|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 22, 2022 16:16:06 GMT -5
It is possible to think certain people are quacks, frauds, or simply mistaken about something, while simultaneously being open to infinite possibilities and deeply appreciative of the fact that we don't know everything, and science can't explain everything. I like the attitude of the explorer. Yes, that's certainly possible. But as a genuine explorer and believer in infinite possibilities you have to leave a lot of limiting beliefs behind, which includes science as well as best practice beliefs re: exercise and nutrition. Which means that at some point you have to part with the masses or the collective and also be at ease with that, because you will be called unreasonable, unscientific, impractical or just weird. I'll tell you a story about health and exercises that you can use to check where you are on the infinite possibilities scale. The more preposterous it will sound to you what I am going to suggest, the more you are in sync with the collective and the farther away you are from truly living in the infinite possibilities realm. The more this will ring true, the more independent you are from the collective and the closer you are to truly living in the infinite possibilities realm. So here's the story: Many years ago, Jerry asked Abraham about physical exercise and if it really was necessary, e.g. if it was really necessary to do pushups every day in order to develop strong arm muscles, because that's what Jerry's experience was. And Abe said, no. Because the rule always is, ask and it is given. And when your belief matches your desire, it is. That's basically the only requirement, alignment with your desire. But... people usually don't believe that when they ask it is given. They think they have to do something in order to get something. They think they have to put in some effort, that they have to earn it, they believe that there is no gain without pain, that they need the right genes etc. And so, Abe explained, while pushups are not necessary by default, people nevertheless have to do pushups in order to develop strong arm muscles. Because the pushups function as a bridge for their beliefs, it brings them into alignment with their desire. They believe they have to do 50 pushups every day for a month in order to get x amount muscle growth. So there are basically two ways of going about it. They could do it the easy way and adjust their beliefs to their desire and then it is, or they could do it the hard way and do the action and put in the effort their beliefs require them to do to match their desire and then it is. Both methods work, but one is going about the hard way and is very limited in terms of possibilities, the other is going about it the easy way and is unlimited in terms of possibilities. So I'd say what it basically comes down to is that we have to decide where on that spectrum (collective vs. infinite possibilities) we are going to play the game. And please don't misunderstand. This isn't a case against action. Not at all. Acting can be fun. Exercise can be fun. But if we act or exercise in order to get a specific result, very often the fun gets lost in the process and then we are just grinding it out, which then begs the question, what's the point of all of this, if it isn't fun or enjoyable or satisfying? Also, if you then do a scientific study among 100 normal people (i.e. that believe in the no pain no gain rule) and you have one group that does exercise and one group that only thinks happy thoughts and then you compare muscle growth after several months and it should turn out that the group that did exercise had very consistent results in terms of muscle growth but the happy thoughts group either had no results or no consistent results, in the context of the ask and it is given rule, what would that scientific study prove? And what do scientific studies in general prove? Bashar calls this a permission slip. He explains that sometimes it's more appropriate for us to engage in a process, in order to allow ourselves to manifest an outcome. The process is a way of giving ourselves a 'permission slip', in this case, it's press ups. Though as part of that, sometimes the process itself is enjoyable....theoretically, there's any number of ways to manifest a cake, but the act of baking is the fun bit (for some folks, not me so much). |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Jun 23, 2022 1:36:44 GMT -5
As it turns out, we the look at all the things and test hypotheses, then, from the results we know what works, and hence we understand there is a direct correlation between the volume of exercise and increase in skeletal muscle. The causal pathways o this are well understood. Genetics are merely the individual potential, and some people have more potential for muscle mass than others. Once we get to elite levels of competition, we only have a handful of very determined, highly trained, genetic outliers (and a lot of steroids). Pushups are generally considered to be a chest exercise, the pecs, but the triceps are also involved in extending the elbow. Minor muscles such as the front delts also get work. However, nutrition is also needed, and a calorie excess is necessary for increasing body-mass, with a high protein diet that targets muscle protein synthesis (growing muscle fibres).
If the 'just believe' theory was a thing, then we would have elite athletes who do not train as hard as possible, but there are no such critters. What we find IRL is, you can build muscle but you have be in a caloric excess, get enough protein and lift heavy things to make that a reality. If you don't do the things, it doesn't happen. And even if you do all the things, there is a limit - your genetic potential - to how much muscle an individual can accrue. There are limits everywhere, actually. The reason the story I tell is credible is because it describes how nature works - regardless of what anyone believes. It's the same with all the physical processes. You can feed the kid the best nutrition so he thrives like no other, but he's not going to be tall and robust unless his genetics are that - and no matter what you do to optimise everything, he'll grow, mature, get weaker and die as every person does. You cannot 'believe' it otherwise because Nature has her way, and everyone lives accordingly. |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Jun 23, 2022 2:12:19 GMT -5
You also have to understand the grind, which is by definition not pleasurable, but this is where mind over matter truly applies. Endurance athletes understand this very well, and I am a fanboy of the ultra-distance runner Courtney Dauwalter. She is the subject of a couple of documentaries on You Tube and has been on all the Podcasts including Rogan. She calls that grind her pain cave and talks about how she navigates that space. Attitude makes a difference as when she was relatively new to the ultra-distance races she used to try to push through that pain cave to get out the other side, but later on she changed the attitude to exploring her pain-cave and finding her way through it. It's a different thing when you look forward to getting to your pain-cave and then going in for a look around, trying to make it bigger, getting to know it, and actually liking it even though it's extremely uncomfortable. This, too, is not a I just believe and therefore I do. It's more like a journey of pushing limitations to see how much you're really capable of. There is very long history behind her of junior athletics, cross country skiing, shorter distance runs, marathons, 50 miles, and then the step up to 100 - 200 - 250 mile. You can't just get up one day and 'effortlessly' win the Lake Tahoe trail run. Believing that is just delusional. Even the best of the best start a race like that just hoping they'll make it to the end. It's not like Dauwalter finishes every run. A distance like that presents many problems which one needs to overcome, and sometimes such problems are insurmountable. My favorite interview would either be the Rogan one, or the RichRoll one on You Tube www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOtSvYSnzNk (13mins is the pain cave part) |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 23, 2022 2:26:45 GMT -5
As it turns out, we the look at all the things and test hypotheses, then, from the results we know what works, and hence we understand there is a direct correlation between the volume of exercise and increase in skeletal muscle. The causal pathways o this are well understood. Genetics are merely the individual potential, and some people have more potential for muscle mass than others. Once we get to elite levels of competition, we only have a handful of very determined, highly trained, genetic outliers (and a lot of steroids). Pushups are generally considered to be a chest exercise, the pecs, but the triceps are also involved in extending the elbow. Minor muscles such as the front delts also get work. However, nutrition is also needed, and a calorie excess is necessary for increasing body-mass, with a high protein diet that targets muscle protein synthesis (growing muscle fibres).
If the 'just believe' theory was a thing, then we would have elite athletes who do not train as hard as possible, but there are no such critters. What we find IRL is, you can build muscle but you have be in a caloric excess, get enough protein and lift heavy things to make that a reality. I you don't do the things, it doesn't happen. And even if you do all the things, there is a limit, which varies from person to person, to how much muscle an individual can accrue. There are limits everywhere, actually. The reason the story I tell is credible is because it describes how nature works - regardless of what anyone believes. It's the same with all the physical processes. You can feed the kid the best nutrition so he thrives like no other, but he's not going to be tall and robust unless his genetics are that - and no matter what you do to optimise everything, he'll grow, mature, get weaker and die as every person does. You cannot 'believe' it otherwise. Nature has her way, and everyone lives accordingly. I think you can 'believe' otherwise, but....here's the thing, just because it's possible to believe otherwise, doesn't mean one CAN, and will, believe otherwise. So in my view, it is possible for a human to fly. However, there's still no way in hell I'm jumping off a building. The belief would have to be congruent on all levels, it would be a radically extraordinary thing (obviously), to have that level of congruence. Our 'reality beliefs' run very deep into the collective mind. Hence why we all tend to abide by the 'rules of our reality', though there are exceptional situations. And mostly, we enjoy abiding by these rules of reality, so it's no problem. 'Process' is interesting, because 'process' is a creative act. I'm sure you have very much enjoyed the process of gaining strength. But have you seen this? It was something I read a few years ago, the indication being that one could imagine themselves into greater strength? www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2887151/Scientists-discover-just-IMAGINING-exercising-make-stronger-tone-muscles-delay-stop-muscle-atrophy.html |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Jun 23, 2022 2:49:20 GMT -5
As it turns out, we the look at all the things and test hypotheses, then, from the results we know what works, and hence we understand there is a direct correlation between the volume of exercise and increase in skeletal muscle. The causal pathways o this are well understood. Genetics are merely the individual potential, and some people have more potential for muscle mass than others. Once we get to elite levels of competition, we only have a handful of very determined, highly trained, genetic outliers (and a lot of steroids). Pushups are generally considered to be a chest exercise, the pecs, but the triceps are also involved in extending the elbow. Minor muscles such as the front delts also get work. However, nutrition is also needed, and a calorie excess is necessary for increasing body-mass, with a high protein diet that targets muscle protein synthesis (growing muscle fibres).
If the 'just believe' theory was a thing, then we would have elite athletes who do not train as hard as possible, but there are no such critters. What we find IRL is, you can build muscle but you have be in a caloric excess, get enough protein and lift heavy things to make that a reality. I you don't do the things, it doesn't happen. And even if you do all the things, there is a limit, which varies from person to person, to how much muscle an individual can accrue. There are limits everywhere, actually. The reason the story I tell is credible is because it describes how nature works - regardless of what anyone believes. It's the same with all the physical processes. You can feed the kid the best nutrition so he thrives like no other, but he's not going to be tall and robust unless his genetics are that - and no matter what you do to optimise everything, he'll grow, mature, get weaker and die as every person does. You cannot 'believe' it otherwise. Nature has her way, and everyone lives accordingly. I think you can 'believe' otherwise, but....here's the thing, just because it's possible to believe otherwise, doesn't mean one CAN, and will, believe otherwise. So in my view, it is possible for a human to fly. However, there's still no way in hell I'm jumping off a building. The belief would have to be congruent on all levels, it would be a radically extraordinary thing (obviously), to have that level of congruence. Our 'reality beliefs' run very deep into the collective mind. Hence why we all tend to abide by the 'rules of our reality', though there are exceptional situations. And mostly, we enjoy abiding by these rules of reality, so it's no problem. 'Process' is interesting, because 'process' is a creative act. I'm sure you have very much enjoyed the process of gaining strength. But have you seen this? It was something I read a few years ago, the indication being that one could imagine themselves into greater strength? www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2887151/Scientists-discover-just-IMAGINING-exercising-make-stronger-tone-muscles-delay-stop-muscle-atrophy.htmlSee I'd do an experiment and test 1000 or 10000 people, see how many can fly, apply statistics to that data to derive a general outcome from the variables in the data. If zero people fly, I'd conclude that no one in the study flew, and therefore, there might be an extraordinarily small, statistically insignificant, number human fliers, and possibly none.
I think visualisation plays a role and just makes you stand straighter breathe differently and so on, and visualisation will probably lead to increased exercise volume and have nutritional influences you don't even notice. I think the spiritual people tend to like the idea the physical aspect o things can be put aside, but all the athletes have times when their physicality is most important and times when psychology is needed most, and it is a visualisatiom/concentration game.
I went from being very weak to being reasonably strong, but my skeletal structure is pretty slight so I don't have a great deal of real estate for muscle mass and I'm too old to really pack on the meat, so I can't compete against the stocky, barrel-like physiques, or younger athletes in their prime, but the idea is to explore your own potential, so you just do what you can, do the training, eat right an find out where your limitations are, and maybe do a few amazing things on your best days.
|
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Jun 23, 2022 3:04:25 GMT -5
P.s. I don't think a Daily Mail article is going to present accurate information, and almost certainly be misleading, so I'm putting it in the BS basket, but some points are accurate such as strength being neuro-muscular. That makes sense on a purely physical nervous system level. The article didn't say muscle size increased or was maintained, and a four week trial would be the minimal time frame, if long enough at all, even if they did take biopsies and measure muscle fibres.
However, visualisation certainly plays a role, so there's probably something to it which the DM almost definitely misrepresents.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 23, 2022 4:04:37 GMT -5
I think you can 'believe' otherwise, but....here's the thing, just because it's possible to believe otherwise, doesn't mean one CAN, and will, believe otherwise. So in my view, it is possible for a human to fly. However, there's still no way in hell I'm jumping off a building. The belief would have to be congruent on all levels, it would be a radically extraordinary thing (obviously), to have that level of congruence. Our 'reality beliefs' run very deep into the collective mind. Hence why we all tend to abide by the 'rules of our reality', though there are exceptional situations. And mostly, we enjoy abiding by these rules of reality, so it's no problem. 'Process' is interesting, because 'process' is a creative act. I'm sure you have very much enjoyed the process of gaining strength. But have you seen this? It was something I read a few years ago, the indication being that one could imagine themselves into greater strength? www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2887151/Scientists-discover-just-IMAGINING-exercising-make-stronger-tone-muscles-delay-stop-muscle-atrophy.htmlSee I'd do an experiment and test 1000 or 10000 people, see how many can fly, apply statistics to that data to derive a general outcome from the variables in the data. If zero people fly, I'd conclude that no one in the study flew, and therefore, there might be an extraordinarily small, statistically insignificant, number human fliers, and possibly none. I think visualisation plays a role and just makes you stand straighter breathe differently and so on, and visualisation will probably lead to increased exercise volume and have nutritional influences you don't even notice. I think the spiritual people tend to like the idea the physical aspect o things can be put aside, but all the athletes have times when their physicality is most important and times when psychology is needed most, and it is a visualisatiom/concentration game.
I went from being very weak to being reasonably strong, but my skeletal structure is pretty slight so I don't have a great deal of real estate for muscle mass and I'm too old to really pack on the meat, so I can't compete against the stocky, barrel-like physiques, or younger athletes in their prime, but the idea is to explore your own potential, so you just do what you can, do the training, eat right an find out where your limitations are, and maybe do a few amazing things on your best days.
Sure. If someone asked me....''Andrew, can you fly? Be honest.'' My answer is an immediate 'No. I cannot fly'. I'm not into self-deluding myself about my capabilities.  The point about possibilities is more a spiritual point than a practical point, in the sense that we often talk about what it means to 'see through the idea of an objective world/universe', and for me, this relates to it. Reality isn't fixed...in a sense, the only rule is that we are collectively making up the rules. But equally, that doesn't mean that we then just break them willy nilly, we create rules to have a certain kind of experience, and a cohesive stability, and then we can also appreciate the extraordinary, like athletes. So I do agree with what you are saying, that looking at the statistics matters, as does looking at the type of person you are working with, and that includes looking at the kind of reality they are creating for themselves....what are the rules they are living by? Some folks might limit themselves TOO much e.g ''there's no way I could achieve that''. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 23, 2022 4:06:55 GMT -5
P.s. I don't think a Daily Mail article is going to present accurate information, and almost certainly be misleading, so I'm putting it in the BS basket, but some points are accurate such as strength being neuro-muscular. That makes sense on a purely physical nervous system level. The article didn't say muscle size increased or was maintained, and a four week trial would be the minimal time frame, if long enough at all, even if they did take biopsies and measure muscle fibres. However, visualisation certainly plays a role, so there's probably something to it which the DM almost definitely misrepresents. The Daily Mail is junky, I think I may have originally read about it in a book by Dr. David R Hamilton, who mixes science (particularly neuro-science) and spirituality in ways that interested me. drdavidhamilton.com/ |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Jun 23, 2022 4:47:30 GMT -5
See I'd do an experiment and test 1000 or 10000 people, see how many can fly, apply statistics to that data to derive a general outcome from the variables in the data. If zero people fly, I'd conclude that no one in the study flew, and therefore, there might be an extraordinarily small, statistically insignificant, number human fliers, and possibly none. I think visualisation plays a role and just makes you stand straighter breathe differently and so on, and visualisation will probably lead to increased exercise volume and have nutritional influences you don't even notice. I think the spiritual people tend to like the idea the physical aspect o things can be put aside, but all the athletes have times when their physicality is most important and times when psychology is needed most, and it is a visualisatiom/concentration game.
I went from being very weak to being reasonably strong, but my skeletal structure is pretty slight so I don't have a great deal of real estate for muscle mass and I'm too old to really pack on the meat, so I can't compete against the stocky, barrel-like physiques, or younger athletes in their prime, but the idea is to explore your own potential, so you just do what you can, do the training, eat right an find out where your limitations are, and maybe do a few amazing things on your best days.
Sure. If someone asked me....''Andrew, can you fly? Be honest.'' My answer is an immediate 'No. I cannot fly'. I'm not into self-deluding myself about my capabilities.  The point about possibilities is more a spiritual point than a practical point, in the sense that we often talk about what it means to 'see through the idea of an objective world/universe', and for me, this relates to it. Reality isn't fixed...in a sense, the only rule is that we are collectively making up the rules. But equally, that doesn't mean that we then just break them willy nilly, we create rules to have a certain kind of experience, and a cohesive stability, and then we can also appreciate the extraordinary, like athletes. So I do agree with what you are saying, that looking at the statistics matters, as does looking at the type of person you are working with, and that includes looking at the kind of reality they are creating for themselves....what are the rules they are living by? Some folks might limit themselves TOO much e.g ''there's no way I could achieve that''. To me it's 'dhamma', which means the universe works in nature's way, so it really doesn't matter who you are or what you believe. If you give it nutrients and do the training it will happen, but vary among individuals by genetic make up, age, sex etc, because that's how it works. I they don't believe it will happen they will find out that belief was wrong. On the other end of the scale we get ones who believe they are going to look like their fitness model idol when they just don't have the genetic make up to achieve it (let alone the photo shop/filters - steroids and fat burners that fitness model takes). It's like you have to spend a few years learning the piano to play anything good. I you're gifted you'll do better. No one can walk up and play something by believing it, and I don't know why I'm stating the obvious. 'Anything is possible if you believe' has never worked because that's not how nature is. It's more like, if you believe you can, you need to do what it takes to make it happen, and it usually takes more effort than we thought it would. You have to overcome the obstacles, solve the problems, be determined, single minded and persistent, and in the end, you won't believe you actually pulled it off. I think we need to stop misleading people into failure by telling them they can just imagine muscle mass into reality or daydream about being a great pianist and the work isn't necessary. Just take the lessons, practice, and you'll play something good in a few years. Nature works that way, so it will work.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 23, 2022 5:19:46 GMT -5
Sure. If someone asked me....''Andrew, can you fly? Be honest.'' My answer is an immediate 'No. I cannot fly'. I'm not into self-deluding myself about my capabilities. The point about possibilities is more a spiritual point than a practical point, in the sense that we often talk about what it means to 'see through the idea of an objective world/universe', and for me, this relates to it. Reality isn't fixed...in a sense, the only rule is that we are collectively making up the rules. But equally, that doesn't mean that we then just break them willy nilly, we create rules to have a certain kind of experience, and a cohesive stability, and then we can also appreciate the extraordinary, like athletes. So I do agree with what you are saying, that looking at the statistics matters, as does looking at the type of person you are working with, and that includes looking at the kind of reality they are creating for themselves....what are the rules they are living by? Some folks might limit themselves TOO much e.g ''there's no way I could achieve that''. To me it's 'dhamma', which means the universe works in nature's way, so it really doesn't matter who you are or what you believe. If you give it nutrients and do the training it will happen, but vary among individuals by genetic make up, age, sex etc, because that's how it works. I they don't believe it will happen they will find out that belief was wrong. On the other end of the scale we get ones who believe they are going to look like their fitness model idol when they just don't have the genetic make up to achieve it (let alone the photo shop/filters - steroids and fat burners that fitness model takes). It's like you have to spend a few years learning the piano to play anything good. I you're gifted you'll do better. No one can walk up and play something by believing it, and I don't know why I'm stating the obvious. 'Anything is possible if you believe' has never worked because that's not how nature is. It's more like, if you believe you can, you need to do what it takes to make it happen, and it usually takes more effort than we thought it would. You have to overcome the obstacles, solve the problems, be determined, single minded and persistent, and in the end, you won't believe you actually pulled it off. I think we need to stop misleading people into failure by telling them they can just imagine muscle mass into reality or daydream about being a great pianist and the work isn't necessary. Just take the lessons, practice, and you'll play something good in a few years. Nature works that way, so it will work.
I don't disagree but I want to re-emphasise something I said. It's not, 'believe it and it will happen'. Manifesting an outcome in a seemingly extraordinary way would require a level of unusually rare congruence. It wouldn't be positive or wishful thinking. It would seem like an obvious and natural step to that individual, it may not even seem extraordinary to them. So the rules of 'nature', as abiding as they are, are still the rules of our reality creation. I don't believe at all that these rules should be disregarded or disrespected....quite the opposite. I support what you are saying, but also think there's an interesting broader context. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 23, 2022 6:11:58 GMT -5
It is possible to think certain people are quacks, frauds, or simply mistaken about something, while simultaneously being open to infinite possibilities and deeply appreciative of the fact that we don't know everything, and science can't explain everything. I like the attitude of the explorer. Yes, that's certainly possible. But as a genuine explorer and believer in infinite possibilities you have to leave a lot of limiting beliefs behind, which includes science as well as best practice beliefs re: exercise and nutrition. Which means that at some point you have to part with the masses or the collective and also be at ease with that, because you will be called unreasonable, unscientific, impractical or just weird. I'll tell you a story about health and exercises that you can use to check where you are on the infinite possibilities scale. The more preposterous it will sound to you what I am going to suggest, the more you are in sync with the collective and the farther away you are from truly living in the infinite possibilities realm. The more this will ring true, the more independent you are from the collective and the closer you are to truly living in the infinite possibilities realm. So here's the story: Many years ago, Jerry asked Abraham about physical exercise and if it really was necessary, e.g. if it was really necessary to do pushups every day in order to develop strong arm muscles, because that's what Jerry's experience was. And Abe said, no. Because the rule always is, ask and it is given. And when your belief matches your desire, it is. That's basically the only requirement, alignment with your desire. But... people usually don't believe that when they ask it is given. They think they have to do something in order to get something. They think they have to put in some effort, that they have to earn it, they believe that there is no gain without pain, that they need the right genes etc. And so, Abe explained, while pushups are not necessary by default, people nevertheless have to do pushups in order to develop strong arm muscles. Because the pushups function as a bridge for their beliefs, it brings them into alignment with their desire. They believe they have to do 50 pushups every day for a month in order to get x amount muscle growth. So there are basically two ways of going about it. They could do it the easy way and adjust their beliefs to their desire and then it is, or they could do it the hard way and do the action and put in the effort their beliefs require them to do to match their desire and then it is. Both methods work, but one is going about the hard way and is very limited in terms of possibilities, the other is going about it the easy way and is unlimited in terms of possibilities. So I'd say what it basically comes down to is that we have to decide where on that spectrum (collective vs. infinite possibilities) we are going to play the game. And please don't misunderstand. This isn't a case against action. Not at all. Acting can be fun. Exercise can be fun. But if we act or exercise in order to get a specific result, very often the fun gets lost in the process and then we are just grinding it out, which then begs the question, what's the point of all of this, if it isn't fun or enjoyable or satisfying? Also, if you then do a scientific study among 100 normal people (i.e. that believe in the no pain no gain rule) and you have one group that does exercise and one group that only thinks happy thoughts and then you compare muscle growth after several months and it should turn out that the group that did exercise had very consistent results in terms of muscle growth but the happy thoughts group either had no results or no consistent results, in the context of the ask and it is given rule, what would that scientific study prove? And what do scientific studies in general prove? But the thing is, "infinite possibility" is ultimately just another idea, one with limitations. The Zen folk point this up quite humorously with the koan of the square circle. Muscle growth is premised on the notion of a time-bound process, so, just like neti-neti you can only apply "infinite potential" in a negative context, ie: question the limiting beliefs. Esther's use of the word belief in this context is to me misleading, and implicates the fallacy of everyone's favorite LOA punching bag, The Secret. What is lost in "ask, and it is given", is everything you've explained to me over the years about alignment. Enigma offered a sort of bridge perspective on this once. He kept trying to explain to the pro-meditators that he wasn't anti-meditation, but they wouldn't listen. So I engaged him about the ideas of a quiet mind and people who deliberately pursue meditation out of an interest in a quiet mind. It was a dialog that spanned years. Eventually he posited an interesting idea: reverse the sense of causality. Instead of thinking of the person gaining greater clarity through meditation, think of it in terms of Consciousness sometimes expressing that clarity through the meditation practice. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jun 23, 2022 6:34:36 GMT -5
To me it's 'dhamma', which means the universe works in nature's way, so it really doesn't matter who you are or what you believe. If you give it nutrients and do the training it will happen, but vary among individuals by genetic make up, age, sex etc, because that's how it works. I they don't believe it will happen they will find out that belief was wrong. On the other end of the scale we get ones who believe they are going to look like their fitness model idol when they just don't have the genetic make up to achieve it (let alone the photo shop/filters - steroids and fat burners that fitness model takes). It's like you have to spend a few years learning the piano to play anything good. I you're gifted you'll do better. No one can walk up and play something by believing it, and I don't know why I'm stating the obvious. 'Anything is possible if you believe' has never worked because that's not how nature is. It's more like, if you believe you can, you need to do what it takes to make it happen, and it usually takes more effort than we thought it would. You have to overcome the obstacles, solve the problems, be determined, single minded and persistent, and in the end, you won't believe you actually pulled it off. I think we need to stop misleading people into failure by telling them they can just imagine muscle mass into reality or daydream about being a great pianist and the work isn't necessary. Just take the lessons, practice, and you'll play something good in a few years. Nature works that way, so it will work.
I don't disagree but I want to re-emphasise something I said. It's not, 'believe it and it will happen'. Manifesting an outcome in a seemingly extraordinary way would require a level of unusually rare congruence. It wouldn't be positive or wishful thinking. It would seem like an obvious and natural step to that individual, it may not even seem extraordinary to them. So the rules of 'nature', as abiding as they are, are still the rules of our reality creation. I don't believe at all that these rules should be disregarded or disrespected....quite the opposite. I support what you are saying, but also think there's an interesting broader context. Agreed. The broader context is that the cosmos is non-local, and THIS can manifest in ways that appear to violate all usual ideas about reality. I suspect that to fully accept this claim one would have to experience non-locality in some obvious and direct way. People who experience deep CC's often write about this, and spiritual literature is full of stories about this. How did Paul Morgan-Somers know the name of his future wife two years before he met her? How did Obaku know that he would be murdered three years in the future and how he would respond at that time? How did Bankei know that the wife of a good friend had died before visiting her husband to offer condolences? One of my initial existential questions was, "What could explain the 'miracle' stories in spiritual literature?" After a CC, I understood. THIS is a unified field of being that can do anything. Hakuin, who lived many years after Obaku was murdered, had the same kind of question about the story of Obaku until a CC, after which he said, "Wonder of wonders, I am Obaku, himself, alive and unharmed." What we are is not limited in how it can manifest. |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Jun 23, 2022 8:50:30 GMT -5
To me it's 'dhamma', which means the universe works in nature's way, so it really doesn't matter who you are or what you believe. If you give it nutrients and do the training it will happen, but vary among individuals by genetic make up, age, sex etc, because that's how it works. I they don't believe it will happen they will find out that belief was wrong. On the other end of the scale we get ones who believe they are going to look like their fitness model idol when they just don't have the genetic make up to achieve it (let alone the photo shop/filters - steroids and fat burners that fitness model takes). It's like you have to spend a few years learning the piano to play anything good. I you're gifted you'll do better. No one can walk up and play something by believing it, and I don't know why I'm stating the obvious. 'Anything is possible if you believe' has never worked because that's not how nature is. It's more like, if you believe you can, you need to do what it takes to make it happen, and it usually takes more effort than we thought it would. You have to overcome the obstacles, solve the problems, be determined, single minded and persistent, and in the end, you won't believe you actually pulled it off. I think we need to stop misleading people into failure by telling them they can just imagine muscle mass into reality or daydream about being a great pianist and the work isn't necessary. Just take the lessons, practice, and you'll play something good in a few years. Nature works that way, so it will work.
I don't disagree but I want to re-emphasise something I said. It's not, 'believe it and it will happen'. Manifesting an outcome in a seemingly extraordinary way would require a level of unusually rare congruence. It wouldn't be positive or wishful thinking. It would seem like an obvious and natural step to that individual, it may not even seem extraordinary to them. So the rules of 'nature', as abiding as they are, are still the rules of our reality creation. I don't believe at all that these rules should be disregarded or disrespected....quite the opposite. I support what you are saying, but also think there's an interesting broader context. Me too, there is an interesting broader context, and the way the universe works with a mind/matter thing is just unfolding as we want, but not in a predetermined way, so it might be weird to say we can have the kind of life we want, but not the one we expected. I think it's best to take care of this moment as it is, be present not because you want to, but because you are, and from that place there is a lot of possibility. The distance runners understand you have to be with just this step. This is the one that counts. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 23, 2022 11:16:27 GMT -5
Doing push ups to build arm muscles is pretty much settled science. I have no other motives for building arm muscles. It is just part of an overall body fitness program. Granted, there is more than one approach to sculpting the body into shape. What other method are you talking about? Whenever the science is 'settled', it has become part of the collective consensus trance, i.e. it is now what everyone expects by default. That's why science can never be leading edge. Again, the only requirement is alignment with your desire, aka 'ask and it is given'. So your question about other methods is somewhat misconceived. Methods only come into play as a tool to bridge the gap between what you expect and what you desire, aka the path of least resistance (as Abe call it), which is simply a way to come into alignment with your desire. Which means the default option would be instant manifestations. Abe are often asked about miracles and magic, and their standard reply is that what we, from our perspective of misalignment, call miracles and magic is what they, from their perspective of total alignment, call normal. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 23, 2022 11:45:54 GMT -5
Bashar calls this a permission slip. He explains that sometimes it's more appropriate for us to engage in a process, in order to allow ourselves to manifest an outcome. The process is a way of giving ourselves a 'permission slip', in this case, it's press ups. Though as part of that, sometimes the process itself is enjoyable....theoretically, there's any number of ways to manifest a cake, but the act of baking is the fun bit (for some folks, not me so much). In Abe-lingo that would be the 'path of least resistance', i.e. the easiest, most fun, most satisfying and most effortless path to get what we want, given our current beliefs. And that can and often does vary greatly from individual to individual. Some people allow money into their experience only after hard work and reject all other avenues, like winning the lottery or someone just handing them a stash of money. And so their experience will be that they have to work hard for money. Others are more open in terms of how they allow money into their experience. And so their experience will be that money seems to just fall into their lap wherever they go... they may find a stash of money in their locker that someone forgot, or they win the lottery, or their bank makes an accounting error and their bank balance is suddenly 10 times more, or they see someone at the side of the road with a broken down car and decide to offer their help and give that poor fellow a ride back into the city and a week later they realize that all their debts are miraculously paid off, because the guy they helped that day was a billionaire who just wanted to show his gratitude... And people who only believe in hard work will find that really really unfair. But from a LOA perspective, it is as fair as it gets. As Abe always say, the universe has endless ways to surprise and delight you and to satisfy your wishes and deliver what you want. Just don't stand in the way with expectations of having it delivered a very specific way. They often say that there are at least 20 or 30 different avenues always available to you that would lead you to wherever you want. But you can't see them because you are so narrowly focused on things coming to you a certain way. It's like going to the dock to catch a ship and when you arrive there, there is already one waiting but instead of hopping on board you say "Nah, that's way too easy" and you let that one go. And then there comes immediately another one, but again you say "That's too easy, things don't come that easily. And if they do, then there surely must be something wrong with that somewhere" and so you let that one go as well and you keep rejecting ship after ship until you have waited long enough and finally feel that you deserve to get on one of those ships and you just take the next one that comes along... and then you get on board and say, "Whew, I'm glad I finally made it, that surely wasn't easy" |
|
