you experience inside you by totally being them. Since that leaves nothing to define them, they cannot establish you as someone definitive. Thus the belief in separation cannot be upheld.

What is said above about uncomfortable feelings also applies to comfortable feelings justified by somebody. When you, for example, assume your spouse causes a feeling of love, it has been excluded from you instead of included. Thus separation is experienced as real and oneness as false. In short, if you want to have the belief in separation undone, it makes no difference what you seem to feel while believing to be someone definitive. That is, if you do not exclude what you feel by justifying it by the world but include it unedited, which is done by being nothing but what you feel.

That said, it takes more than one to include something, and there is no more than that which is One since it is formless, thus endless, so inclusiveness is as illusionary as exclusiveness. But contrary to exclusiveness, which enhances the belief in separation, inclusiveness undoes it.


Without polarity a world a world of duality cannot be experienced. So when the opposing sides of contrasts, for example light and darkness, are included, there is nothing to experience, thus nothing to hide that which cannot be experienced, namely non-duality. Photo © Alexius Jorgensen.

Most believe that they will feel good when something bad has been made right. However, the problem is not good versus bad, but that you feel disconnected when choosing between more than one because that which is you is no different from that which is one, and it requires more than one to choose.

BEING NOTHING BUT BAD, YOU ENTER A STATE OF NOT-KNOWING:
When you include the bad feelings by being nothing but that, there is nothing good to contrast them, thus neither bad nor good. Hence it is a state of not-knowing.

That is the way it goes with any other feeling you include. For example, being nothing but sad, there is nothing to contrast it. Thus neither sadness nor its contrast, happiness, seems to exist. As this nothingness momentarily rubs off on the other contrasts making up your personality, there is nobody left to judge the apparent differences of the world to make a difference. Thus you are in a state of not-knowing.

Not being exclusive but inclusive does not mean you must accept all the world’s appearances, but include the disgust that some of them trigger as much as you include the joy that others seem to bring.

A STATE OF NOT-KNOWING DOES NOT REQUIRE LEARNING, JUST HONESTY
The two cats – Wincent and Guinevere – with who Alexius shares a home have a deep territorial instinct, so when a new cat showed up in their home, they got upset – especially Guinevere. She freaked out and furiously ran away. When Guinevere returned, she did not notice the stranger was still there, so she laid down on the floor without worry – until she suddenly looked around and saw him.

Once again, she furiously left, and even though the visitor had left when she returned, she was still agitated. To prove it was justified, she searched for spots of leftover scent from the visitor. Whenever she found one, she screamed to show Wincent and Alexius how much the stranger had hurt her.

Photo © Alexius Jorgensen.

To include a feeling as it is, you do not justify it. In this way, somebody, who appears to make you angry, becomes somebody who helps you become nobody in a state of not-knowing. Photo © Alexius Jorgensen.

The anger Guinevere held onto was supposed to make the unfamiliar cat feel so bad that it never would return. But since the new cat was mainly asleep, he was unaware of her anger. But another one felt punished by her rage, namely Guinevere. The fury was eating her up from the inside.

The above is not a story about anger, but that justifying something set up a fictitious cause and effect. In the case of Guinevere, her justified anger made her believe the foreign cat caused it. However, if the experience of anger is not turned into a story of why and how the experience quickly dissolves because without a cause, there is no effect. Read more about that here. So if Guinevere had not justified her experience of distress with the foreign cat, her anger would quickly have passed by.

A state of not-knowing can be compared to a zone where there is no need to to disguise, transcend or transform anything because nothing is seen as definite.

As a kitten, Guinevere was left several times by people. Hence she freaks out whenever something triggers old feelings of betrayal. And Alexius grew up in a home that felt like a war zone (read more about that here), so he tends to justify his insecurity with a devastating power perceived outside of him.

However, feelings from the past are not an ongoing problem if we include them as ours. We do not have to back into the past to do that, but include the present pain in the stomach, for example, as that is where most unwanted feelings are hidden. Read more about that in hack #4.3 The toxic mix of physical and non-physical issues.

That frees you from your story about a world made of memories. Therefore, since those memories were used to keep specific feelings fearsome, the concepts that conditioned you into upholding the fear fall apart.


Alexius’ Duality Hacks are not a new philosophy or religion with a new vocabulary and rules you must learn and strictly follow. Should you not want to include your cats, feel free to exclude them. It does not matter, as long as you include your unwillingness to include. Photo © Alexius Jorgensen.

The idea about living in the now is, like most so-called spiritual ideas, based on exclusion. In this case, the past and future are excluded to highlight a separate point in between them imagined as now.

On the other hand, a state of not-knowing is not based on exclusion. It includes any memory of the past and expectations of the future. It has no rules but to be inclusive, and this happens automatically because there is nobody to label anything in a state of not-knowing.

1005P5207666-Edit

Alexius followed a dried-out river down the mountain towards the sea until the plantation became so impenetrable that he could not make his way through it. Photo © Alexius Jorgensen.

YOU ENTER A STATE OF NOT-KNOWING WHEN YOU INCLUDE YOUR BULLSHIT
When Alexius was stuck in the rainforest for two days without water and food, he had to make his way through many thorny lianas in the dried-out river he followed down the mountain to get to the coast. The thorny lianas came in bundles tightly woven together. Sometimes it took half an hour to pass a distance that, if not for the bushes of lianas, he could have walked in two minutes.

His feet hurt because two nails had been ripped off when he fell down the mountain several times due to branches being so dry that they broke when he tried to hold onto them. Moreover, his clothes were torn apart due to the thorns in the bushes, and his hands were full of blood. Each time he, after intense work, had beaten his way through a bundle of thorny bushes, he felt so tormented that the immense beauty in front of him was dismissed as crap. He blamed the whole world for his shit. But then, suddenly, he had enough of feeling entrapped by conditioned judgments and solutions.

In the middle of nowhere, Alexius had no need to go anywhere. The moment was perfect as it was.

Of course, that did not change his hopeless situation for the better. However, instead of trying to get rid of the horror, Alexius included it. Thus what he had perceived as bad did not seem to hide that everything was fine. Nothing was wrong or missing. Every moment was the perfect moment.

The movie Man vs. Bee with Rowan Atkinson is a perfect example of solving ones rage by fixing something instead of including it as it is.

That was not an intellectual but an emotional change for Alexius. When he stopped trying to get rid of his frustrations of feeling stuck, he burst out in laughter because there was nothing he needed to escape. Hence the journey in the rainforest seemed to mirror how one tries to manipulate the moment into something familiar until, suddenly, the frustrations of never getting it right get too much, so instead of trying to change the moment to get rid of your rage or disappointment, you include what you feel about the moment unedited, thus entering a state of not knowing.

That was where Alexius was when a helicopter wired him up from the rainforest. In other words, when you are in a state of not-knowing the world goes on as usual. However, you do not judge it as usual because nobody is in a not-knowing state. Fortunately, you do not have to get stuck in the rainforest to enter a state of not-knowing. You can do that anywhere by including your undiminished experience of the present moment. Read more about Alexius in the rainforest here.

A state of not-knowing can last from a split second to 45 minutes. But it may seem as if you are forever in a state of not-knowing while dreaming about nothing. Photo © Alexius Jorgensen.

TO INCLUDE THE PRESENT MOMENT IS STRAIGHTFORWARD:
It is not complicated to include your experience of the present moment. For example, if the guy in the above image did not notice the Chinese wallpaper the moment the picture was shot, he has no experience with that to include.

And if he did not look at the food but indulged in childhood memories, to include his experience at the moment, he includes the thoughts and feelings arising from his memories.

In other words, since he was not aware of the Chinese wallpaper, food, or people passing by, that was not his moment. Instead, it was memories of his childhood. So when his reaction to the past is felt unedited, it is included. Thus he is in a state of not-knowing until he disassociates himself from a specific thought or feeling instead of including it.


See the below articles about protecting and justifying your feelings to disassociate yourself from them:


NOTE: This article is part of hack #3.1 Inclusiveness is freedom.