|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 30, 2020 9:29:07 GMT -5
How can both of these be right? A very intense guy who has had a very deep search for most of his life carefully has crafted his question for Abraham, he has written it in advance, a few minutes long. It is a question I have raised here several times, zd usually answers. Why are certain individuals, and even groups of people, squeezed into a corner where there is unavoidable suffering? If we all create our own reality, how can this be? (Nobody would create such a reality). Abraham doesn't shrink from the question, t(he)y answer it very aptly, without disagreeing with the guy with the hat, without disallowing his view. So how can two such divergent views both be right? Yet they are both right. Ya know, when first reading about Don Juan's cubic centimeter of chance, that phrase has always stuck in my mind. The hat-guy-questioner is almost there, at understanding, just a tiny shift needed. But he is ATST he's a million miles away. This is a very powerful dialogue. I found that interesting, and touching. The crux of the issue, seems to me, to be the question of where one individual's reality ends and another's begins... how they intersect and relate. I'm not a solipsist, so I believe in co-creation, but I also love Abe, and am in a few facebook Abe groups. I don't think they explain this aspect well. (by the way, 'Palm Springs' is a fun new film with philosophical undertones) |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jul 30, 2020 10:30:06 GMT -5
How can both of these be right? A very intense guy who has had a very deep search for most of his life carefully has crafted his question for Abraham, he has written it in advance, a few minutes long. It is a question I have raised here several times, zd usually answers. Why are certain individuals, and even groups of people, squeezed into a corner where there is unavoidable suffering? If we all create our own reality, how can this be? (Nobody would create such a reality). Abraham doesn't shrink from the question, t(he)y answer it very aptly, without disagreeing with the guy with the hat, without disallowing his view. So how can two such divergent views both be right? Yet they are both right. Ya know, when first reading about Don Juan's cubic centimeter of chance, that phrase has always stuck in my mind. The hat-guy-questioner is almost there, at understanding, just a tiny shift needed. But he is ATST he's a million miles away. This is a very powerful dialogue. I found that interesting, and touching. The crux of the issue, seems to me, to be the question of where one individual's reality ends and another's begins... how they intersect and relate. I'm not a solipsist, so I believe in co-creation, but I also love Abe, and am in a few facebook Abe groups. I don't think they explain this aspect well. (by the way, 'Palm Springs' is a fun new film with philosophical undertones) is a very good point. Sphere of influence comes in here. I think Abraham makes a good point, in 95% of people what happens is because of unconscious processing. So, basically, in a collective the person or group who is the best manipulator comes out ahead. And then sometimes an individual can take control through force. One end of this stick is the bully, all the way up to dictator of a country. But each individual can be free within whatever circumstances they happen to be in. After posting earlier a great example of this occurred to me, the great Viktor Frankl. He decided that being in a Concentration camp was not going to defeat him. I think Viktor Frankl trumps hat-guy's argument. (No matter what happens externally, it cannot defeat one's internal attitude to life). www.openculture.com/2017/05/holocaust-survivor-viktor-frankl-explains-why-if-we-have-true-meaning-in-our-lives-we-can-make-it-through-the-darkest-of-times.html |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Jul 30, 2020 15:39:36 GMT -5
How can both of these be right? A very intense guy who has had a very deep search for most of his life carefully has crafted his question for Abraham, he has written it in advance, a few minutes long. It is a question I have raised here several times, zd usually answers. Why are certain individuals, and even groups of people, squeezed into a corner where there is unavoidable suffering? If we all create our own reality, how can this be? (Nobody would create such a reality). Abraham doesn't shrink from the question, t(he)y answer it very aptly, without disagreeing with the guy with the hat, without disallowing his view. So how can two such divergent views both be right? Yet they are both right. Ya know, when first reading about Don Juan's cubic centimeter of chance, that phrase has always stuck in my mind. The hat-guy-questioner is almost there, at understanding, just a tiny shift needed. But he is ATST he's a million miles away. This is a very powerful dialogue. [abraham-hicks video] I found that interesting, and touching. The crux of the issue, seems to me, to be the question of where one individual's reality ends and another's begins... how they intersect and relate. I'm not a solipsist, so I believe in co-creation, but I also love Abe, and am in a few facebook Abe groups. I don't think they explain this aspect well. (by the way, 'Palm Springs' is a fun new film with philosophical undertones) You can get a good idea of how individual physical realities are if you think of the individual dream realities. Everything in your reality is created by your subconscious, based on your expectations powered by your emotions. The same for everybody else. There isn't an objective physical reality, but there is a multitude of parallel individual realities, which can be quite different from each other, although they are more alike than different, as all co-participants are in direct contact at subconscious level. Your five senses don't perceive an objective reality, but only the reality your subconscious created. You observe the other co-participants' realities using your inner senses, that people aren't consciously using. In simpler terms, your reality reflects to a certain extent what your inner senses perceive, as your dream reality reflects to a certain extent your physical reality. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jul 30, 2020 16:11:34 GMT -5
Most people are behind the curve, unconsciously processing by default, it's possible to be actively ahead of the curve consciously processing deliberately-(From first few sentences). Beginning minute 5 particularly pertinent.
As a whole, very subtle in a certain sense, but very precise.
|
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jul 30, 2020 18:10:33 GMT -5
I found another good one, how your memories (what you were pastly identified with-as) sabotage your present really wishing-to-do-be.
|
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jul 30, 2020 18:40:19 GMT -5
This is a tricky one, why it's not really the subconscious that's effecting control of the events in your life, but it's the present-thoughts one is having. The questioner even gives an example of a dream that corroborates this which Abraham acknowledges.
|
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jul 30, 2020 21:31:05 GMT -5
This is pretty general but very powerful. I pick it because it's something I've said over and over for eleven years here, and get little response (which Abraham expresses often, but this video is mostly specifically about). The individuation is a point of expression that is always increasing in the capacity to be able to take in more that is (I call it the evolution of consciousness), Abraham calls it ever expanding. So, this is very cool.
|
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jul 31, 2020 5:27:45 GMT -5
How can both of these be right? A very intense guy who has had a very deep search for most of his life carefully has crafted his question for Abraham, he has written it in advance, a few minutes long. It is a question I have raised here several times, zd usually answers. Why are certain individuals, and even groups of people, squeezed into a corner where there is unavoidable suffering? If we all create our own reality, how can this be? (Nobody would create such a reality). Abraham doesn't shrink from the question, t(he)y answer it very aptly, without disagreeing with the guy with the hat, without disallowing his view. So how can two such divergent views both be right? Yet they are both right. Ya know, when first reading about Don Juan's cubic centimeter of chance, that phrase has always stuck in my mind. The hat-guy-questioner is almost there, at understanding, just a tiny shift needed. But he is ATST he's a million miles away. This is a very powerful dialogue. One of the classics applies here: The Book of Job. What also came to mind for me on this was Kiplings voice from "If". If only he could keep his humanity in his embrace of the world's pain. If only we can see and accept how that world, in it's glorious impersonality, is, on one hand, entirely callous to individual pain, but, on the other hand, at the same time, tune in to, and feel how the entirety of eternity is never not conspiring for the individual experience to happen .. well then, we could be that humanity. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Aug 2, 2020 5:43:54 GMT -5
financial well-being (3)
You are never deprived when someone else gains, because abundance expands proportionately to match desires. When the success of another makes your heart sing, your resistance is gone and your own success soars.
Many people believe that there is not enough to go around because they are experiencing the lack of something wanted in their own experience. But the shortage that they are experiencing is not because there is not enough to go around; it is only because they have vibrationally cut themselves off from the abundant supply.
Many believe that there is a quantifiable financial limit that is spread thin, as more people strive to partake of it, and they often feel jealousy or blame as they condemn others for taking more than their fair share. They also feel guilty when they believe that they are taking more than their fair share.
We want you to understand that abundance expands proportionately to match desire, and that there is great untapped abundance not yet allowed by the very humans who have created it. When your life experience causes a focused desire within you, the means to fulfill that desire is created at the same time—but you have to be on the vibrational wavelength with your desire in order to see the path to the fulfillment of it.
A belief in shortage or lack will prevent your discovery of the path to your own creation, and any feeling of resistance indicates that you are on the wrong vibrational path. However, in your understanding of the never-ending abundance of this Universe, you will feel personal delight whenever you observe anyone’s alignment with it, for their achievement can in no way diminish yours, but can only enhance it.
Abraham-Hicks, Getting into the Vortex, 2011
|
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Aug 2, 2020 13:30:10 GMT -5
financial well-being (3)You are never deprived when someone else gains, because abundance expands proportionately to match desires. When the success of another makes your heart sing, your resistance is gone and your own success soars. Many people believe that there is not enough to go around because they are experiencing the lack of something wanted in their own experience. But the shortage that they are experiencing is not because there is not enough to go around; it is only because they have vibrationally cut themselves off from the abundant supply. Many believe that there is a quantifiable financial limit that is spread thin, as more people strive to partake of it, and they often feel jealousy or blame as they condemn others for taking more than their fair share. They also feel guilty when they believe that they are taking more than their fair share. We want you to understand that abundance expands proportionately to match desire, and that there is great untapped abundance not yet allowed by the very humans who have created it. When your life experience causes a focused desire within you, the means to fulfill that desire is created at the same time—but you have to be on the vibrational wavelength with your desire in order to see the path to the fulfillment of it. A belief in shortage or lack will prevent your discovery of the path to your own creation, and any feeling of resistance indicates that you are on the wrong vibrational path. However, in your understanding of the never-ending abundance of this Universe, you will feel personal delight whenever you observe anyone’s alignment with it, for their achievement can in no way diminish yours, but can only enhance it.
Abraham-Hicks, Getting into the Vortex, 2011
This "vibrational" approach reminds of the fishing scene from the old comedy with Louis de Funes, Ni vu, ni connu - 1958. No matter who "taps" the source, the catch goes to the sly ...  video (see about 4:00 mark): www.facebook.com/justlouisdefunes/videos/concours-de-p%C3%AAche/487558431640184/ |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Aug 2, 2020 21:17:08 GMT -5
I know that movie! He was cheating using his dog, if I remember correctly. Very clever.  The vibrational (or emotional journey) approach just means being fully in alignment with your desire. Period. The how, the who and the when is none your concern. In a competition situation that means whoever is most in alignment with his/her/their desire will catch the fish. LOA will see to that. So slyness does only matter to the degree it functions as a means to bring you more into alignment with your desire. Let's say you have the firm belief that the catch always goes to the sly. In that situation, not using some slyness to win the competition would be counter your belief of how to succeed. Which means you would be totally out of alignment with your desire. So if you use slyness, that would be in alignment with your belief of how to succeed and you would be more in alignment with your desire. Which will increase your chances of winning. However, believing that only slyness will get you there is severely limiting your options, it is an indication of shortage consciousness which again will work against you in the long run. This is one of the reasons why I prefer Abe over Seth. Seth does teach some practical things, but you have look really hard to find anything LOA or inner guidance related material. It's there in the Seth material, but it's rare and it comes out rather convoluted. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2020 7:39:49 GMT -5
I know that movie! He was cheating using his dog, if I remember correctly. Very clever. The vibrational (or emotional journey) approach just means being fully in alignment with your desire. Period. The how, the who and the when is none your concern. In a competition situation that means whoever is most in alignment with his/her/their desire will catch the fish. LOA will see to that. So slyness does only matter to the degree it functions as a means to bring you more into alignment with your desire. Let's say you have the firm belief that the catch always goes to the sly. In that situation, not using some slyness to win the competition would be counter your belief of how to succeed. Which means you would be totally out of alignment with your desire. So if you use slyness, that would be in alignment with your belief of how to succeed and you would be more in alignment with your desire. Which will increase your chances of winning. However, believing that only slyness will get you there is severely limiting your options, it is an indication of shortage consciousness which again will work against you in the long run. This is one of the reasons why I prefer Abe over Seth. Seth does teach some practical things, but you have look really hard to find anything LOA or inner guidance related material. It's there in the Seth material, but it's rare and it comes out rather convoluted. If your desire is burning desire, It's more than enough to bring that thing you desire in your life. No mumbo, jumbo exercise is required. But only thing is, If you decide to take some action to achieve that or if you try negate it, it wouldn't happen. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Aug 3, 2020 15:31:55 GMT -5
I know that movie! He was cheating using his dog, if I remember correctly. Very clever. The vibrational (or emotional journey) approach just means being fully in alignment with your desire. Period. The how, the who and the when is none your concern. In a competition situation that means whoever is most in alignment with his/her/their desire will catch the fish. LOA will see to that. So slyness does only matter to the degree it functions as a means to bring you more into alignment with your desire. Let's say you have the firm belief that the catch always goes to the sly. In that situation, not using some slyness to win the competition would be counter your belief of how to succeed. Which means you would be totally out of alignment with your desire. So if you use slyness, that would be in alignment with your belief of how to succeed and you would be more in alignment with your desire. Which will increase your chances of winning. However, believing that only slyness will get you there is severely limiting your options, it is an indication of shortage consciousness which again will work against you in the long run. This is one of the reasons why I prefer Abe over Seth. Seth does teach some practical things, but you have look really hard to find anything LOA or inner guidance related material. It's there in the Seth material, but it's rare and it comes out rather convoluted. If your desire is burning desire, It's more than enough to bring that thing you desire in your life. No mumbo, jumbo exercise is required. But only thing is, If you decide to take some action to achieve that or if you try negate it, it wouldn't happen. In my opinion, the essential element is "expectation". You get what you expect, not what you "desire". I expect tomorrow morning the Sun to rise. I desire tomorrow morning not to rain. When you want something to happen, you have to feel like the former, not the latter. To be able to do so you need practice. Taking action isn't the issue. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2020 23:49:20 GMT -5
If your desire is burning desire, It's more than enough to bring that thing you desire in your life. No mumbo, jumbo exercise is required. But only thing is, If you decide to take some action to achieve that or if you try negate it, it wouldn't happen. In my opinion, the essential element is "expectation". You get what you expect, not what you "desire". I expect tomorrow morning the Sun to rise. I desire tomorrow morning not to rain. When you want something to happen, you have to feel like the former, not the latter. To be able to do so you need practice. Taking action isn't the issue. You are not expecting tomorrow morning sun to rise, You KNOW tomorrow morning sun will rise. Knowing is different from expecting. Expecting something so desperately would freezes that particular future. Consciousness is creative, it starts creating what you desire from the movement the desire arises in your mind, but when you try or when you expect or when you take action, that's where the problem starts. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Aug 4, 2020 0:37:49 GMT -5
In my opinion, the essential element is "expectation". You get what you expect, not what you "desire". I expect tomorrow morning the Sun to rise. I desire tomorrow morning not to rain. When you want something to happen, you have to feel like the former, not the latter. To be able to do so you need practice. Taking action isn't the issue. You are not expecting tomorrow morning sun to rise, You KNOW tomorrow morning sun will rise. Knowing is different from expecting. Expecting something so desperately would freezes that particular future. Consciousness is creative, it starts creating what you desire from the movement the desire arises in your mind, but when you try or when you expect or when you take action, that's where the problem starts. I disagree. I don't think it is just because we give different meaning to some words. You do your way; I'll do my way. |
|
