Interesting article. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
There are a few things that I found curious:
Stephen Hawking was, of course, a brilliant human being. However, his list of 3 best applies to himself, because it seems to reflect his personal life experience and viewpoint, yet this is hardly universal. What's important to Hawking may very well be low on someone else's list. It may be interesting to read his views, but his views are his own.
Next, regarding "turning passion(s) into work" seems to be backwards. A passion is never work (working to earn a livelihood) and that is what makes it special for anyone who can earn a living doing it. Still, the value of earning money is a mental construct that is pretty negative in many ways, especially if we look at the myriad ways that capitalism causes suffering. When a passion becomes associated with work, to varying degrees, it becomes diluted, stifled, limited, etc.
Next, regarding Rumi's quote, “When you do things from your soul, you feel a river moving in you, a joy.” It seems to me that this has nothing to do with work at all, but rather speaks to awakening to the illusion of the egoic mind and allowing the mind to be clear enough to behold the totality this world has to offer. When this occurs it becomes apparent that the world is in you and not the other way around.
Lastly, regarding the Ram Dass quote. This is something I am quite familiar with, but I don't want to go into the details about my own experiences, so I'll just say that many people have spoken about this projection, but until it actually dawns on you as a realization, like so many spiritual ideas, it is only understood intellectually at best. At worst, it is misunderstood and misinterpreted. At some point it may occur to one that all that she sees is her own self — not the self of the ego, but the self of consciousness. Since all is contained within consciousness then obviously all that we see is ourselves.
Regarding the "evolution" of which Ram Dass spoke, I am reminded of of Carl Jung's finding that the types of people with whom we become involved is much more nuanced than the idea that we are meeting people on or of our own level. It's something to think about: A person repeatedly comes into some form of relationship with a certain type of person, not because that person is on his own level, but because he is seen, unconsciously, as someone who can provide an opportunity to have a need met. For example, a person abused in childhood may grow up to marry an abusive spouse because that spouse will hopefully (or so the unconscious mind hopes) provide an opportunity for the abused person to change the outcome of the relationship and thereby move beyond his or her trauma. Of course, such a release rarely happens, but this is the hope of one who has been traumatized or whose needs were not met.
Just some food for thought.
