This is a somewhat recent dream of Becky's and from her perspective. Interestingly, she had this dream a little while after i had talked at length about these issues here.  It seems to be a confirmation dream from guidance about this issue.  More specifically about how they are influencing some humans to think in more limiting, negative ways and misleading them about important things.

  "It was dusk and we had seen a craft that had been hovering over a clearing, so we went to go check it out. We were in a little patch of trees next to the small craft hovering over two men and they were communicating with them. I wanted to go investigate but Justin was more cautious and said it probably wasn't a good idea, i went anyways and confronted the space craft.  I remember that i had an impression that i didn't like what they were communicating to the two men, but i don't remember exactly what that was. 

So i started confronting them about how they were trying to manipulate humans, and Justin was still kind of hanging off in the trees when i had run out to confront them. They asked me a series of questions and it seemed like they were trying to gauge how much of a threat i was, rather than being interested in the specific questions or answers.  They were trying to get me to open a bit to see if i would present a challenge to their plans. I knew after that they did think i would cause problems. Then a beam of light materialized and focused onto my 3rd  eye region and they were injecting like a pheromone or chemical into my brain that would mark me as a threat or danger.  They were not happy with my outburst and that i was confronting them, and i struggled hard against it and i knew what they were doing (both to me and humanity) was wrong. Justin tried to save or protect me but i passed out, and when i awoke i knew i had been marked as "different" to some of my fellow humans, and that this pheromone would have the affect to repel others who let themselves be influenced by this E.T. group. It was more an unconscious, instinctive reactive process on their part.  In a sense, it kind of had the effect of putting up their hackles in relation to me."

Does it help sending these aliens PUL?

PauliEffectt wrote on Jan 29^th, 2011 at 5:03pm:

Does it help sending these aliens PUL?

  In the direct sense, i don't know.  In the indirect sense it always helps. 

  The more who more so attune to PUL, the easier for all it becomes, and the more it lifts all up. 

  Whether you, i, or anyone, or even a group, "sent" PUL to groups with ill intentions, and it directly influenced them to change is a good question that i don't know the answer to. 

  Either way, it will have some kind of influence in the grand scheme of things, so it's worth partaking in i believe.

Justin:

Some people might say that Becky's mind simply created what she dreamt based on what you told her.

But if they consider closely what Becky experienced, they might see that she was provided with details that are "very" possibly beyond what her imagination came up with.

Specifically, the part where she was injected with something that would repel people from her who are controlled by the unfriendly aliens. It could be that the unfriendly aliens don't want her to influence the people they controll in a positive way.

This leads to something that relates to what PauliEffect asked about. The unfriendly aliens wouldn't be concerned about Becky being a positive influence for the people they control if these people didn't have the ability to become free of their influence.

It has been made clear to me numerous times through experiences and spirit messages I received that we have the say as to whether or not we are influenced by unfriendly beings, we just need to become conscious enought to sieze such control.

In his book "Passport to the Cosmos" David Mack wrote about three people who were influenced by Reptilians until they took control and started to send them PUL. The Reptilians couldn't handle the PUL.

  Thank you for the reply Recoverer.  You made some interesting and insightful points. 

  Btw, to clarify, when I answered Pauli's question earlier, i did so in the context of Retrieval.  No doubt PUL is what will make a person non-susceptible to their influence, and also probably tends to have a repelling affect in general, but i'm more interested in whether or not it can help them change for the better.

Recoverer wrote, It has been made clear to me numerous times through experiences and spirit messages I received that we have the say as to whether or not we are influenced by unfriendly beings, we just need to become conscious enought to sieze such control.

  Therein lies the rub.  That can be mighty difficult or easy depending.  All one really has to do, is learn to listen to their true self, and yet so many of us have spent our lives largely deaf to same, or even purposely blocking it out. 

recoverer wrote on Jan 30^th, 2011 at 6:37pm:

Justin: Some people might say that Becky's mind simply created what she dreamt based on what you told her.

  I should have pointed this out awhile ago, but in my original post i mentioned not talking to her at length about this issue at the time, but talking here at this site at length about this issue. 

   Becky was not aware then before she had the above dream, that i had talked so much about that hindering E.T. group here.  She does not post here and rarely ever reads this site, and i don't always tell her what exactly i've been posting and saying here. 

It was like her Guidance and/or Expanded self was responding to this situation and confirming the truth of it for me, via her dream message. 

This is actually kind of a common occurrence between us both.  Our respective guidance uses each other to get across important messages or confirmations for each other.  While i sometimes complain about being married to my Twin Soul (can be testing at times), ultimately, i'm quite a lucky man! 

Thanks for sharing this with us Justin, very interesting!

I did not know/read that there are negative E.T. groups out there. Do they target/influence humanity in general or only a specific few? And what do they do to them? Is there a way to noticed and 'fight' them?

Also, are there any online sources I can read? I'd love to read/know more about them....as they say...."Keep your friends close and your enemies closer"

Thanks!

Wonderer wrote on Feb 29^th, 2012 at 11:02am:

Thanks for sharing this with us Justin, very interesting! I did not know/read that there are negative E.T. groups out there. Do they target/influence humanity in general or only a specific few?

Your welcome.  Both, but if you have potential to affect a lot of positive change of a spiritual nature, they will concentrate and focus on you.  But once you attune to PUL enough, you start to automatically repel them in a direct sense.  Then they switch tactics and try to get to you through others--especially those close to you, those with authority or material power, or others than can affect you.


Quote:

And what do they do to them? Is there a way to noticed and 'fight' them?

  Be aware of them and their influence without fear (especially through direct guidance), and Love them for in a sense, "they know not what they do."  They are part of us and we of them, they are fellow Children of our Creator just as much as we are. Pray that they may change their ways and learn to become happy and loving in nature.  Once you get more direct guidance, then speak of them without being concerned with what others will say about you, though of course in appropriate places and contexts, like at sites like these. 

Getting one's butt in spiritual gear is the most effective way to counter balance them.  This means the right kinds of meditation, prayer, the right diet and health lifestyle (health promoting obviously), partaking in holistic service activities, dropping all hindering activities like getting drunk, high, looking at porn or indulging one's sex drive beyond the necessity to vent hormonal drives, gambling, etc., etc. 

Basically, a total holistic attunement to Love and a disciplined dedication of self to service of the Creator, Creation, and Humanity.  Positive and spiritual E.T. groups are numerous and more than willing to help in counter balancing the hindering group.  They wish humans would become more consciously aware of this issue.  They have sent some of their own in directly as humans to help others become more aware of these issues.

  We all have the same potential to become like Yeshua (Jesus), we just have to choose to live like he did.  We can do it!  It might not come in this present life, but every effort, every choice we choose to the positive and Loving, gets us closer and creates a habit of positivity and makes it easier and easier for us to build up that Christ Consciousness within our Heart and Minds. 

   
Quote:

Also, are there any online sources I can read? I'd love to read/know more about them....as they say...."Keep your friends close and your enemies closer" Thanks!

   Just look at all the ancient history from around the world.  Virtually every culture of the past speaks of something akin to "demons" that are non human in nature, but of negative intent.  Many refer to them as "Dragons".  Dragons while not completely accurate, is a somewhat decent description for those who didn't know better.   

  The most negatively intentioned group is a group whose bodies look quite reptilian in nature, and since they fly around high in the sky in vehicles that can shoot lazers and fires of all kind, then dragons is not a bad description.   

   Bob Monroe's long time Explorer, Rosiland A. McKnight, in her book "Cosmic Journey's" outlining her guidance sessions, well her guidance outlined some about a particular E.T. group that was negative in intentions toward us and which we would eventually, around the 2500 year mark, have a full out and out war with, but that we would get some help from the positive E.T.'s. 

   Remote Viewer Courtney Brown Phd wrote two interesting books which you can download for free on one of his sites.  I highly recommend his second book, because it talks about the negative E.T. group.  He was someone, who btw, took the Gateway Voyage program at The Monroe Institute.  He also started up an Institute of his own in Georgia called the "Farsight Institute." 

  Oliver from this site recently shared a link that you might find interesting. It's all about the Bible, but looking at it in a more objective and analytical way and more at the original words and languages and the real meanings of it.  The author of said site and articles comes to the conclusion that the Bible has a lot to do with E.T.'s, both friendly and spiritual and also negative and misleading. 

In fact, it seems that one of the messages of the Bible is that there is an ongoing space war between these groups, with Earth and humanity kind of stuck in the middle.  Both sides are fighting over this Earth. 

Interestingly, this is what Courtney Brown and his fellow Remote Viewers also found out in their remote viewings.  The more humans who become aware of these issues and without fear, and the more who become part of the solution, the better it will be for all involved. 

Here is that site btw: http://www.biblerealitycheck.com/

  I don't agree with all conclusions of the author in the above, but he makes a lot of good points.  A lot of words in the modern bibles of today are not well translated, and he points out certain ones like "heaven", should really be translated as "outer space", the cosmos, or the like. 

  I've done the "nonduality", repeating to self over and over again that "everything is One" thing.  While this is true, i've become aware that one can get stuck in this, and become over Yin imbalanced.  Yin is that of passiveness, and allowing things to happen, and not being an active agent or force of change and activity. 

  I've begun to suspect that this negative E.T. group is quite involved with promoting belief systems here on Earth which incline us to over passiveness and not being involved with the active Retrieval efforts of a suffering world. 

  They like "non duality" concepts, because it contains enough truth (the truth of Oneness) to hook us, but misleads us by making us think that all will work out for the best no matter what we do or don't do.  That is one of the most harmful spiritual lies promoted on this Earth. 

  This is very much a battle between those that would see us limited, weak, and stuck and those that would free us and see us become Co-Creator Gods like they and Yeshua are. We, as humans, can help out in this and we must help out in this by the methods i outlined in the above.

  Thank you for showing an interest Wonderer, and definitely seek your own guidance on this issue under the more ideal circumstances (during more deep meditation and while asking for help and guidance from only the most Source and PUL attuned sources, and while remembering the feelings of Love and/or Gratitude). 

Thank you for your elaborate answer Justin! Off to do some reading now ;)

Cheers
Wonderer.

To whoever reads this:
Sadly und with surprisedly noted that Justin left the forum just now.
As I looked for his latest contributions, I came across this one.
Want to remark about what he wrote about the possibly deluding effects of the view of "non-duality".
The danger when misunderstanding it is really as he says.
But it is a misunderstanding.
Non-duality is not about becoming passive, not at all, it is about seeing the whole picture.
We are all part of it, and we are all very very connected, more than anyone can think of.
This whole creation universe is about action, and seeing it in non-duality makes it even more vivid.
Seeing in non-duality is seeing from the viewpoint of LOVE and compassion.
When we see clearly - or "claivoyantly" - we see that we are each of us, and then we may act like the cells in our body which do not think and act selfishly, but always for the good of each other and of the whole system.
:'(

People have different viewpoints of what "nonduality"  means. I was involved with such teachings for quite a while and have kept up to date with what's going on. Here's an article I wrote where I tried to summarize my thoughts and feelings about nondual teachings.

http://nondualityisdualistic.com/articles-2012/nondual-teachings-my-likes-and-dislikes-11712/

Have also read Ramana and Nisargadatta.
What you write in your article, feels like a very mental view on the subject.
Understandable, sure.
I also was a very inquisitive truth-seeker, and also got frustrated, but my principle was never to think that I know something 100%, only max. 99%, so I left me a backdoor for any unlikely case whatsoever. 
I experienced a state of blissful "nonduality" or stillness in 2003 for ca. 6 weeks, but deluded myself in it, and the self-delusion finally became more and more, until I lost the blissful non-thinking non-duality state, and was very very sad and frustrated thereof.
However, I'm very cautious with my mind, I try to get a clearer view of reality by stepping a step back, into the background, and watch vigilantly, like a hunter, patiently, not moving, not making a sound.

I found that this non-duality cannot be grasped intellectually, it escapes any willfull attempts to attain it. The more one wants it, the farther away it is.
However, there is a lot of conceptionalization about it, which is paradoxical, and there is also a lot of false ideas and self-delusion about it. Many people think they understand it, but there is nothing to understand, it is totally beyond the mind, and that is simply too frustrating for the mind to accept.
But it can be felt with an open and loving and compassionate heart. Then the heart can see, and if the mind becomes humble and surrenders to the heart and lets itself become a servant to the heart, then it can see also.

greetings!

Btw, "nirvana and samsara are one", that means the distinction between nonduality and duality is itself a duality.
Nonduality and duality are just the two sides of one coin, none of them is better than the other, and both are necessary for each other, and together it is the creation.

Oliver:

If you deeply consider some of the things I wrote (as available at my site) you'll see that I'm not being limited by my intellect.

Sometimes nondual gurus use that intellect thing to make it so their followers don't question the inaccuracies of what they teach. As far as I'm concerned such gurus might as well tell their followers that they are too stupid to understand the viewpoints expoused by their gurus. By the way, a big part of being with a guru is not doubting what he or she says.

If we are going to understand something, to some extent we have to use our mind. Such an approach isn't limited to intellect and psychological conditioning. I once had an experience where not only did I understand that the afterlife exists, I completely understood how it is possible for it to exist. It was an automatic and certain knowing that didn't require me to think in the way people often do so.

Yet, this understanding wasn't independent of the mind aspect of being.  Rather I was plugged into source/awareness in a way where I understood its comprehensive viewpoint. It was able to understand in such a way because it allowed itself to use its mind aspect of being so it could thoroughly and clearly understand what it is aware of.

There are many nondual teachers that don't seem to understand how important the mind aspect of being is. Instead they'll keep repeating things such as "you aren't your mind...you aren't your mind, you're only awareness." If they would consider things deeper they would understand that just because we can use our minds in an inefficient way, this doesn't mean that our minds are our enemy and have nothing to do with who we are. 

recoverer wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2012 at 3:28pm:

Oliver: If you deeply consider some of the things I wrote (as available at my site) you'll see that I'm not being limited by my intellect. Sometimes nondual gurus use that intellect thing to make it so their followers don't question the inaccuracies of what they teach. As far as I'm concerned such gurus might as well tell their followers that they are too stupid to understand the viewpoints expoused by their gurus. By the way, a big part of being with a guru is not doubting what he or she says. If we are going to understand something, to some extent we have to use our mind. Such an approach isn't limited to intellect and psychological conditioning. I once had an experience where not only did I understand that the afterlife exists, I completely understood how it is possible for it to exist. It was an automatic and certain knowing that didn't require me to think in the way people often do so. Yet, this understanding wasn't independent of the mind aspect of being.  Rather I was plugged into source/awareness in a way where I understood its comprehensive viewpoint. It was able to understand in such a way because it allowed itself to use its mind aspect of being so it could thoroughly and clearly understand what it is aware of. There are many nondual teachers that don't seem to understand how important the mind aspect of being is. Instead they'll keep repeating things such as "you aren't your mind...you aren't your mind, you're only awareness." If they would consider things deeper they would understand that just because we can use our minds in an inefficient way, this doesn't mean that our minds are our enemy and have nothing to do with who we are.

As far as I'm concerned it is dualistic to say that truth is beyond the mind, since the mind aspect of being is just as much a part of who we are as the awareness aspect is. To try to separate the two, you might as well try to separate wetness from water.

Rather than thinking in terms of "no mind," it is better to think in terms of "large mind."

I don't know why, but the edit feature isn't working now, so I ended up quoting myself rather than editing my post.

recoverer wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2012 at 3:35pm:

I don't know why, but the edit feature isn't working now, so I ended up quoting myself rather than editing my post.

that is because thread started by ex-member, seems to be a software-bug, because if we are allowed to write new posts in the thread, why should we be disallowed to edit our post

i see your point.
i also feel annoyed by people who repeat advaita slogans in mantra-like manner, saying things like "and who does it experience?" in every second sentence.
difficult to communicate with them when getting always useless comments on everything you say.

the teachers who preach non-duality all the time, maybe they feel it to be their mission, and maybe people get attracted to them until they heard enough and got the point and then go on their own ways.

i was for some years attending a guru's satsangs and retreats, and most the time, and more and more, i didn't listen to the talks anymore, i was content to sit in the teacher's presence and feel the "energy field", i would have preferred the teacher not to talk at all, but sit silently in meditation.

i'm not saying that mind and thinking are bad and no-mind and non-thinking good, i like to have both, sometimes i get weary of the thinking and then want stillness and peace, and when i had enough rest in no-mind, then i want action again, or something in me wants to do something creative.

observing my mind and ego and states of consciousness, i noticed that there are different modes, and that not all modes are useful in all conditions.
for example the rational thinking is useful in certain conditions. it is blocking the other modes of consciousness, which is useful for some things, but detrimental for some other things.

your experience of source/awareness (beautiful!), that would also be a mode of consciousness, or of mind, but the word "mind" is over-used for too many different things, and this can lead to lots of misunderstandings.
some people think that "mind" means the "ego-mind's half-conscious conditioned thinking processes", and call it a bad thing.
when regarding "mind" as a personal awareness in the space of consciousness, then it's much different view of the term "mind", much different from that other view.
and then there are many other meanings and connotations.

Sometimes it seems as if language is an invention of the devil. Telepathy would be the direct way of communi(cati)on without all those misunderstandings.
Do you remember in Bruce Moen's and Bob Monroe's books about the extraterrestrian race which is telepathic? It has advantages and disadvantages to be a telepathic race. The advantage is that they can work in group consciousness and have greater power of information processing and awareness. The disadvantages is that they are limited in the range of their experiences, and that might be the reason why we humans here on earth are non-telepathic or semi-telepathic. I think we do have these telepathic possibilities, it is there in the subconscious, and we could activate it if we want, and often we use it unconsciously. Maybe we evolve towards more freedom and individual soverignty and awareness, and then can use more of our potential, and can also work with group consciousness when we want, and use even more modes of consciousness.
I'm a great fan of evolution! :-)

p.s.: editing works again! :-)

Oliver:

When it comes to the telepathic beings Bruce wrote about, did you read both of the books where Bruce did so? He updated information about them at the end of "Voyage to Curiosity's father." I believe it shows that trying to be integrated when it comes to uniqueness and oneness is a challenge our souls need to master. I believe we have to reach the point where we aren't so caught up in ourselves that we try to push others away.

I'm aware of the neoadvaita thing you wrote of.

Regarding the presence of the teacher you saw, I believe that is a tricky matter to discern. Sometimes people feel their own presence and erronously give their guru credit. Sometimes they feel the presence of the Satsang attendees that are tuning into their being.  Sometimes they feel the love that radiates off of a guru after this love is sent to a guru by his (or her) followers. Sometimes they feel the happiness a guru feels when he gets people to treat him in an adoring way. Sometimes they feel the energy that manifests as their guru turns within to whatever degree he does so.

Regarding this latter point, not all gurus are the same. Some are actually able to experience their beingness. When they do so a person might sense this. However, it is important to point out that just because a person is able to tune into his beingness this doesn't mean that he is integrated and balanced when it comes to the awareness/mind, uniqueness/oneness dichotomies.

I've found that when some people find out about the awareness aspect of being they become so intriqued with it that they feel as if they have to push away the other parts of their being. Eventually they'll find that this isn't so. I don't mean that renunciation doesn't have its place at all.  For example, if we are overly attached to finding happiness in a particular outward way, this could intefere with our ability to find it inwardly.

Telepathic beings:
Yes, i read all books of Bruce and also of Bob.
I found that telepathy is the norm, not the exception, and that we still have it, it is due to the separation of awake-consciousness/sub-consciousness that our awake-consciousness can pretend to ignore it or be unaware of it, while still using it subconsciously in communication and other areas.

Gurus:
Good analysis! Yes, that may be so.
There are ego-traps on all levels of so-called spiritual development. There is always opportunity for self-delusion and clinging to phenomena, as long as there are phenomena perceived subjectively. One who tries to get through those pitfalls must be extremely cautious and self-reflective, always doing reality checks and questioning oneself.
It is like a scientific project where we ourselves are the instruments for our scientific research, we fine-tune the instruments and do experiments and observe the results with as little manipulation as we can.
You know of course that thoughts and all sorts of energy movements in consciousness do influence our perceived reality. Even natural scientists like physicists have found that.
So the difficulty is to influence the object of observation as little as possible. When we think and/or have emotions or both together, then we create ripples in the fabric of reality, and those ripples interact with our perception in a sort of feedback-loop, it actually creates what we call reality, and we want to minimize these effects, so we try to minimize our emotional interest in the outcome of our experiments, and at the same time maximize the alertness of our senses.

Right, we have to look out for ego traps.

Five people from the guru-based group I used to belong to got involved with another guru (the same one). He's quick to tell his disciples that they are enlightened.  He told these five people this is so, they all believed him, and they all became gurus.  I knew 3 of these people fairly well and they were nice people.

Therefore, their becoming gurus wasn't about their being scoundrels. It was more about what they allowed themselves to believe. I believe there is some truth to what they say, but they also say things that aren't true and are out of perspective.

An odd thing about this is that I listened to a radio interview of one of these people (on youtube) and he sounds more like his old guru than his new guru even though he believes his old guru is a fraud.

I'm not certain how much this applies to the above  people, but some people have the desire to become gurus.  If one has such a desire it might influence how one allows oneself to be deceived by one's own mind.

Here's another story.

With the group I used to belong to there was one Satsang that was attended by a man who was a spiritual teacher. At the time he had a small number of followers. He told the guru I used to see that he teaches others even though he isn't enlightened because he likes the love he receives from his followers. The guru I used to see was able to relate to what he said (I wonder why ;)) and told the guy that such an approach will delay his spiritual progress.

After Satsang I ended up speaking to this guy and he was speaking as if he was enlightened. I could tell that this wasn't true at all. He was very assertive. A few years later I saw an adverstisement for his guru-based center. Apparently, he deluded himself to whatever extent was necessary so he could follow his desire to be a guru and receive adoration from his followers.  In a way such an approach isn't any different than people who try to obtain adoration from others by being a pop or rock star.

I suppose that eventually his soul will become bored with such a false approach and seek to find love and self worth in a wiser way.

Hey, wow, yes, those are good stories! I also know some similar cases. Have you read the book "After ecstasy the laundry" by Jack Kornfield? He addressed such things there.

I suppose, you know Osho, I knew a woman who was in his community and who was one of a group of individuals whom Osho declared to be enlightened one day, it was simply one of his practical jokes. And another story of him says that there was another guru or self-delusive guru who asked Osho to confirm that he (the other man) was enlightened. I forgot what Osho told him, but later he said that if someone has to ask, then it's a clear sign of not being enlightened, and that being enlightened is similar to being in love. When you are, you know it, because you are.

These false-guru stories look like soap operas, like dramas that people play, and those false gurus attract seekers who are looking for a spiritual authority that they can lean unto, and get trapped as well. So both those false gurus as well as their followers get trapped in the same trap. I don't think they should be pitied, but that it is just an experience on the path, potential for learning, and as we know, the path is long, so no need to rush, and no need to cry over spilled milk or over wasted time.

best! ;)

Oliver:

I haven't read that Jack Kornfeld book.

I know of Osho. About 30 years ago I read 3 of his books when he went by the name Rajneesh. 

I don't believe it is good to speak about gurus just for the sake of gossiping. Sometimes it is useful to consider what some of them do partly so we can determine how legit they are and partly so we can develop a better understanding of the psychological traps that exist.

I believe this World would be a better place and soul evolution would be easier if there weren't so many things that lead souls off track. But I guess the universe can't have free will if you put in place too many restrictions.

recoverer wrote on Mar 6^th, 2012 at 5:19pm:

I don't believe it is good to speak about gurus just for the sake of gossiping.

I think one has to bear the repercussions of one's own actions, a principle often called "Karma" (= "action"), meaning taking responsibility for one's actions by taking the consequences, which is inevitable. It wasn't for sake of gossiping although I was making a fun of it, it was for the sake of taking out the seriousness.
I think there is too much respect for authorities in this world. People lose their self-reliability when they depend on authorities. A good example is the medical system in the western culture. I just had another confirming experience with it, had three ribs broken 12 days ago, and my family pressed me to go to hospital so much that I had to give in because it took me too much energy to resist their pressure, energy that I needed for the body's self-healing process. Anyway, the outcome was as expected, the doctors did nothing, it was a waste of time and energy and money, again - again - again!
The worst side effect of it is that one is made to believe more in the external authorities of the medical system than in the insight and wisdom of one's own body, and then loses the inner sense and communication with one's own body.
Same thing in religion and spiritual communities: People rely on external authorities for showing them the way to God, when they could better turn inward and find the immediate direct access.
I can really get upset about it when I think of it! >:(


recoverer wrote on Mar 6^th, 2012 at 5:19pm:

I believe this World would be a better place and soul evolution would be easier if there weren't so many things that lead souls off track. But I guess the universe can't have free will if you put in place too many restrictions.

I think the many things leading souls off track are necessary aids for the souls' learning process, and so the purpose of them is not to lead them off track, but to enhance their strength to find the track and walk it.
I think free will is a relative and personal experience of a seeming freedom of decision on re-action in situations, not absolutely a true, real, unshakable truth.
In my own experience, I find not much freedom of choice, sometimes I seem to have a freedom of choice, but then it does not seem to matter much what I do, it seems like two paths leading to the same place then.
The more one sees, the less freedom of choice. Imagine you know the shortest way from A to B, and there are longer ways, and you are in a hurry, what are your choices then really? Is there really a choice then?

Or to put in another way, a lot of people don't know how to truly think for themselves.

This applies to obtaining medical help. Quite often people have too much of an attitude of following their doctors blindly. There are some doctors that take a holistic approach that considers mind, body and spirit, but there are many that follow the psychological conditioning that Western medicine includes.  They allow themselves to be overly influenced by what the drug companies are selling.

I wonder how Doctors who take a holistic approach are viewed by other doctors. Not to say that western procedures are never called for. For example, I believe there are some occasions when surgery is probably required.  If a person has a heart attack there might not be time to wait for an alternative approach other than heart surgery.

Regarding free will, I believe we always have it, it is just that sometimes people are so caught up in their psychological conditioning that they don't end up using their free will in a wise way.  Or in other words, they lose touch with their free will. Eventually their souls will evolve so they can use their free will fully and wisely.

Regarding the negative things that happen, I'll compare life to a football game.  Quite often football players get injured without it being desired that they get injured. If you want to be involved with the game of life you have to accept the possibility that things will go wrong at times. However, just as you can try to minimize football injuries by having the players wear protective gear, you can try to minimize the pitfalls of the soul development process by dealing with the factors that interfere. 

Regarding the negative things: I want to quote a passage of Eckhart Tolle's "A New Earth", a paragraph entitled "Conscious Suffering":

Quote:

If you have young children, give them help, guidance, and protection to the best of your ability, but even more important, give them space - space to be. They come into this world through you, but they are not "yours." The belief "I know what's best for you" may be true when they are very young, but the older they get, the less true it becomes. The more expectations you have of how their life should unfold, the more you are in your mind instead of being present for them. Eventually, they will make mistakes, and they will experience some form of suffering, as all humans do. In fact, they may be mistakes only from your perspective. What to you is a mistake may be exactly be what your children need to do or experience. Give them as much help and guidance as you can, but realize that you may also at times have to allow them to make mistakes, especially as they begin to reach adulthood. At times, you may also have to allow them to suffer. Suffering may come to them out of the blue or it may come as the consequence of their own mistakes. Wouldn't it be wonderful if you could spare them from all suffering? No, it wouldn't. They would not evolve as human beings and would remain shallow, identified with the external form of things. Suffering drives you deeper. The paradox is that suffering is caused by identification with form and erodes identification with form. A lot of it is caused by the ego, although eventually suffering destroys the ego - but not until you suffer consciously. Humanity is destined to go beyond suffering, but not in the way the ego thinks. One of the ego's many erroneous assumptions, one of its many deluded thoughts is "I should not have to suffer." Sometimes the thought gets transferred to someone close to you: "My child should not have to suffer." That thought itself lies at the root of suffering. Suffering has a noble purpose: the evolution of consciousness and the burning up of the ego. The man on the cross is an archetypal image. He is every man and woman. As long as you resist suffering, it is a slow process because the resistance creates more ego to burn up. When you accept suffering, however, there is an acceleration of that process which is brought about by the fact that you suffer consciously. You can accept suffering for yourself, or you can accept it for someone else, such as your child or parent. In the midst of conscious suffering, there is already the transmutation. The fire of suffering becomes the light of consciousness. The ego says, "I shouldn't have to suffer," and that thought makes you suffer so much more. It is a distortion of the truth, which is always paradoxical. The truth is that you need to say yes to suffering before you can transcend it.

I read it today and find it very beautiful and true.

I want to ask you something: Have you not also felt sometimes that all individuals who seem separate on the outer level are connected on a subconscious level? Like C.G.Jung's concept of a collective subconsciousness.

I believe we are all connected. I haven't read enough of Jung to know what his collective unconscious theory is all about.

I agree that children need to be allowed to have some freedom when it comes to decisions and their growth.

However, I wouldn't allow a young child to do whatever he or she wants.

By the way, Eckart Tolle reminds me of Madonna. She can sing, dance and act a little, but her talent level doesn't match her fame. Similarly, Eckart Tolle might have some good things to say, but his wisdom level doesn't match how famous he is. Sometimes marketing is a factor.

recoverer:
just forget any preconceptions and feel inward - if you want to know - the inner senses are there - you can recover them :-)

Oliver, just in case anybody has preconceptions about Eckart Tolle:

There was a time in my life when I would've really dug what Tolle has to say. Now that I am more experienced I am able to see that even though he has some good things to say, not everything he says is accurate. Some of it is out of context. Some of it could cause a person to take an extreme approach that isn't productive.

Earlier you wrote that people shouldn't follow authority figures. Tolle refers to himself as enlightened. He speaks of his so-called enlightenment experience. A lot of people end up thinking of supposed enlightened people as if they are infallible. As a result they turn such supposedly enlightened people into authority figures. It is hard to question somebody if one believes that such a person is an infallible authority figure. Some people follow supposed enlightened people blindly just as some people follow doctors blindly. I figure that if one is truly interested in one's spiritual, mental and physical health, one won't follow anybody blindly.

I believe that a wise and responsible person would never present himself as if he is an infallible spiritual teacher because he would understand that if he did the above described kind of trap will probably take place for some people. Many people have given their power away to supposed enlightened people.

Tolle presents himself as if he is an enlightened person, yet he doesn't seem to understand about the above. If he does something such as quote ACIM, some people might assume ACIM is okay because they would assume that he wouldn't refer to ACIM if it isn't legit.

He was interviewed by Andrew Cohen who is one of the most scandalous American Gurus the United States has had. Some people might make the mistake of assuming that Andrew Cohen is trustworthy because they would conclude that an enlightened person wouldn't allow himself to be interviewed by Cohen (for Cohen's magazine) if such a (supposedly) enlightened person didn't believe that Cohen is legit. My feeling is that anybody who has a significant degree of spiritual wisdom wouldn't associate himself with Cohen in such a way. Cohen has been a highly abusive guru. Consider the below links. The books they refer to provide good examples of what it is like to be with an abusive guru.

http://www.themotherofgod.com/

http://www.monkfishpublishing.com/books/enlighten.htm

I agree with Tolle when he says that we need to live in the moment more than we do and to not make our happiness and peace conditional. I've found that the more I've let go of limiting thought patterns the more I've been able to live in my beingness quite naturally. Doing so now feels significantly different than it did years ago. In "The Power of Now" Tolle wrote that there is no point in trying to overcome your fears because they are endless. He said that the only way to overcome fear is to overcome your ego. (I am paraphrasing him because I don't remember his exact words). I believe such an all or nothing approach is a mistake. He might've gotten it from ACIM because it says something similar. The number of fears we have "aren't" endless. I've found that it has been very helpful to overcome some of my fears. If I would've listened to somebody such as Tolle I might not have bothered to deal with specific issues.

If a person isn't careful he (or she) might develop dissociative identity disorder if they follow Tolle's approach in a way that leads to such a result. It is fine to be aware of our spirit selves, but it is a mistake to in some way tell ourselves that we aren't our mind by saying something such as "I am not my mind, I am this presence I feel." The main reason unwanted thoughts appear is because of some underlying psychological condition we haven't taken care of. Such a condition doesn't go away simply by ignoring it and focusing on the now and whatever amount of presence we are able to experience. Eventually we will have to deal with our unwanted thought patterns. The more we do the more we'll be able to abide according to our spirit selves quite naturally.

Some people might say that Tolle doesn't suggest that people do as I described above. I'd say that such people are making a statement that is based on what they have allowed themselves to be aware of. I know of people who have focused their awareness on their presence as much as they could and believe that they have freed themselves from unwanted thought patterns when in fact they haven't. Rather, they have found a way to ignore them and sweep them under the carpet. Eventually the carpet will have to be lifted. Some people get into an all or nothing approach because they don't want to have to deal with their issues. They want a quick fix. They don't want to have to do the work. Below is an example of somebody being influenced by Tolle in the way I just explained.

http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?12,86095

Regarding ego, Tolle takes this is issue to a nondual teaching like extreme and says that there is no such thing as individual being. This isn't true. Our souls are distinct and at one with the oneness at the same time. Until we take responsibility for our issues we won't be able to completely abide with the oneness. The below article delves further into how people can deceive themselves into believing that they don't exist as an individual.

http://nondualityisdualistic.com/articles-2/jeff-foster-advaita-vedanta-and-nonduality-122311/

I saw a youtube video where a person asked Tolle what happens when we die. He answered that he doesn't know because he hasn't died yet. Some might say that such a response has merit, but if one considers the authority figure factor it could be misleading for some people because they might conclude that if an enlightened person such as Tolle doesn't know what happens after death, then nobody knows. This isn't so because numerous people have had experiences that have given them a fairly good idea of what happens after death. I say "fairly" because people experience death in various ways and it is hard for a living person to know about all of the ways. One thing spirit World experiencers have found is that we can't sweep our psychological issues under the carpet as if they don't have anything to do with us because such issues will play a part in what we experience after we die.

I believe it is a shame that a person who isn't as wise as many people believe has the stature that Tolle has. People who choose to strongly believe according to what he says will be limited accordingly.

On an earlier post I wrote that some people desire to be a guru. If the attached article is true Tolle had this desire. The first few paragraphs are the key paragraphs.

http://www3.telus.net/public/sarlo/Ytolle.htm

Regarding whether in fact he has overcome his ego, a person who claims to know him says this isn't so. Here is a link (the first post).

http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?12,73107




 

recoverer:

Can you please overlook the name of the author of the text and just sense what the text says, and try to feel into it with an open mind? I only quoted it because I could not put it better in words and I had just come across the text.
The text speaks of "children", but it can be applied to "grown-up children" as well.

Could you try to envision it, get a sort of intuitive vision of it, feel it, get a feel for it? Open and use your inner senses, they can be trained by using them more often, but without overexertion or strain.

Oliver:

Going by the Tolle words you presented and other things he has said, it is clear to me that he has read Jiddu Krishnamurti. Years ago I read a lot of Krishnammurti. Such an approach has some value, but goes only so far. I've noticed that even scandalous gurus are able to use such words.

If something troubles us I believe we should look at the underlying issues closely and deal with them as best as we can so they won't continue to trouble us.  If something in our life situation is troubling us we should fix it as best as we can.

I believe we would find that most situations are fixable.  Even if we have something such as an terminal illness we won't have to suffer if we clearly understand that we don't die when our body dies.

If somebody we care for is suffering and there is nothing we can do to fix his (or her) situation, being with suffering and that ego thing isn't the answer. Such an approach won't do anything for the person we care for. We shouldn't wallow in our concern, but certainly we can care. The best we can do is offer whatever support we can and understand that the day will come when the person we care for will no longer have to suffer as he does. 

Say our friend is in a mental hospital dealing with a very troubling psychological condition. I don't believe it would help much to tell him, "be with your suffering." It would be much better to deal with the root problems.

Regarding who the words came from, I don't agree with the approach of not considering the nature of the source of information.  Lots of people can say some things that sound correct. But what is the overall effect of how they influence people.

In a way, a person who tunes into his presence as best as he can while ignoring his underlying issues isn't much different than a person who ignores his issues by taking heroin. Eventually the day will come when he will have to deal with his issues.

It isn't a matter of the "ego" Tolle speaks of coming to an end. Each of us is a soul that has accumulated knowledge and ways of being. Until we fully accept the reality of our existence and deal with our overall way of being in a wise and harmonious manner, we won't find the perfection we seek.

recoverer:

I also read some books of Jiddu Krishnamurti.
The fact that different authors say similar things doesn't mean necessarily that they have influenced one another.
It could be the case that they observed the same things independently and came to the same conclusions.
I find intellectual reasoning fascinating, but I also recognize its limitations, it can't reach far into the depths, it will always remain outside and look at something from the outside, from a separated viewpoint. Some things can only be explored by immersing in them. We have not only our intellect as a tool that we can use, but also have "inner" senses we can use, these inner senses are normally underdeveloped in our western civilization culture, but they are still there and can be trained, like muscles that have atrophied, they can be built up by using them. Then we have a more versatile and powerful toolbox, with all sorts of tools that we can combine, we have then the intellect and the inner senses and can use them together. With the inner senses we can explore the depths and when we get back to the surface we can use our intellect to shape our discoveries into systematic records that can be useful for communicating our findings to other explorers.

Oliver:

It seems to me you are saying that I am being intellectual. I believe I am using my discrimination.  When I do so I use my intellect, experience and intuition.

recoverer:

Can you - just for the sake of experimentation - leave away intellect and experience for a short while and focus on intuition alone?
No focus on discrimination, but rather get into a deeply relaxed state and let impressions come and go, and just watch without interfering/judging/manipulating the sensations/perceptions.

Oliver:

If you have it in mind for me to point my intuition towards Tolle, it says, "not a completely reliable source of information."

I do not believe that intuition can be separated from experience and intellect in the way you suggest. Even if a person uses his intuition to tap into universal mind, universal mind uses its rememberance of what it has experienced and learned and combines this with its ability to consider, reason and think in an intelligent way.

This whole "no mind at all business" comes from gurus who have claimed more wisdom than they have.  They like to diss the mind aspect of being without understanding what it is all about. Sometimes they do so in order to prevent their followers from thoroughly considering what they say. If their followers did so they might find some error in what such gurus say.

Perhaps you are underestimating how much I have looked inward for an answer because you are defining what is possible for me according to preconceptions you picked up while involved with nondual teachings.

recoverer:

No, nothing special in mind, it's only about the method, I'm scientifically minded, I care about the functionality of methods, and I'm open towards any possible results and outcomes.

Yes, perception can be separated from the memories of the past, more or less, otherwise it would be impossible to learn anything new.

For example, wehen you lay down on a bed or couch and relax deeply by relaxing all the muscles in your body, then after a short while, if you don't fall asleep or are occupied with thinking, the body goes into alpha state, that is the brain waves go into alpha frequencies, and the body feels numb and a bit strange, and the attitude of the brain's mode of thinking has changed, it is no more the linear and discerning mind, but a synchronous sort of mind mode, and you watch instead of create the thoughts, you may get all sorts of impressions, feelings, sensations, images. It has similarity with dream state, but you are half-awake and know that you are not asleep.

It is not about teachings or theories or concepts, it is simply an interesting method.

I acknowledge you and appreciate you and am grateful that you are and that we can communicate here, thank you!