|
|
Post by inavalan on Jun 16, 2020 20:42:43 GMT -5
(from "A New Beginning 1", pages 165-167, Q&A) Interesting that you are quoting from this book. I've never read it but I remember Abe actually rejecting parts of it a decade later. How did you find it? I discovered Abraham-Hicks about two and a half years ago. Probably somebody mentioned it on a forum. I thought that the best way to see what that was about was to read / browse some of their first books, before the Hicks established stroger beliefs on the subject. All the channels deviate from their beginnings somewhat. As they get more proficient at channeling, their beliefs become stronger, and they introduce more distortions to the messages they receive. It takes a consciously sustained effort not to do that. I didn't go further than 2-3 of the early Abraham-Hicks books. EDIT: a quick google search: www.pdfdrive.com/esther-hicks-a-new-beginning-1pdf-e52754474.html |
|
|
|
Post by esponja on Jun 17, 2020 2:07:33 GMT -5
Mmm not sure I’m ready to post this one to facebook! Racial DiscriminationABRAHAM: Esther was watching the television before you came. The subject was racial discrimination. And new understanding came to Esther. Racial discrimination is created by the being who feels abused. By the being who believes that he is being treated unfairly. And that belief, that expectation, attracts it out of beings who otherwise would never be racialists. Most beings have never given it a thought, for it is not something that they have interacted with at all. But because there is this belief that "Because I am a certain color I am mistreated," then as I walk the streets, I solicit that from every being with whom I interact. But I do not know that I am doing it through my thought, you see, and so I blame you. I blame you because you look at me strangely, and I think you don't like me because I am not the color that you are, you see. And it has nothing to do with you. I have solicited it from you, through my thought. Do you see? Are you understanding this? Are you understanding that in every relationship you have, whenever you are having unpleasant experiences, you are attracting the unpleasant experience because that is where you are giving your attention. (from "A New Beginning 1", page 133) |
|
|
|
Post by esponja on Jun 17, 2020 2:12:39 GMT -5
❤️❤️❤️❤️ Want (intend) it, and allow it, and it is
-- you attract them and push themABRAHAM: In the moment that you are excited about it, you are. In the moment that you are worried about it and thinking you cannot afford it, you are pushing it away. And that is the way most of your creations are. They are floating around in limbo out here somewhere. Created, just not coming into your experience, because you attract them and push them, attract them and push, attract them and push them. The key is to monitor the way that you feel, and whenever you feel negative emotion, stop doing whatever you're doing. Stop thinking, speaking or acting) stop doing whatever it is that has brought forth that negative emotion. Now that doesn't mean you have to fix the thought. That doesn't mean you have to convince yourself you can afford it. It means you have to stop thinking that you can't afford it, by thinking of something else. COMMENT: Distraction. ABRAHAM: Distraction. Now hear this: Let us begin again for the benefit of those who have not heard. We will speak very quickly this process... Want it and allow it and it is. Make a statement "I intend." Intend is more powerful than want, for intend includes the expectation and the wanting. "I intend," and whatever it is, "for these reasons." Write the reasons that came from you. Not the reasons that someone wants you to want it. Write the reasons that you want it. There is power in your wanting. There is no power in someone else's wanting for you. Until you are wanting it, it is not powerful for you. On the other side of your paper write all of the reasons that you know it will be. That will enhance the belief, or the allowing, part of the equation. Consider it done. Fold your paper and put it in your pocket, and say, "That was easy. What is next?" If you will not think about it in negative terms again, it will be yours. And if you will think about it in positive terms very often, it will be yours very quickly. Now, you are moving through your day. As long as you are feeling only positive emotion, or only no emotion, it is on its way to you, but in the moment you are feeling negative emotion about that subject, you are pushing it away. Now, if you will say, "I am feeling negative emotion; what do I want?" regarding any subject, distracting yourself in any way, so that you stop that miscreating, that is very good. You will stop the miscreating. (from "A New Beginning 1", pages 159-160) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2020 11:52:20 GMT -5
Amazing and inspiring. It’s the Quantum model of reality versus the Newtonian model. Alignment and then.. 👏🏼👏🏼 Thanks for posting Reefs. Good point. In a sense, what Abe teach transcends causality. On the action level it's 'do A in order to get to B'. But as we've seen, they want us to move beyond the action level (thinking is action too, btw). And beyond that level, it's more like 'with A you always also get B'.
I'm glad you like it.  Which is what, as far as I understand it, the Buddhists' 'Dependent Origination' is all about. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 18, 2020 21:41:59 GMT -5
Good point. In a sense, what Abe teach transcends causality. On the action level it's 'do A in order to get to B'. But as we've seen, they want us to move beyond the action level (thinking is action too, btw). And beyond that level, it's more like 'with A you always also get B'.
I'm glad you like it. Which is what, as far as I understand it, the Buddhists' 'Dependent Origination' is all about. Interesting. Hadn't thought of that. But that's basically Niz' perspective as well. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 18, 2020 21:44:21 GMT -5
Relationships (6)
Focus on the best you can in others: and when characteristics you want are missing, practice seeing them anyway— for when you practice the thoughts of the things that you desire, they must show up in your experience. It is Law.
Every person with whom you interact holds a wide variety of Vibrational potential for you to choose from. And in the same way that you deliberately select the things you want to experience for lunch as you choose from the food buffet, you can choose the characteristics of the people you are interacting with as well. Even if the majority of what others are living and feeling and being is not pleasing to you, still you have the ability to look for and find characteristics that do please you. And when you make that your common practice, you will attract increasingly better experiences to yourself from each of them.
Abraham-Hicks, Getting into the Vortex, 2011
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 18, 2020 21:53:24 GMT -5
Interesting that you are quoting from this book. I've never read it but I remember Abe actually rejecting parts of it a decade later. How did you find it? I discovered Abraham-Hicks about two and a half years ago. Probably somebody mentioned it on a forum. I thought that the best way to see what that was about was to read / browse some of their first books, before the Hicks established stroger beliefs on the subject. All the channels deviate from their beginnings somewhat. As they get more proficient at channeling, their beliefs become stronger, and they introduce more distortions to the messages they receive. It takes a consciously sustained effort not to do that. I didn't go further than 2-3 of the early Abraham-Hicks books. EDIT: a quick google search: www.pdfdrive.com/esther-hicks-a-new-beginning-1pdf-e52754474.htmlFrom my perspective, the A-H message hasn't really changed over the years, but the audience certainly did. They started with a handful of people, mostly friends or people they knew. It's a much broader audience now and LOA has gone mainstream. The presentation of the message has changed significantly. The earlier dialogs were more to the point, nowadays there's a lot more rambling going on. The core message is the same though. A real classic that never gets old is Ask And It Is Given. It's the only book I would recommend. Another classic is their meditation CD. It comes with a booklet. And that booklet is a real gem. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2020 7:39:41 GMT -5
Which is what, as far as I understand it, the Buddhists' 'Dependent Origination' is all about. Interesting. Hadn't thought of that. But that's basically Niz' perspective as well. As B can't exist independent of A, does A cease to exist when B goes? |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 20, 2020 11:30:33 GMT -5
Interesting. Hadn't thought of that. But that's basically Niz' perspective as well. As B can't exist independent of A, does A cease to exist when B goes? If we think of it in pairs or as one unit, that would be the correct conclusion. But what Niz is saying is that causation is a mental construct only, as are space and time. I call them mental overlays. Because in reality, none of these actually exist. According to Niz, in reality, things don't have a particular cause, the (possible) causes are innumerable. The source of all of this is the Supreme (aka Self), which has no cause. That source is not a cause and no cause is a source. In that sense, everything is uncaused. A-H always use the water/faucet analogy to explain this. If someone asks you where the water comes from in your kitchen, you could just point at the faucet and, in a sense, that would be correct. But there's so much more to the story! So while in our daily lives these water/faucet stories have some practical value in explaining how things happen or work, they still fall short of really explaining why things happen, why things are as they are. As Niz says, a thing is what it is because the universe it what it is. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2020 11:34:53 GMT -5
As B can't exist independent of A, does A cease to exist when B goes? If we think of it in pairs or as one unit, that would be the correct conclusion. But what Niz is saying is that causation is a mental construct only, as are space and time. I call them mental overlays. Because in reality, none of these actually exist. According to Niz, in reality, things don't have a particular cause, the (possible) causes are innumerable. The source of all of this is the Supreme (aka Self), which has no cause. That source is not a cause and no cause is a source. In that sense, everything is uncaused. A-H always use the water/faucet analogy to explain this. If someone asks you where the water comes from in your kitchen, you could just point at the faucet and, in a sense, that would be correct. But there's so much more to the story! So while in our daily lives these water/faucet stories have some practical value in explaining how things happen or work, they still fall short of really explaining why things happen, why things are as they are. As Niz says, a thing is what it is because the universe it what it is. if it could be any different then it would be. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 20, 2020 11:49:32 GMT -5
As B can't exist independent of A, does A cease to exist when B goes? If we think of it in pairs or as one unit, that would be the correct conclusion. But what Niz is saying is that causation is a mental construct only, as are space and time. I call them mental overlays. Because in reality, none of these actually exist. According to Niz, in reality, things don't have a particular cause, the (possible) causes are innumerable. The source of all of this is the Supreme (aka Self), which has no cause. That source is not a cause and no cause is a source. In that sense, everything is uncaused. A-H always use the water/faucet analogy to explain this. If someone asks you where the water comes from in your kitchen, you could just point at the faucet and, in a sense, that would be correct. But there's so much more to the story! So while in our daily lives these water/faucet stories have some practical value in explaining how things happen or work, they still fall short of really explaining why things happen, why things are as they are. As Niz says, a thing is what it is because the universe it what it is. Intellect can only ever find confusion at the confluence of the relative and the absolute.  |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 20, 2020 13:34:01 GMT -5
If we think of it in pairs or as one unit, that would be the correct conclusion. But what Niz is saying is that causation is a mental construct only, as are space and time. I call them mental overlays. Because in reality, none of these actually exist. According to Niz, in reality, things don't have a particular cause, the (possible) causes are innumerable. The source of all of this is the Supreme (aka Self), which has no cause. That source is not a cause and no cause is a source. In that sense, everything is uncaused. A-H always use the water/faucet analogy to explain this. If someone asks you where the water comes from in your kitchen, you could just point at the faucet and, in a sense, that would be correct. But there's so much more to the story! So while in our daily lives these water/faucet stories have some practical value in explaining how things happen or work, they still fall short of really explaining why things happen, why things are as they are. As Niz says, a thing is what it is because the universe it what it is. Intellect can only ever find confusion at the confluence of the relative and the absolute. Now you know why the state of dreamless deep sleep has such a good reputation, hehe. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Jun 20, 2020 15:45:09 GMT -5
As B can't exist independent of A, does A cease to exist when B goes? If we think of it in pairs or as one unit, that would be the correct conclusion. But what Niz is saying is that causation is a mental construct only, as are space and time. I call them mental overlays. Because in reality, none of these actually exist. According to Niz, in reality, things don't have a particular cause, the (possible) causes are innumerable. The source of all of this is the Supreme (aka Self), which has no cause. That source is not a cause and no cause is a source. In that sense, everything is uncaused. A-H always use the water/faucet analogy to explain this. If someone asks you where the water comes from in your kitchen, you could just point at the faucet and, in a sense, that would be correct. But there's so much more to the story! So while in our daily lives these water/faucet stories have some practical value in explaining how things happen or work, they still fall short of really explaining why things happen, why things are as they are. As Niz says, a thing is what it is because the universe it what it is. The way I think about it, unrelated to the belief systems discussed here, is that a current situation (that may be perceived as an effect) can propagate its influence into the past (not only into the future), creating a causative chain of events in reverse order. The space-time construct isn't less "real" because it is a construct, as everything is a construct, and it is part of the basic assumption of this reality. This reality's basic assumptions are the training wheels for the emerging conscious entities. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Jun 20, 2020 15:56:51 GMT -5
Intellect can only ever find confusion at the confluence of the relative and the absolute. Now you know why the state of dreamless deep sleep has such a good reputation, hehe. I doubt there is a state of "dreamless deep sleep". In my experience, immediately when I fall asleep I start dreaming. Always. When we don't recall, it doesn't mean we didn't dream. REM isn't the only period when we dream either. What are our dreams? In my opinion / experience, dreams are symbolic translations (into our outer senses language) of the knowledge and guidance that we receive from within. No exception. Dreams operate with more or less familiar elements and concepts, but those are just utilized to build the symbolic message. If you pay closer attention, dreams are redundant. The same message is repeated over and over under different symbolic guises, inside the same sleep segment, so that the ego has a better chance to get the message (which most egos still don't). |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 21, 2020 11:07:05 GMT -5
If we think of it in pairs or as one unit, that would be the correct conclusion. But what Niz is saying is that causation is a mental construct only, as are space and time. I call them mental overlays. Because in reality, none of these actually exist. According to Niz, in reality, things don't have a particular cause, the (possible) causes are innumerable. The source of all of this is the Supreme (aka Self), which has no cause. That source is not a cause and no cause is a source. In that sense, everything is uncaused. A-H always use the water/faucet analogy to explain this. If someone asks you where the water comes from in your kitchen, you could just point at the faucet and, in a sense, that would be correct. But there's so much more to the story! So while in our daily lives these water/faucet stories have some practical value in explaining how things happen or work, they still fall short of really explaining why things happen, why things are as they are. As Niz says, a thing is what it is because the universe it what it is. The way I think about it, unrelated to the belief systems discussed here, is that a current situation (that may be perceived as an effect) can propagate its influence into the past (not only into the future), creating a causative chain of events in reverse order. The space-time construct isn't less "real" because it is a construct, as everything is a construct, and it is part of the basic assumption of this reality. This reality's basic assumptions are the training wheels for the emerging conscious entities. Where Abe, Seth and non-duality agree is that there is only NOW. Because no matter if you think of the past, the present or the future, you are always doing it NOW. That's why Seth says, the point of power is in the present and why Tolle talks about the power of NOW. Seth usually talks about different concepts of time, clock time and psychological. Clock time is fixed, psychological time is flexible. And then there's what Seth calls 'the spacious present' (in Abe-speak: 'the vortex') which does away with both concepts of time. So sometimes you will hear Seth talk about 'probable selves' or how your past self gets inspired by your future self or vice versa. In the spacious present, your past self, present self and your future self all exist simultaneously, NOW. So once the idea of linear time goes out the window, the concept reincarnation goes out with it as well, as does the conventional idea of cause and effect. So while Niz and Seth have a different approach to this, they come to the same conclusion. But this has to be realized in order to have any effect in your life. You have to see how concepts of time and space just fall away, and then you suddenly stand in the NOW, which actually is your natural state. Are you familiar with Tolle? He talks a lot about this. I'd say a reference for the NOW is absolutely essential for understanding non-duality. Actually, by default everyone has that reference, because that's how we typically spend our early childhood, in the NOW. But most adults seem to have 'lost' that reference. Because most adults live in their heads (lost in their own conceptual overlays) and the NOW is something mind cannot touch, it can't be conceptualized. So when you hear people talk about non-duality, you have to look beyond the mere concepts that are presented to you. What is said here can easily be mistaken for a belief system because language forces us to use concepts and concepts usually refer to belief systems. However, ideally, that's not the case in non-duality discussions. Here, concepts are only a way of communicating, mere pointers. What is important is not the concept, but what's standing behind the concept, which is a realization, i.e. seeing things from a perspective that is prior to mind, prior to any conceptualization. |
|
