|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 18, 2024 22:11:07 GMT -5
A while ago ZD mentioned Moorjani in the context of SR affecting physical health positively. So I looked her up, watched some of her videos and also read her books. She's got a fascinating story to tell and her books, especially her first two books are real gems, especially in the Abe deliberate creation context.
The Moorjani Case, Part 1
From Wikipedia about here case:
From her book about her NDE:
|
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Feb 18, 2024 23:00:03 GMT -5
Effects of Mental Imagery on Muscular Strength in Healthy and Patient Participants: A Systematic ReviewlinkJ Sports Sci Med. 2016 Sep; 15(3): 434–450. Published online 2016 Aug 5. From the abstract: - ... Overall, the results reveal that the combination of mental imagery and physical practice is more efficient than, or at least comparable to, physical execution with respect to strength performance. Imagery prevention intervention was also effective in reducing of strength loss after short-term muscle immobilization and ACL. The present review also indicates advantageous effects of internal imagery (range from 2.6 to 136.3%) for strength performance compared with external imagery (range from 4.8 to 23.2%). Typically, mental imagery with muscular activity was higher in active than passive muscles, and imagining “lifting a heavy object” resulted in more EMG activity compared with imagining “lifting a lighter object”. Thus, in samples of students, novices, or youth male and female athletes, internal mental imagery has a greater effect on muscle strength than external mental imagery does. Imagery ability, motivation, and self-efficacy have been shown to be the variables mediating the effect of mental imagery on strength performance. ...
This is well researched, actually. As the study suggests, how far it can be taken, depends on your ability to purely work with imagery, which is a skill that can be developed, of course. And that's not different from what Patanjali says. Another interesting story comes from Oliver Sachs' book, I think, about multiple personalities, where one individual had several different personas that all had different tastes and also different allergies. So depending on what persona was dominant in the moment, that individual was allergic to peanuts or not, for example. All the same body, but operated by a different individual intelligence, and therefore totally different results. And then, of course, there are always these stories of people in a state of emergency or under hypnosis who suddenly have physical powers that go far beyond what physics would deem possible.
By Philip Cohen 21 November 2001 It is a couch potato’s dream – just imagining yourself exercising can increase the strength of even your large muscles. The discovery could help patients too weak to exercise to start recuperating from stroke or other injury. And if the technique works in older people, they might use it to help maintain their strength. Muscles move in response to impulses from nearby motor neurons. The firing of those neurons in turn depends on the strength of electrical impulses sent by the brain. “That suggests you can increase muscle strength solely by sending a larger signal to motor neurons from the brain,” says Guang Yue, an exercise physiologist at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation in Ohio. Yue and his colleagues have already found that mentally visualising exercise was enough to increase strength in a muscle in the little finger, which it uses to move sideways. Now his team has turned its attention to a larger, more frequently used muscle, the bicep. Thought experiment They asked 10 volunteers aged 20 to 35 to imagine flexing one of their biceps as hard as possible in training sessions five times a week. The researchers recorded the electrical brain activity during the sessions. To ensure the volunteers were not unintentionally tensing, they also monitored electrical impulses at the motor neurons of their arm muscles. Every two weeks, they measured the strength of the volunteers’ muscles. The volunteers who thought about exercise showed a 13.5 per cent increase in strength after a few weeks, and maintained that gain for three months after the training stopped. Controls who missed out on the mental workout showed no improvement in strength.The researchers are now repeating the experiment with people aged 65 to 80 to see if mental gymnastics also works for them. The research was presented at the Society for Neuroscience conference in San Diego. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 18, 2024 23:04:21 GMT -5
The Moorjani Case, Part 2
This is from her book again, about her healing and how the medical community struggled to accept it:
Doctors baffled at the test results, but still not accepting healing...
At the radiologists after another round of tests...
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 18, 2024 23:08:49 GMT -5
The Moorjani Case, Part 3
This is an excerpt from the report her doctor in Hong Kong wrote, for review to other doctors and researchers...
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 18, 2024 23:19:35 GMT -5
The Moorjani Case, Part 4
Now, here's the important part, especially with respect to Patanjali's theory and objections from our disbelievers on the forum. Her healing was not the result of pure focus, deconstructing beliefs or positive thinking but only happened because of a radical shift in perspective or state of being, to the Source perspective, or the extension of Source perspective. Her full recovery was just the inevitable result of being in that state of total alignment long enough and consistently enough.
Here's how she explains it:
So, similarly to SR, where self has no role to play in gaining true and instant clarity, self had no role to play in achieving true and instant healing either. Which means similar to full clarity where the path is not thru self, in full healing the path is not thru self either, but by side-stepping self altogether.
-------
The rest of her book and also her second book is pretty much the A-H perspective. It reads like one of the many Abe books. She also seems to follow A-H and she definitely took on some of the Abe lingo.
While I don't doubt her pure awareness and oneness experience, it all comes across as genuine, the thing though is that she mostly speaks from memory now. This is not so much apparent in her books, but it is somewhat obvious in her videos. She also mentioned it herself that she has to remind herself of that state again and again. Which is why she always has to refer back to "my NDE experience"...
Nevertheless, in terms of deliberate creation and alignment context, her books are most excellent. For non-duality discussions, probably not so much. Because her focus is mostly on how to live a good and fulfilling life, and that's just not the focus of non-duality.
In summary, her main point is also my main point, that state of being trumps everything. So the most direct route is via a change in state of being which is the primary cause, not action (be it on the mental, emotional or physical level) which are secondary causes. That's how so-called miracles happen, but they are not miracles if you know the logic behind it. They are only miracles to the collective consensus trance mind. And science and medicine and also religion and most of spirituality are, unfortunately, part of the collective consensus trance mind. So if you are looking for miracles, or explanations for miracles, that's the wrong place to look. So keep an open mind and become aware of your core beliefs and how they build and limit your perception, experience and reality.
And above all, stop arguing for your limitations. The way some members here keep arguing for their own limitations in the name of the current consensus trance is downright ridiculous, especially for a spiritual forum I would expect better. You can do better!
|
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Feb 19, 2024 0:15:29 GMT -5
In weight lifting we appreciate the benefit of psychology but it's more involved than you think. I can't remember the actual theories all that well, but the most important psychology is something like fortitude, basically confidence, grit and determination closely followed by focus and awareness. A lifter has a pre-lift ritual to habitualise the 'right' mind-state. When a lifter comes on stage, he/she will do it the same way every time, step up the same, chalk hands the same way, stride to center the same, aproach the bar the same, do a tribal yell or something, and the set up to grip that bar is always the same. Body building not so much because it's not a performance sport. It's getting in shape for a beauty show. But lifting sports like olympic lifting and power lifting are like religious practices. Moving the weight as efficiently as possible in training repeat repeat repeat until it's the same thing every time - just keep dialing it in. There's more, but enough psychological aspects on various levels already to illustrate the thing. 'Visualsation', 'talking your self up' are also important psychological strategies, but not the most important, and they usually comes naturally. When it's a part of your life you visualise the routine at least twice a day and between every lift, but sometimes specific visual and or vocal strategies are used. For example, Eddie Hall who holds the deadlift record (competition lift) of 500 kilos went full cooked with psychology including hypnosis while training for his successful attempt. Not a replacement for physical training by any means, but psychology is a big part of his game.
I have leg training tomorrow, so I have to sleep, and being rested is also good psychology, so you can try to say 'belief alone' but people who don't actually train are the people who don't place at the meets, and everyone placing at a meet knows how big the full picture really is.
Just to clarify, are you saying that Patanjali and the yoga tradition are bogus? I'm not at all familiar with Patanjali, so for all I know, what I said could support the claims he makes. |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Feb 19, 2024 0:27:16 GMT -5
Centre of mass is a good example of something that exists, yet has no substance. Actually, there is no "hard" substance. Think about the atom: most of it is nothing. Then it's nucleus is made mostly of nothing, and so on each particle. Tru dat. The entire shemozzle is not even there. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 19, 2024 6:57:01 GMT -5
Actually, there is no "hard" substance. Think about the atom: most of it is nothing. Then it's nucleus is made mostly of nothing, and so on each particle. Tru dat. The entire shemozzle is not even there. It's a treatise on yoga. In the later chapters he goes into the mechanics of siddhis (supernatural powers), which is basically identical to what I have said here about the mechanics of miracles. So, what you are saying, would go against Patanjali and the yoga tradition. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 19, 2024 8:33:19 GMT -5
Centre of mass is a good example of something that exists, yet has no substance. Actually, there is no "hard" substance. Think about the atom: most of it is nothing. Then it's nucleus is made mostly of nothing, and so on each particle. yuppers. Every now and then, for a period of many years, out of the blue, I'd look at my hand or a solid object and think "huh, mostly empty space and the rest not independent of observation ..." and then I'd get back to work!  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 19, 2024 9:04:42 GMT -5
Without a doubt if you eat the right foods and do certain exercises there would be certain results had every time. Everything has a signature in this reality that contains a certain quality for use of a better word. Putting certain beliefs aside for a minute, the trees in the forest will grow under certain conditions butt if a lightning bolt sets fire to it and burns it to the ground then the tree will no longer grow despite what anyone believes. However, it doesn't mean that beliefs can't move mountains but how many muscle men who are bursting at the seams eat junk food all day long and never exercise do peeps know? I don't know of any. Yes, eating the right foods does contribute to health, however, it's the chemical level, and that's the lowest level in terms of effectiveness. There are other factors, like intention, mood and state of being which usually get ignored because it's difficult to qualify, quantify and analyze them in scientifically satisfying terms. Nevertheless, those other factors are of a much higher order in terms of effectiveness and therefore have a lot more influence on health. And without considering these factors you cannot explain why some people who eat all the right food and do all the right exercises still get cancer and why some people who do the exact opposite remain healthy. As the basic rules of deliberate creation state, your actions don't matter much, what matters is your state of being while you perform those actions. Eating only healthy foods but from a state of fear of cancer will still get you cancer in the end (see Moorjani's story). Your mood and state of being is way more powerful, it can override everything, even those seeming 'laws' of physics, chemistry and biology (again, see Moorjani's story). So while food and exercise are factors to consider, they are not the main factor, or the only factor as some want us to believe. Butt... you have to somewhat radically depart from the default collective belief system in order to pull that off. And you can't talk to normies about that, not even to spiritually oriented people as we've seen here, because they will make you doubt with their realism and what-is-itis. So I'd say it's not by accident that the Patanjali yogis go into the forest or into the mountains to practice, so that these false belief systems that usually surround one in the company of others, are eliminated. Not to re-join the debate, but what you wrote here suggests a belief that I can understand and embrace, which isn't what you stated, but can be read into it: the focus on a manifestation, in this case, a better body, can result in these other results that can seem tangential to the focus, in this case, diet, exercise and sleep. Certainly, the metal aspects of this go far beyond a "good attitude", and in ways that a materialist perspective are going to miss. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 19, 2024 9:19:01 GMT -5
I understand folks objections to these ideas. On the flip side, there's quite a bit going on with that notion . Seth's ideas - as an example - are complex, but so is science. Perhaps I should read all the material before I question whether or not Seth's idea of incarnation implies a re-creation of the source of perception in each instance of it. I'll leave the current debate about the role of belief in manifestation on a tenkautology .. whatever is possible, is whatever is possible. Now, I know that your interest here is practical. There's a good chance I'll follow up with your suggested reading, thanks again. But like I said, my contribution to that debate is limited as stated. Beyond that, in the abstract, Andy, as an example, explores various ideas about creation-by-belief, but to me it seems like trying to architect with the wrong set of tools. Trying to make sense and blue-print the outlines of a mystery. At the root of it I perceive an unanswerable and ultimately misconceived question: "is reality subjective, or objective?". I know how I would give the long answer to that one, accounting for creation. For example, Spira makes some good points here, but he makes that suggestion - which I find a form of solipsism - that reality is subjective, rather than objective. He calls out the fallacy of an objective reality, but he doesn't stop there, planting the seeds of what might just turn into yet another fallacy. Seth is actually pretty close to the QM model of reality. And this is the point I wanted to make with the salamander story, that contemporary science and yogic science are not that far apart actually, you just need the right bridge, as in the case of QM bridging contemporary physics and spirituality and religion in some way. If you look at what I say about health and healing from the extensions of Source perspective, it should all makes sense. I'll post some details from the Moorjani cancer case later, she let doctors document it. It will be a good example for what I am getting at. Spira is a bit too theoretical. He seems to talk himself into realizations that he apparently never had. A bit like Figgles. On the surface, really beautiful and elegant oneness and emptiness poetry. But if you take a closer look, you'll see it's all just theory. His other video against solipsism, for example, is basically him positioning himself as a solipsist, haha. precious! Now, as to QM: QM is impersonal, and is expressed from an objective foundation. What it had to shed from that foundation is determinism, which is replaced by a stochastic model (which, no, is not "random" in the truest sense of that word). Spiritualists wander off into solipsism when they start making assumptions about the question "what is the QM observer?". The conclusion that the entire Universe is alive at "the atomic level" is sort of suggested, even by Heisenberg (but only in writing on a metaphysical tangent, and I'm not sure about Bohr), but never embraced explicitly. Later commentators in the field, like the ones zd has mentioned over time, have gotten more explicit on the topic, and I haven't taken the time to read the material to see if they're making the same mistake, as say a Chopra, or, as it would seem from here, Spira.
I'm very much on board with most of what you say about health and healing from a Source perspective, except for one particular point. Change, is nothing but time, and time, is nothing but change, so this idea of immediate manifestation is one that I reserve any judgment on for now. I don't disagree with the point that "creative potential is only ever Now", butt, the applicable tenkautology is: "it takes time to manifest whatever it takes time to manifest".  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 19, 2024 9:23:25 GMT -5
Actually, there is no "hard" substance. Think about the atom: most of it is nothing. Then it's nucleus is made mostly of nothing, and so on each particle. Tru dat. The entire shemozzle is not even there. (** slaps lolly's face **) |
|
|
|
Post by DonHelado on Feb 19, 2024 10:25:24 GMT -5
It's cool that some salamanders regrow limbs, but it's also worth noting that we don't observe that in more complex species like mammals. That includes dogs, cats, deer - not just humans with their "limiting beliefs". Different species, different bodies, different traits. It doesn't matter how spiritual someone thinks they are, they don't shoot rope out their ass and hang from it, like a spider. They don't dive to 2500 meters with a sperm whale. Deers regrow their antlers as shown in Number 2 of this list.. www.thecoldwire.com/animals-that-can-regrow-limbs/Sure. Those are more like teeth or fingernails though, and technically not "limbs" like arms and legs. I was pretty old when I learned deer shed their antlers every year - haha. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 19, 2024 11:52:16 GMT -5
Yes, eating the right foods does contribute to health, however, it's the chemical level, and that's the lowest level in terms of effectiveness. There are other factors, like intention, mood and state of being which usually get ignored because it's difficult to qualify, quantify and analyze them in scientifically satisfying terms. Nevertheless, those other factors are of a much higher order in terms of effectiveness and therefore have a lot more influence on health. And without considering these factors you cannot explain why some people who eat all the right food and do all the right exercises still get cancer and why some people who do the exact opposite remain healthy. As the basic rules of deliberate creation state, your actions don't matter much, what matters is your state of being while you perform those actions. Eating only healthy foods but from a state of fear of cancer will still get you cancer in the end (see Moorjani's story). Your mood and state of being is way more powerful, it can override everything, even those seeming 'laws' of physics, chemistry and biology (again, see Moorjani's story). So while food and exercise are factors to consider, they are not the main factor, or the only factor as some want us to believe. Butt... you have to somewhat radically depart from the default collective belief system in order to pull that off. And you can't talk to normies about that, not even to spiritually oriented people as we've seen here, because they will make you doubt with their realism and what-is-itis. So I'd say it's not by accident that the Patanjali yogis go into the forest or into the mountains to practice, so that these false belief systems that usually surround one in the company of others, are eliminated. Not to re-join the debate, but what you wrote here suggests a belief that I can understand and embrace, which isn't what you stated, but can be read into it: the focus on a manifestation, in this case, a better body, can result in these other results that can seem tangential to the focus, in this case, diet, exercise and sleep. Certainly, the metal aspects of this go far beyond a "good attitude", and in ways that a materialist perspective are going to miss. In a sense, in the end, it's back to what ZD keeps saying, that THIS is mysterious and that no one knows how to grow a hair or a tooth and yet it happens. Or as Abe say, the same energy that keeps this earth spinning in its orbit is also running thru your veins and keeps your heart pumping. There's no need to micromanage. I mean, how could we? This would be my only point of disagreement with Patanjali. All this stuff we talk about here, nutrition, exercise, attitude, beliefs and even focus all fall into the micromanaging category. However, as Abe teach, all you need to know is that your natural state is one of total well-being, and that good feels good and bad feels bad and that it therefore takes no effort to be well. This is very difficult for people to grasp. So you don't need to know about nutrition and exercises etc. in order to stay healthy, all you need to know is about total alignment and the rest follows automatically. The Moorjani case is the best example for that. So you could say, the less people are aware of their connection to THIS and the less trust they have into the infinite intelligence of THIS, the more they are concerned with micromanaging their lives. That's why Anita's doctors couldn't see the truth even when it sat right before their faces and was staring them in their eyes. People who are overly concerned with practice and right action and right behavior and right attitude also fall into that category. They can't see the forest for the trees. And so whatever action they take, whatever decision they make from that state of confusion, will only compound that confusion. As Anita put it, just drop it, suspend it all, and you're there, immediately, because it's here, always here and now as RM likes to say. |
|
|
|
Post by DonHelado on Feb 19, 2024 12:31:43 GMT -5
And then, of course, there are always these stories of people in a state of emergency or under hypnosis who suddenly have physical powers that go far beyond what physics would deem possible. Wrong again. Lifting heavier weights because one's life depends on it, or you have adrenaline, or you sniffed a smelling salt, or otherwise recruited more nerves to fire - that is all very interesting, and in some cases fun, but it's well within the laws of physics. Perhaps you're not educated on what "laws of physics" means. Example laws of physics include the thermodynamic law of conservation of energy, or the gravitational force, or the equal and opposite force law. Example violations by a human body, would be: 1. Running ultramarathons for weeks while not taking in any food energy (calories), only drinking water. More energy use than is present and stored in the human body. 2. Lifting weight so heavy that the force x distance = energy output also produces a violation of the law. Lifting a car is fine, lifting a skyscraper or something like it will eventually be beyond the conservation of energy law. 3. Levitation - simply floating in mid air and countering the gravitation force without a propulsion force. (Superman) People occasionally getting over a disease is to be expected. It's also not a violation of any laws. It's rare to win the lottery. But it's not rare that someone wins the lottery every week. If you didn't fail math class, you can see the difference. |
|
