|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 21, 2020 16:58:15 GMT -5
New age theory is pretty close to what Seth teaches, although Seth doesn't really go as far as you are going. I'm not believing that. But I am generally suspicious of any 'no pain no gain' theories. And if I had to choose between your ascension theory and the A-H theory, I'd choose the latter. That's all I was trying to say. Fortunately, none of these theories are necessary or even true in an absolute sense. They can be helpful in certain contexts, but ultimately, they don't mean anything. Realizing that will result in a much more relaxed approach to life. What seems funny to me is how dismissive you are of my beliefs, while pontificating yours as truths. Also, you keep incorrectly assuming that I am a Seth (as channeled by Jane Roberts) adept. I repeat it: I am not. It is just that Seth is the one I find the closest to what I believe. You seem to assume that there is an objective reality we all perceive through our five senses, and that pretty much we have nothing to learn through our lives. I disagree on both accounts. I suspect there is no way to convince you (and I repeatedly stated I don't intend to convince anybody, just sharing opinions), and you can't convince me either (because I don't value any external source of information over my inner one). I must be doing something I don't intend to do (like hitting a raw nerve), as I keep getting these kind of dismissive, sometimes insulting reactions, that sometimes attribute me opinions that I didn't express.. People here seem to be overly-convinced they're right. That's a weakness. Too bad, as it seems to be a forum with above average well-read people. This forum is very clean compared to what it used to be. You've been treated with "kid's gloves" compared to a few years ago. Reefs basically took it upon himself to clean this place up, and he's done a terrific job. I've been tarred and feathered more than a few times, not unexpected. I've been dispatched and dismissed, but I'm still here.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 21, 2020 17:02:21 GMT -5
You mean you are both just speculating and you are both okay with that? No. No speculation about what isn't known. This seems to be one of the problems I encounter on this forum: people seem to believe they know the truth and dismiss any other point of view as worthless speculation. They know their truth just as you know your truth. How does that work? With a bigger umbrella.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 21, 2020 17:08:05 GMT -5
The universe is a creation dance that we all play in made of consciousness, it does not exist as a separate reality from consciousness. If one 'rests' in the field of awareness, the obviousness is stunning. We may use terms "universe", "consciousness", "awareness" with slightly different meaning. Not sure what of my post made you write your comment. Anyway, I disagree that "resting" is the way here. We didn't take the trouble to "incarnate" for the purpose of resting. I assume that you called "universe" what you perceive with your five senses, the physical universe, which I contend that it is created by your own subconscious; and that there's no objective universe out there. In your view what allows for agreement? You drive through a green light, I'm at right angles to you and stop at the red light. What allows for common agreement? Every election, each candidate wishes to win. One wins one loses. How did the loser create his reality of losing? In your view what allows for disparity, for dis-agreement?
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Sept 21, 2020 18:36:36 GMT -5
What seems funny to me is how dismissive you are of my beliefs, while pontificating yours as truths. Also, you keep incorrectly assuming that I am a Seth (as channeled by Jane Roberts) adept. I repeat it: I am not. It is just that Seth is the one I find the closest to what I believe. You seem to assume that there is an objective reality we all perceive through our five senses, and that pretty much we have nothing to learn through our lives. I disagree on both accounts. I suspect there is no way to convince you (and I repeatedly stated I don't intend to convince anybody, just sharing opinions), and you can't convince me either (because I don't value any external source of information over my inner one). I must be doing something I don't intend to do (like hitting a raw nerve), as I keep getting these kind of dismissive, sometimes insulting reactions, that sometimes attribute me opinions that I didn't express.. People here seem to be overly-convinced they're right. That's a weakness. Too bad, as it seems to be a forum with above average well-read people. This forum is very clean compared to what it used to be. You've been treated with "kid's gloves" compared to a few years ago. Reefs basically took it upon himself to clean this place up, and he's done a terrific job. I've been tarred and feathered more than a few times, not unexpected. I've been dispatched and dismissed, but I'm still here. It doesn't matter how others were treated. I react to what the person says to me. People should comment on ideas, not on the person who posted the idea. Sometimes negative attitudes denote conscious or unconscious insecurity ... "is it possible that I'm wrong?". My reply would be: "it doesn't matter; in your reality you are always right; that's how the game is set up".
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Sept 21, 2020 18:42:02 GMT -5
No. No speculation about what isn't known. This seems to be one of the problems I encounter on this forum: people seem to believe they know the truth and dismiss any other point of view as worthless speculation. They know their truth just as you know your truth. How does that work? With a bigger umbrella. Absolutely! That works for me. Just watch your manners.
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Sept 21, 2020 19:02:25 GMT -5
We may use terms "universe", "consciousness", "awareness" with slightly different meaning. Not sure what of my post made you write your comment. Anyway, I disagree that "resting" is the way here. We didn't take the trouble to "incarnate" for the purpose of resting. I assume that you called "universe" what you perceive with your five senses, the physical universe, which I contend that it is created by your own subconscious; and that there's no objective universe out there. In your view what allows for agreement? You drive through a green light, I'm at right angles to you and stop at the red light. What allows for common agreement? Every election, each candidate wishes to win. One wins one loses. How did the loser create his reality of losing? In your view what allows for disparity, for dis-agreement? It isn't a matter of agreement. You perceive everybody's primary creation in their reality, and build that as secondary creation into yours, then behave accordingly. What you consciously want doesn't matter much. That doesn't create your reality. Your reality is created by your subconscious based on your beliefs and emotions; your expectations and focus matter. Who wins an election is an outcome that is the "democratically" compounded result of people's focus. If elected, Trump will be elected as result of peoples' emotional focus. His haters do more for his continuing being in their reality than his supporters. Negative emotions are stronger. It is much simpler than people believe. If you wonder (the more fearful, angry, hateful the more effective in extending those feeling for you; it doesn't matter if you're right or not) who will win the election then you lost, because you're reactive, not consciously creative. You don't wonder, you chose the outcome you want. The real fight isn't between what people want (create), but what don't want (react). We keep using "you", "I", ... but depending on where your awareness is focused, those are different, with different agendas, capabilities, perceptions.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 22, 2020 10:53:59 GMT -5
the gif is as funny as it is rather vaguely disturbing if one suspends the fiction of it in their mind. Some people just like it on a college campus .. the ambiance, being in the midst of that constant transition, having opportunity to learn even just a bit more of an endless collection of knowledge or perhaps broaden one's horizon with a completely new line of study to the ones already mastered. Why not a different metaphor from a dojo, of, say, a fish tank or bird feeder? Is your point that only a violent fool would postpone moving on? Is there a final, postgraduate doctorate level in some other, higher reality, or is that something that we can't know from this level? Not violent, just fool. I don't know. Can't say what others know. In my metaphor, a postgraduate reality creator wouldn't attend the same class (the Earth). My gif example is about the disproportion of attending the same class by people with largely different capabilities. Like playing tennis men with women. I subscribe neither to the idea of having to suffer here to learn, nor to the one that we have to learn here love, nor to the one that we have to do nothing here. But, again, that's what I believe, now. We'll see. But if you don't know if there's an ultimate end to the learning, shouldn't that call into question the foundation of the university model, to begin with? Have you ever investigated the very inception of your interest in this question "what is the purpose of life?". What if it doesn't have any answer that can be expressed in any sort of model? .. and please don't mistake these questions an an advertisement for nihilism .. quite the opposite, actually.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 22, 2020 10:55:33 GMT -5
Not violent, just fool. I don't know. Can't say what others know. In my metaphor, a postgraduate reality creator wouldn't attend the same class (the Earth). My gif example is about the disproportion of attending the same class by people with largely different capabilities. Like playing tennis men with women. I subscribe neither to the idea of having to suffer here to learn, nor to the one that we have to learn here love, nor to the one that we have to do nothing here. But, again, that's what I believe, now. We'll see. The universe is a creation dance that we all play in made of consciousness, it does not exist as a separate reality from consciousness. If one 'rests' in the field of awareness, the obviousness is stunning.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 22, 2020 10:57:46 GMT -5
You mean you are both just speculating and you are both okay with that? No. No speculation about what isn't known. This seems to be one of the problems I encounter on this forum: people seem to believe they know the truth and dismiss any other point of view as worthless speculation. Speculation isn't necessarily worthless just because it's speculation. There's a power to the process of pursuing the existential question.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2020 12:07:25 GMT -5
Dude .. this above all .. first .. bee kind! I hear ya
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2020 12:08:55 GMT -5
The universe is a creation dance that we all play in made of consciousness, it does not exist as a separate reality from consciousness. If one 'rests' in the field of awareness, the obviousness is stunning. We may use terms "universe", "consciousness", "awareness" with slightly different meaning. Not sure what of my post made you write your comment. Anyway, I disagree that "resting" is the way here. We didn't take the trouble to "incarnate" for the purpose of resting. I assume that you called "universe" what you perceive with your five senses, the physical universe, which I contend that it is created by your own subconscious; and that there's no objective universe out there. Read his line carefully, he is saying there is no objective universe
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2020 12:16:41 GMT -5
Can you please answer my question. Aren't you believing that others are perceivers while you dream? This is where you keep mixing contexts. Why would it matter what I believe in a dream? What matters is what is happening HERE, NOW - free from anything imagined. You always try to bring this conversation back to the level of imagination. But I'll play your game just for fun. Let's assume I believe that others are perceivers while I dream? So what? What does that tell us about the nature of reality? Nothing. Now, let's then assume I believe that others are not perceivers while I dream. What does that tell us about the nature of reality? Nothing. It only tells us something about the nature of my dream experiences. That's all. Comparing experiences will only tell you something about the nature of experiences. You gotta stop comparing dream state to waking state, one experience to another experience if you want to actually learn something about the true nature of reality. As long as you keep comparing experiences you will stay mesmerized by the simulation and actually never leave the simulation. But in order to learn something about the nature of reality, not just the nature of the simulation, you need to step out of the simulation, which in your case means stop comparing dream state to waking state, stop assigning any importance to these hypotheticals. Instead, be fully HERE, NOW. That's how you step out of the simulation, and that's how you can see, really see. As long as you are mesmerized by the simulation, you don't really see, you only imagine which you call seeing. No, there is something is there to notice. The ground in which both the appearances are appearing is the same, consciousness is that ground. Dream and reality are appearing in Consciousness.One you are considering that other people are figments, but in other you are considering that other people are real. But you know since both are appearing in consciousness, you can never know!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2020 12:22:44 GMT -5
It has absolutely something to do with separation. If there is separation, then other one can choose against what you are choosing to create. That is what brings the shared reality but unfortunately, there is no shared reality here, there is no separate reality here too. There is one creator creates, so other people can't choose to create something which is against what you have chosen because there is no others. You don't have to fight to create your reality, manifest a line out of infinite with your belief.
yes, there is a perfect co-ordination among them.They all move as one! Did you notice that?
You keep mixing contexts. You want to apply what is only true from the impersonal perspective to the personal perspective. That's why your theory is such a mess and not adding up. You can talk about all being one and moving as one and no separation and there being no others. That's fine. In that case, there are no personal creators and the question about there being other perceives has no basis. But then in the same breath you start talking about creating in other people's reality and not being able to know if there are even other perceivers - which is the personal context. You can't have it both ways. You either talk about this from the impersonal context, i.e. oneness, no others, no personal creators, only spontaneous unfolding or you talk about this from the personal context, i.e. separation, otherness, personal creators, predetermination. But you can't mix this as you are always doing, i.e. talking about predetermination and how you personally will your preferred reality into being and even let do others as you please - that's the SVP trying to be God. And that's a nonsense. The SVP believing to be an extension of Source or God, that's fine. But the SVP believing to be Source or God, that's a recipe for disaster. There is no place for personal creator! I say other people existence can't be known. I did not say other people are figments. I said I can't know! So If other people are not real, then I am creating the figments. If other people are real, then I am pulling the real perceivers in my life. And also my intention is not my intention, I am just experiencing the intention which has already been set, so I agree with your spontaneous unfolding. Since my intention is not my intention, the whole creation usually starts even before I set an intent to create, my intention is arising as a part of unfolding.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2020 12:25:44 GMT -5
I don't know what a "personal creator" is. "Here" means physical reality, which I believe to be a subjective reality, which everyone (every unit of consciousness, not humans only) creates a personal version of, and doesn't sense it through their five senses (there is no objective reality to be sensed). I was stating that none of the participants into this physical reality can consciously manifest what they want, or they wouldn't be here anymore. To learn to do that is the reason for being here. Obviously, this is what I believe. A personal creator is an individual creator. Okay, understood. It doesn't matter whether one believes himself to be a individual creator or not, If he set an intention, it wouldn't fail to manifest. But on the way to the manifestation, he can see something marvelous, that is, creation starts even before he sets the intention, so he is not actually creating, he is receiving the intention as the part of unfolding of the overall movement of the universe.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2020 12:26:37 GMT -5
If you hold something in your mind's eye, then the mind which creates the events kicks in and you are going to manifest it. The same happens in lucid dream but in lucid dream it would be very fast, it's instantaneous but here in physical reality it's very slow, but it manifests nonetheless with the given condition that you hold the image of your desire reality. Yes, that would be the ideal case. However, how do you know that your thoughts actually cause what is manifesting? Your thoughts could as well just accompany/match whatever is manifesting anyway without actually causing it. You see, this is where comparing dream state to waking state and lucid dreaming isn't going to help you see more clearly on this issue. Yes, that's the good question, but I believe I answered in my aforementioned reply!
|
|