To All,

Recently a friend's brother died and the manner of his death required immediate feedback on his situation after death.  I had the privilege of working with another dear friend as her "wing-man" on daily trips to check on the deceased brother. 

I am in awe of the clarity of vision perceived by this woman, her name is Carolene Heart.  She was added to my floating menu bar list as a highly recommended resource not  so long ago.

At first the brother was unreachable, that lasted about  a week.  I perceived him in a white, thick cotton candy, cocoon.  With other beings around him.  I have seen these cocoons before, they are my Interpreter's nearest similar thing to being isolated in PUL.  Nothing but love gets in.  Carolene saw him in a white light swirling around him with other beings.  She had a lot more detail as well as conversations with the beings.  She couldn't get contact directly with him either, at first.

We both talked about the same aspect of him that separated at death and was not inside to cocoon with him.  We got the lesson from Helpers that there are life review reasons why traumatic deaths can need temporary separation from some of their aspects and isolation in PUL.  He has to be able to start accepting and forgiving  himself before his ready to come out of the cocoon.

When he started to regain conscious contact outside the cocoon Helpers were there to assist him in regaining more.  Carolene got way more detail of the same story.

He attended a portion of the ceremony held for friends and family here in Dunedin.  There was a part of the ceremony where people shared stories of experiences with the brother during his physical life.  There was lots of laughing and it did the brother good to feel the happiness of the old times together with friends and family.

As it stands now the brother is improving.  Able to accept more of himself as he re-lives the  pain he caused others in their experiences with him when he was physically alive.

He still has a way to go to recover from his life decisions and his death.

We all keep sending PUL and intending the best outcome for all.

Such is my life, so different from lots of other people .  For me the experience of some one else's death is just like turning a page in a novel.  The sory goes on.  We don't escape the fate we make for ourselves with every decision we make from moment to moment.   Both in this world we call physical and the other worlds beyond there we contiinue to exist, making more decisions and more fate for ourselves. 

Love to All,

Bruce

Thanks for sharing this Bruce.  It's touching to hear this story, inspiring to learn from, and nice too to get a reminder of the work you do and how it works out there on the other side. 

Love,
Vicky

Thank you, Bruce.

I see that there is still some need to explore the nature of PUL (well, the simpliest things can be the most difficult ones) and of aspects of a person, and how and if our view of a "person" or "soul" has to be altered by experiences just like you've shared.

That everything we do will have consequences, and we can't escape these, is a bit frightening to me (although I experience this every day :-) ). Exactly around this... well,  kind of burden, my thoughts revolve during the last years, as some traditional schools say for some there is a point reachable where all of their past just falls off, and aren't any longer burdened by their past. It's what's called "enlightenment" or so. I can't help myself, but in my view, after having many retrieval-experiences, there must be a point beyond which we (or in whatever form, maybe without "I", "here", "me") are not any longer attached to the chain of our personal lives.

Spooky

Spooky,


spooky2 wrote on Oct 19^th, 2011 at 7:30pm:

as some traditional schools say for some there is a point reachable where all of their past just falls off, and aren't any longer burdened by their past. It's what's called "enlightenment" or so. I can't help myself, but in my view, after having many retrieval-experiences, there must be a point beyond which we (or in whatever form, maybe without "I", "here", "me") are not any longer attached to the chain of our personal lives.

I agree, there is a point when the effects of our physical lives drop away and we enter a new way of being.  Some call that way enlightenment.  I feel it is just part of the natural progression of learning to experience and express PUL to an ever greater degree.

Probably doesn't matter what we call it.  Probably doesn't matter how long it takes us.  As eternal beings we only have forever to work on it and whatever comes after enlightenment.

Bruce

Wonderful post, and important verifications regarding the cocoon of PUL encasing the troubled person.  Thank you Bruce. 

I sometimes wonder if there is much difference between remote viewing of the living, and the seeking out of the recently deceased.  From my view, it is probing of a consciousness, either in the physical plane or in a focus level.  So the method is not so different. 

Thank you, Bruce.

As to karma and freeing yourself from its effects, I have thought long and hard about this.  I believe we do reach this state, when we lose our ego-based way of thinking and acting, choosing to act out of love instead.  We are bound to karma when we are ego- based (when we find ourselves at the polar end of an opposing view), we are freed when we are not (when we can see from another's view).  This is not to say that we must dissolve our identity.  From my perspective, instead it means that we rid ourselves of the false belief systems that isolate us into discreet physical bodies, so lonely, vulnerable, and seemingly separate from the universe. 

Part of transcending karma must include forgiveness.  Forgiving others for any perceived wrongs, and forgiving ourselves.  Forgiveness is a sign of strength and enlightenment.

Matthew

Thanks Bruce for the great story - love reading stories like this. It's through stories like yours and other's that we grown in confidence with our experiences with retrievals etc.

I still struggle with confidence, but i persist anyway because i want to retreive for the right reasons - compassion. If i was in the same situation (hopefully not)  i'd like someone to come and help me.

hugs.

Josh Langley wrote on Oct 19^th, 2011 at 10:55pm:

Thanks Bruce for the great story - love reading stories like this. It's through stories like yours and other's that we grown in confidence with our experiences with retrievals etc. I still struggle with confidence, but i persist anyway because i want to retreive for the right reasons - compassion. If i was in the same situation (hopefully not)  i'd like someone to come and help me. hugs.

Yes!  I completely agree with this.  This thought has passed my mind many times!

:)

Bruce Moen wrote on Oct 19^th, 2011 at 12:06pm:

... Such is my life, so different from lots of other people. ...

Bruce,

Have you ever struggled coming to terms with being so different from others; living half in one world half in another; being able to see behind the scenes while others can't; unable to reveal to others your true self and what you do and what you see; having to carry it about as a secret ?

If you have struggled in this way, and if you have made some progress with it, then I would appreciate hearing how you progressed, what efforts have helped you.

crossbow

It may be true that our souls eventually reach the point where we let go of all of the false ways we define ourselves; however, I have found that pretty much "all" of the people who claim to be enlightened aren't the transcendent masters they claim to be.

My feeling is that anybody who truly understood what spiritual growth is about  wouldn't lable himself as being "enlightened" because he wouldn't want to connect himself to the tremendous extent the term has been misapplied. Anybody who has an understanding of what transcendence is really about wouldn't find it necessary to speak of the ego in the way so-called enlightened people tend to speak of it.

In a way, this enlightenment-no ego business isn't any different than any other belief system. As long as a person clings to it they can't see beyond it. Nonduality is a form of bondage just as fundamentalist Christianity is a form of bondage.

It is better that a person accepts the fact that like it or not he is going to have to deal with his psychological issues. They aren't going to all drop away just like that. Eckart Tolle is a person who  claims that all of his tendencies dropped away just like that. The below person who knows him believes differently.

http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?12,73107,page=1

It is important to remember that the enlightment/no ego way of thinking was created by people who set things up so people put them on a pedestal and handed them the key to their spiritual welfare. A responsible and honest person would never set himself up in such a way.


spooky2 wrote on Oct 19^th, 2011 at 7:30pm:

Thank you, Bruce. I see that there is still some need to explore the nature of PUL (well, the simpliest things can be the most difficult ones) and of aspects of a person, and how and if our view of a "person" or "soul" has to be altered by experiences just like you've shared. That everything we do will have consequences, and we can't escape these, is a bit frightening to me (although I experience this every day :-) ). Exactly around this... well,  kind of burden, my thoughts revolve during the last years, as some traditional schools say for some there is a point reachable where all of their past just falls off, and aren't any longer burdened by their past. It's what's called "enlightenment" or so. I can't help myself, but in my view, after having many retrieval-experiences, there must be a point beyond which we (or in whatever form, maybe without "I", "here", "me") are not any longer attached to the chain of our personal lives. Spooky

Doc:

I believe there is a lot of truth to what you said.  The goal isn't to become non-existent egoless beings (whatever the heck that means). The goal is to move away from self-centerdness and live completely according to love.



DocM wrote on Oct 19^th, 2011 at 10:12pm:

Wonderful post, and important verifications regarding the cocoon of PUL encasing the troubled person.  Thank you Bruce.  I sometimes wonder if there is much difference between remote viewing of the living, and the seeking out of the recently deceased.  From my view, it is probing of a consciousness, either in the physical plane or in a focus level.  So the method is not so different.  Thank you, Bruce. As to karma and freeing yourself from its effects, I have thought long and hard about this.  I believe we do reach this state, when we lose our ego-based way of thinking and acting, choosing to act out of love instead.  We are bound to karma when we are ego- based (when we find ourselves at the polar end of an opposing view), we are freed when we are not (when we can see from another's view).  This is not to say that we must dissolve our identity.  From my perspective, instead it means that we rid ourselves of the false belief systems that isolate us into discreet physical bodies, so lonely, vulnerable, and seemingly separate from the universe.  Part of transcending karma must include forgiveness.  Forgiving others for any perceived wrongs, and forgiving ourselves.  Forgiveness is a sign of strength and enlightenment. Matthew

Related to what Crossbow wrote, yesterday I spoke to a coworker and the subject of Paula Abdul came up. He stated that she's nuts. I let him know that she sees ghosts. This added to his belief that she is nuts.

I then let him know that I communicate with spirits. I provided him with examples of when I received information from spirits that I didn't know about and was able to verify. I don't care if he thinks I'm nuts. Perhaps what I said will in some way help him.

I recently self-published two books and because of the first one my parents became aware of things about me that they weren't previously aware of. Some of it troubles them, but what can you do? Perhaps in order for the World to evolve people have to be willing to reveal what they know even if some people judge them to be nutcases.


crossbow wrote on Oct 20^th, 2011 at 12:26am:

Bruce Moen wrote on Oct 19th, 2011 at 12:06pm: ... Such is my life, so different from lots of other people. ...  Bruce, Have you ever struggled coming to terms with being so different from others; living half in one world half in another; being able to see behind the scenes while others can't; unable to reveal to others your true self and what you do and what you see; having to carry it about as a secret ? If you have struggled in this way, and if you have made some progress with it, then I would appreciate hearing how you progressed, what efforts have helped you. crossbow

DocM


DocM wrote on Oct 19^th, 2011 at 10:12pm:

I sometimes wonder if there is much difference between remote viewing of the living, and the seeking out of the recently deceased.  From my view, it is probing of a consciousness, either in the physical plane or in a focus level.  So the method is not so different.

I would agree.  In my view either one is just using the same  "nonphysical senses" to a specific area of consciousness into our awareness.


DocM wrote on Oct 19^th, 2011 at 10:12pm:

As to karma . . . This is not to say that we must dissolve our identity.  From my perspective, instead it means that we rid ourselves of the false belief systems that isolate us into discreet physical bodies, so lonely, vulnerable, and seemingly separate from the universe.

I always had trouble with the concept of dissolving identity as a goal in the path to enlightenment.   Just never seemed right.  Now years later I see that my understanding was skewed badly by beliefs I held at the time.  Now I understand that as belief systems fall away I discover my identity encompasses far more than I realized before. 

A Japanese Buddhist during my last trip to Japan explained it to me this way:  Identity doesn't dissolve into nothingness, rather, it expands into No-Thing-Ness. 


DocM wrote on Oct 19^th, 2011 at 10:12pm:

Part of transcending karma must include forgiveness.  Forgiving others for any perceived wrongs, and forgiving ourselves.

My experience suggests self acceptance, love and self forgiveness are at the root of making "progress" in life review issues.  And for me life review issues are the beginning of dealing with what others call karma.   

The deceased brother in my stating post was in horrendous emotion pain due to his manner of death and his inability to accept the pain had caused others.  It wasn't until soaking in the energy of the cocoon facilitated his feeling love again that he was able to begin to accept himself and love himself and begin to deal with his life view issues.

As an update on his condition the brother is now fairly conscious and with the assistance of Helpers releasing the "energies" of karma.

Bruce

Bruce said: "A Japanese Buddhist during my last trip to Japan explained it to me this way:  Identity doesn't dissolve into nothingness, rather, it expands into No-Thing-Ness."

Recoverer responds: "I figure it is a matter of being a being who is capable of great knowledge and love without being limited by the temporary identities that come into existence as the process of becoming wise and loving took place. Or in other words, curiosity gets defined in various ways as it seeks knowledge, but not indefinitely.  ;)

If "No-Thingness" applies to love, then perhaps it is an okay thing. How about the ability to enjoy a good joke? Is that a part of "No-thingness?" If not, then I don't know if "No-thingness" is for me.

An example of knowledge: a soul who has learned about the value of living according to love and therefore chooses to do so. Such a soul would be "much" more than a mere nothing..

There have been occasions when I've opened to love and my awareness was located in more places than where my body was located. This isn't precisely right, it is as if I become aware of what's going on for awareness other than my own parcel of awareness. It's like a vast field of awareness/being.

When this takes place it isn't necessary for me to dissapear completely.  In fact, the part of me that understands about the value of living according to love is a key part of what enables me to expand in such a way.

It is as if reality is like a bush, everything originates from its roots, and each branch and leaf is a part of the bush and the bush at the same time. It is a matter of how much of the bush a leaf decides to be aware of. In order for a leaf to be aware of the totality of the bush each root, branch and leaf has to exist. A bush doesn't lose it's essential nature simply because it has branches and leaves. It would be dualistic to believe that branches and leaves have to be negated before a bush can exist.

When it comes to what Buddhists believe,  they don't all believe precisely the same. If you read some of the old Buddhist texts that are attributed to the Buddha, they emphasize the "no-self" viewpoint to an extent that makes it seem as if branches and leaves are in some way a problem.

When two souls merge and share love with each other, each of them doesn't have to first dissapear.  If each of them dissapeared completely, how would they have a merger experience? It is more of a matter of each soul being aware of what's going on for two souls at the same time."

I've heard Adyashati talk about no-thingness and i feel it could be more about an opening of awareness. Once we realise we're more than the physical and not solely focussed on the physical world, we're suddelnly aware of the 'no- thing ness'.

As Zen teachings say "enlightenment is nothing more than letting go of all opinions, even of the opinion that you exist". The 'you' they refer to is the name, the label of you, etc.

Your consciousness / awareness / essence is still there, but no longer has the need for a 'character' to play in order to learn.

But i could be really wrong and i guess that's just another opinion :) Ha ha... I love the exploration regardless.

This talk of "ego-loss" is really what I believe to be the most important aspect of one's spiritual path to becoming a God-realized being.  It is really nothing more than detaching from one's identification with not only all external forms around ones self, such as the body, possessions, past and present life situation, and the people and objects that are interacted with, but also the loss of identification with one's own thoughts and emotions.  It is this detachment that allows one to fully realize the true nature of their being.  That's not to say that these things are forgotten about or disregarded, but rather, they are seen for what they truly are without having to react to them out of ego-based fear.  They are simply allowed to be as they are in the moment, rather than being internally resisted, and accepted for what they are from a place of peace and love- our true state of being.

So many people today believe themselves to be what they have, what they look like, what they do, and what they think, when this is not the case, and only causes imbalance and fear.  By discovering the eternally valid aspect of ones self that underlies the illusions created in the world of mind and matter, one taps into their divine power, and by living in a state of unity with our divine essence, an infinitely vast pool of internal resources is made available whereby which one is constantly inspired to live in true peace, love, compassion, and grace.  This can only be done when one's awareness is moved out of the mind (that is to say, when one stops obsessively thinking about the past or future, as most do constantly), and into the present moment, which is where one's true self can be experienced underneath the veil of the mind.

I have already begun my journey to God-realization, and I urge all of you to join me.  I recently went through a situation which would leave any "normal" person absolutely devastated, a totally life changing event, something the consensus would perceive as being for the worse, and I have breezed past it with little to no negative thoughts or emotions and have come out on top.  I am nowhere near being God-realized (lol), but have just begun the process of total detachment and the process of attunement to my divine self.  The positive effects have been apparent from the beginning, and continue to manifest. 

This is what is going to create positive changes in this world.  We need to wake up to reality, to the true nature of our reality, and help ourselves so that we may in turn help others and help the world.  We need to learn how to live unadulterated by ego-based fears created by the false identification with the worlds of thought and form, and instead live in awareness of our divine being, allowing thoughts and forms to work for us rather than living our lives dictated by them. 

By the way, I highly recommend investigating the work of Eckhart Tolle, and really putting his teachings into practice. :)

   

I agree only in part about detachment.  I think that is what Bruce described when he said he had difficulty with the idea of dissolving into a whole.

See, Dude, there is a reason not to let go of your love as an individual for others.  Yet, if your goal is complete detachment from worldly things/events/etc. then you are a senseless bystander.  This is what one of the great Indian Epics, The Bhagavad Gita, discusses when the god Krishna comes down from heaven to talk with the warrior Arjuna.  Arjuna is the greatest warrior on earth, and he is about to go into battle with his army against an opposing army composed of his tyrant cousins.  He sees all of the death about to occur - his kinsmen who will surely die, the oprhans who will be made, etc. and he wants no part of it. 

Krishna reminds him that he is who he is, and that this is all a play in some ways, and that his position of great warrior is to neither be feared nor loved, but he must do his duty.  The immortal souls of those involved are on their own paths.  Krishna argues that a greater understanding should lead Arjuna to fight - play the part, and not be attached to the outcome.

From Wikipedia:   "Fundamentally, the Bhagavad Gita proposes that true enlightenment comes from growing beyond identification with the temporal ego, the 'False Self', the ephemeral world, so that one identifies with the truth of the immortal self, the absolute soul or Atman. Through detachment from the material sense of ego, the Yogi, or follower of a particular path of Yoga, is able to transcend his/her illusory mortality and attachment to the material world and enter the realm of the Supreme."

Krishna does not propose that the physical world must be forgotten or neglected. Rather, one's life on Earth must be lived in accordance with greater laws and truths, one must embrace one's temporal duties whilst remaining mindful of timeless reality, acting for the sake of service without consideration for the results thereof. Such a life would naturally lead towards stability, happiness and, ultimately, enlightenment."

I think it would be a mistake for one to think, even for a moment, that detachment should lead to a lack of caring or action for our loved ones.  There is a horrible video from China that went viral on the web, of a toddler running out into traffic, who was killed after being repeatedly struck by several cars on a street lined with people, who went about their business.  Not one person rushed out to save the child, although clearly he was seen.  This image is repulsive to my very core  - to me it is obvious why, but in light of our conversation, some who are "detached" might ask "why should they have acted?"

The answer is that a greater understanding of our divine nature only strengthens our ability to love and care for others.  Action is necessary, as is fulfilling our earthly duties in the physical shell we are in.  Love for others and the need to act while alive are part of who we are.  Detachment means not acting out of ego-interests, not giving up on love and our loved ones.


Matthew

Doc

Funny, and probably more than a coincidence, but I happen to be reading the Bhagavad Gita as we speak. 

I don't know where you got the idea that I think one should let go of one's love as an individual for others, or that it causes one to be a senseless bystander, especially being that I said, "That's not to say that these things(egoic/world-and-mind-based things) are forgotten about or disregarded, but rather, they are seen for what they truly are without having to react to them out of ego-based fear.  They are simply allowed to be as they are in the moment, rather than being internally resisted, and accepted for what they are from a place of peace and love- our true state of being."  This is what detachment is all about.  To completely detach one's identity from worldly/egoic things/events allows for action of the spiritually highest kind, as ego-based fear is eliminated and does not interfere with right action. 

About the video you mention.  One who is truly detached in the way I have described would have instantly stepped out to save the child, for not doing so would be the result of ego-based fear. 

But, perhaps you were just making it more clear for those who may have misinterpreted what I wrote.  Although a thorough reading would not deem that necessary.

Dude,

I was trying to clarify my own point, not implying you felt we should give up on loved ones.

But yes, I do mean that to seek spiritual awareness we should hold onto love for each other, and not become passive.  See, if you realize in the big picture, that ego-based actions stem from false separation and thought, then some people may say "I am part of a great whole, and just a character in this play of life - so action doesn't really matter."

By that same attitude, those people could watch the car hit the toddler, thinking -  "well, he is an immortal part of the whole, and he will come out ok on the other side."  It seems from the video that no one cared.  Not necessarily out of fear, but because it wasn't their "business" to care.

I like the notion of "right thought" and "right action" from buddhism.  That is, whether you have deeper spiritual goals or not, it is your obligation through love to act lovingly toward others and help when you can.  That thinking transcendentally is meaningless if not coupled to loving action, here in the "real" world. 

So it is a slippery slope to say we will not be emotionally tied to the outcomes of events, yet we will not be so detached that we take no action at all. 

I think we agree on this.


Matthew

Matthew,
"So it is a slippery slope to say we will not be emotionally tied to the outcomes of events, yet we will not be so detached that we take no action at all."

The situation you mention isn't one where I need to grow a beard for the fingers to stroke through while I ponder if it's right to try to bring someone out of harm's way. Fortunately. Recently saw a picture of two boys flipping their fingers while hanging a dog by a rope. Disgusting, but there isn't anything I can do about that event. I certainly won't spread that picture. I could strike the guilt sword and go hunting for knees that don't bend to light polarity. I could gnash the teeth while mumbling humans are hopeless and will burn in hell. I also could become detached for a moment and go beyond bodily issues and see that they are both totally wrong and learning. I couldn't not feel, but I could remain calm while observing and not add dense feelings to an already dense earth. Others could not feel, another of my greater self members the same. What I'm going to do is write this post and then watch community for enjoyment & laughs.

No action at all IS right, sometimes. You get a glimpse through the window of your neighbour opening the milk carton by the wrong end. Sometimes action is right. The doctor was supposed to remove a mole but accidentally took the heart away from the body. A frown upside down and big thanks to the shaman, whom would merely see the body not moving.

I do like to read stories from the astral, and do notice that some take these and similar stories for 'how the afterlife works'. Not so, just as this forum doesn't define how all forums operate. Kind of the helpers to help this fellow out though. Light polarity people do love white light, and well, it's theirs to love.

"I think we agree on this."

Are you emotionally tied to the outcome of that? ;)

Dude:

Regarding your comment about Eckart Tolle, do you have any openess at all to what the person who knows him wrote (the link I provided)?

One thing Eckart does that bugs me is promote ACIM.  Because he also claims to be enlightened, some people will make the mistake of believing he is infallible and assume that ACIM is a valid source of spiritual information, rather than the brainwashing vehicle it is. It can lead to indifference. If you adjust some its words it would say, "Don't worry about that kid who is being run over by cars because nothing you see is real."

Another thing that bugs me about Tolle is his claim that he had his life changing experience after becoming suicidal. When people claim that they gained transcendence over their egoic nature after one experience, I tend to become really skeptical. Partly, because I have found through experience that such people tend to be frauds.

I first deeply saw that I'm more than my body-based personality more than 30 years ago, yet I still haven't overcome all of my negative tendencies. I've found that spiritual growth can take a lot of time and all negative tendencies don't drop away just like that because of one experience. It is important to factor in that 30 years isn't long when compared to the eternal nature of our soul.

Otherwise, I like much of what you wrote; however, I believe it can be a mistake to go too far when it comes to seperating ourselves from what we have become. This is so because we develop traits that are extremely worth having such as unconditional love, humility, respect for others, grattitude, an understanding of where true fullfillment comes from, endurance and discrimination. We couldn't even tell the difference between light and darkness if there wasn't a part of ourselves that knew the difference.

When it comes to consciously being a part of the oneness, I believe a key ingredient is opening up to what is needed in order to help it as much as possible. One thing that needs to be accomplished is dealing with all of the misleading sources of information that to varying degrees interfere with the perfection the oneness is striving for. If we constantly make excuses for the sources that mislead, even when people point out the faults, do we help the oneness as much as we can? Perhaps some  people need to stop being naive and acknowledge how much insidious and deceptive forces take part in this World, sometimes through people that many people unwisely put on a pedestal.

A late P.S. to the post I wrote a moment ago.

Regarding detaching from one's thoughts and emotions, this a point that Tolle way overstates.

I know of a guru who is a sex and porn addict and he says that it doesn't matter, because he isn't his body and mind. Regardless of what he believes, either here or in the hereafter, he is going to have to deal with his addictions.

What often happens with nondual gurus is that a follower of such a guru will tell his guru that his (or her) mind his troubling him, and his guru will basically tell him to not worry about it because he isn't his mind.

No matter how many supposedly egoless enlightened gurus say we aren't our mind, our mind "is" a part of who we are, and we have to deal with our mental tendencies, like it or not.

The reason many people get attracted to nondual teachings and the instantaneous enlightenment concept is because they don't want to have to take the time and do the work that is required in order to overcome their unwanted mental tendencies. These tendencies can't be escaped no matter how much a person asserts "I am not my mind."

Another thing nondual gurus tell their followers is that they don't have to worry about their problems because they aren't the individuals they believe themselves to be. The truth of the matter is that each of us is an eternal soul and each of us needs to take responsibility for ourself eventually. Intentionally developing a self-impossed dissociative disorder only delays dealing with what will eventually have to be dealt with.

Here's another thread where people speak about their experience with Tolle. Perhaps it is sometimes, even just a little, okay to listen to people who have been there done that.

http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?12,86095,page=1

recoverer wrote on Oct 21^st, 2011 at 1:49pm:

Intentionally developing a self-impossed dissociative disorder only delays dealing with what will eventually have to be dealt with.

I agree with this, and here's my simple way of stating this concept...

I still believe that intention is everything.  And we are not always aware of our intentions, even if we think we are consciously aware of all that we intend.  The truth is, intention creates energy, and that energy is created in everything we think, feel, and do.  So, even if we are thinking, feeling, or doing something and in the back of our mind we aren't consciously, intentionally intending to create or not create...the fact remains that the energy of intentions is sometimes created even without our awareness of it.

That's the whole point in leading a good life, following beliefs and practices that we believe have a good purpose.  It's the whole point in knowing, trusting, and having faith in one's own truth. 

So to say one thing but then do another doesn't change the process of some energy being created.  And it is within that energy that an intention exists, thus having a chain reaction.  In other words, once created, it can't be uncreated.  I believe it can be over-ridden, but then again that requires intention to do so....through thought, feeling, or action, whether consciously or unconsciously. 

No matter how you slice it, no matter how you word it, we are beings in constant creation of energy of intentions, even when we don't have a clue what we're causing.  It is only by being able to completely open oneself up to facing his own truth that we ever get to the real, raw "stuff" of our own existence, meaning, and purpose. 

In my opinion, no need to quibble about separating the physical from the spiritual, or the body from the mind.  That's nonsense.  We are always, constantly, conscious beings.  We are only fooled by what we allow ourselves to be fooled by.  There's not even a need to say "this is what being enlightened means to me, and this is what I think it will feel like, and this is what I have to lose or gain in order to have it." 

There don't have to be rules other than the only rule being truly loving and opening oneself up to your own truth.  And I think that at any point you think "Now I really know my real self, now I know how I need to be and what I need to do"  watch out, because you're beginning to limit your own growth right there.  It's ok to feel that you're on the right path and doing great, but don't forget that you still have a long way to go.  The more we learn, the more we realize that there's still a lot more to learn.  We are always growing as conscious beings.  I don't think there's a final answer that we're seeking.  I think while on the path of our own seeking, we're still continually creating and growing.  So if that's true, why try to put definitions as to what it is we're actually seeking to find? 

Vicky:

Thank you for writing what you wrote. :) I believe it has a lot of value.

This sort of relates, as some of you have already heard, I used to be afraid of unfriendly spirits. I could've tried to push that part of self away by asserting "those are just thoughts," "I am not my mind," or "I am pure awareness, so nothing can touch me," but the fact of the matter is that my mind "IS" a part of who I am. Thank goodness for that!

In order to get over my fear of unfriendly spirits I had to go through a lot and deal with the responsible thought patterns. This included many nonphysical experiences. It was rough at times, but I'm glad I went through the process and would do so again if necessary because if we want to have a state of being that is preferable, we have to take responsibility for our mind even if it is difficult to do so at times.

Also similar to what you said: our life in this World is just "one small part of the equation," so it is a mistake to conclude that just one experience is going to turn somebody into an enlightened person who is supposedly an absolute authority figure.

Vicky,

"And I think that at any point you think "Now I really know my real self, now I know how I need to be and what I need to do" watch out, because you're beginning to limit your own growth right there.  It's ok to feel that you're on the right path and doing great, but don't forget that you still have a long way to go.  The more we learn, the more we realize that there's still a lot more to learn.  We are always growing as conscious beings.  I don't think there's a final answer that we're seeking.  I think while on the path of our own seeking, we're still continually creating and growing.  So if that's true, why try to put definitions as to what it is we're actually seeking to find?"

Constantly and continually creating and growing, skipping the comfortable nights with complacency nested in the arms. Moving in a direction that is unheard of to the ones denying there are other paths than those leading to the shores of the daily grind - sisyphus and generations of copies, pushing the rocks up the mountain. No, going in a direction captain kirk wouldn't dream of because his pursuing of physical matters outweighs the possible spiritual quest. There is a distiction, quibble me softly or not. The more learnt, the bigger picture opens, and sure is bigger than breathtakingly vast; still learning indeed. Continually creating and growing in this one playground of many, many playgrounds, until there are bigger experiences to fry. If there are no definitions/final answers pertaining to life on earth being sought, why write a book? Why read books, posts, and listen to what people and guides have to say? What's been found so far, as to what one's been looking for, for so long. Gucci handbags. Pants that make the bum look swell. Tasty treats and kids that tread the safe road to cultural normality. Slick husbands with huge hands that grab money into the pockest of the mighty big household.

Recoverer,

Thanks!


Volu,

I don't quite understand all your wordiness, but maybe I get your gist....So in response...I'm not saying a journey should be easy and is not going to be hard.  And I'm not saying don't have goals, don't have ideas you wish to seek or accomplish.

What I am saying is that each person's journey to truth is his own and there's no clear cut path.  To try and define what the journey or end-goal should be, to me, is a limitation on one's clarity to the truth. 

Let's say I pray for happiness.  How will I know when I've accomplished that goal?  What if along the way I have bad luck, sad times, difficult experiences?  Does that mean that I won't ever be happy?  Does it mean that I'm doing it wrong?  No.  We create our experiences, we create our journey.  Whatever there is for me to learn, I'll learn it as long as I don't limit myself. 

So if a person believes himself to be enlightened, that's great.  But should he stop there and just pass along all the goodies he's learned?  Why not say "I'm more enlightened than I was before.  What else is there for me to learn?" 

Yes, it's good to set goals for oneself, and along the way through the process of our experiences, we learn more about ourselves than we ever knew existed.  And the whole process continues.  More questions, more goals, more curiosity, more experiences...and it then continues. 

Let me put it in some simple human terms.  My ex-husband spent our entire marriage saying things like, "When we have more money, I'll be happy.  When the kids are older and can do more for themselves, I'll be happy.  When work gets better, I'll be happy.  When the house is fixed up, I'll be happy."

Do you catch my drift?  He was never happy.  He set definitions on what his happiness was based on and he limited himself.  Why not just accept what is, deal with what is right in front of you (your own truth), instead of putting it off? 

So to say that this physical life and body don't mean as much as spiritual life and body, and as long as I intend to be a spiritual thinker, it doesn't matter what kind of life I lead...it doesn't jive.  Everything we think, feel, and do in any life, in any reality, whether we consciously intend something or not, is in itself an intention.  We just are not always aware of what happens because of it. 

If my ex-husband had instead said, "I want to find happiness", and he still has money problems, still has to put up with the demands of parenthood and work, does it mean he's not well on his way to accomplishing his goal?  No.  He may THINK he's not getting what he asked for, but that's his choice.  If he were to allow his own experience of the process of his own journey to his own truth to unfold, he would have found what he was seeking.  It may not be the definition of what he decided it should be, but I have no doubt he would have found it. 

Vicky,

The wordiness is letting the right brain out of the cage to have a little dance with lefty. Yes, I catch and you clarify well, and agree and see that the perceived end-goal may be different than thought. The perceived end-goal may make one blind to that which may be the actual stepping stones forward, thinking it didn't show up.

"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans."  ---John Lennon

I thank you all for your posts (yes, I mean it) and I have to state: There still is a certain difference in what is worthwile, so to say, to live like; if it is to keep on to be a person (maybe with the history/burden of former incarnations) or to dissolve into the all-that-is. Why is this thing-ness and me-ness at all? No one can explain this to me.

I appriciate Bruce's answer to my post, as it showed a relaxation and, well, knowingness or wiseness, as there's something shimmering through what is the ultimate must-be-truth. It's the "let's see truth".

I for myself feel most familiar with Dudes'  comments here. It is commendable to present statements about certain prominent, or "guru-type" people, but this is not what we should focus on, as otherwise we would focus on the wrong thing, and we won't want that, do we.

Spooky

On some occasions when you find out what the history behind a particular way of thinking is, you get a better understanding of what that way of thinking is about. Nondual thought--there is only one self, there are no individuals, only pure awareness is valid, you aren't your mind, what I  say is the ultimate truth because I am enlightened--comes from gurus.


spooky2 wrote on Oct 21^st, 2011 at 8:39pm:

I thank you all for your posts (yes, I mean it) and I have to state: There still is a certain difference in what is worthwile, so to say, to live like; if it is to keep on to be a person (maybe with the history/burden of former incarnations) or to dissolve into the all-that-is. Why is this thing-ness and me-ness at all? No one can explain this to me. I appriciate Bruce's answer to my post, as it showed a relaxation and, well, knowingness or wiseness, as there's something shimmering through what is the ultimate must-be-truth. It's the "let's see truth". I for myself feel most familiar with Dudes'  comments here. It is commendable to present statements about certain prominent, or "guru-type" people, but this is not what we should focus on, as otherwise we would focus on the wrong thing, and we won't want that, do we. Spooky

Every thought comes from someone, and it is up to each of us to call them "guru" or not.

Spooky

Bruce my dear friend, I'm with you.
Just say if you need anything.

Warmly,
J.K.Chris

I find the more I talk about living spiritually and in attunement with my higher self, the more it detracts from actually being in that blissful state of presence, and I have found that many times it can be more of an ego-satisfier than anything else.  I see those who post and debate in order to solidify their own beliefs and convert others to their way of thinking, or to give off the appearance of being someone or something, rather than to truly help others.  As I practice detaching from the fear-bound ego that had such a strong grasp on me before, this becomes more and more apparent.  Let's remind ourselves of why we are actually saying what we say before we say it, and if we find it more self-serving than helpful to others, it should be dismissed and used simply as a lesson to strive to become less attached to ego. 

It is not so much the external content which is important, but how it is perceived and used that matters.  If a source of information is found to be beneficial to 99%, and is unfortunately harmful to the 1% who misinterpret, misunderstand, or misuse the information, then the intent of those who propagandize against the source should be questioned, regardless of the intent of the source. 

I for one will be quick to recommend sources which have proven to be a positive influence in my life and which have assisted in the evolution of my consciousness to higher states of union with my internal divine power.  There is a clear distinction between the recommendation of such empowering and inspiring sources of information and the attempt to steer people away from those same sources.  One comes from love, and one from fear.  :) 

'If a source of information is found to be beneficial to 99%, and is unfortunately harmful to the 1% who misinterpret, misunderstand, or misuse the information, then the intent of those who propagandize against the source should be questioned, regardless of the intent of the source'.


This reminds me of the website tripadvisor.When myself and my wife go on holiday, we may have a perfectly fine time at a resort, only to find that one or two people consider it to be the worst dump they've ever been to and would'nt go back as long as there's breath in their body ! This is true in any walk of life where people have markedly different views.I think its critical to consider whether the criticisms are from people whose opinions one values in connection with the critiqued subject.

Regarding the old duality/non-duality schism it seems to me that non-duality (putting it inelegantly !) simply means that we are all made of the same 'godstuff'.I think the sceptics of non-duality main objection is the fear that without good/evil duality, anything goes, anything is tolerated. I think that often this fear is more apparent than real.When one's guiding star is love (or the biggest version of it one can currently perceive) then those concerns melt away...
My two penneth. 

Dude,

"It is not so much the external content which is important, but how it is perceived and used that matters.  If a source of information is found to be beneficial to 99%, and is unfortunately harmful to the 1% who misinterpret, misunderstand, or misuse the information, then the intent of those who propagandize against the source should be questioned, regardless of the intent of the source."

I presume, assume and estimate the number of people who suckle at the tits of love 'n light is vastly outnumbered by the people who's outside the nearest physical door leading outside the house. Table turned, and bubble gum music (http://tiny.cc/us4x5) shoves a tiny fragment of real music's generous library (http://tiny.cc/1sme8) into the the cold. I like that YouTube is their planet and they both can live there though one of them is the popular root chakra humping one.

Dude:

Perhaps you are being a bit disrespectful towards those who try to help others when you characterize what they do as you did below.

One would think that forums would be a good place for people to have an open communication of what's true, but unfortunately people end up doing as you have done.

The main reason I've written 2 books and almost have a new website available is so people can avail themselves to what I have to share "only" if they want to. Such an approach will probably be better than taking part on forums because some people will do as you have done.

An odd thing that takes place is that people who are caught up in belief systems such as nonduality have no problem seeing the error in a thought system such as fundamentalist Christianity, but they are completely closed to seeing error in their own belief system.

If it means nothing to people that I was caught up in the nondual thought system 20 years ago and found my way free of it, that is their choice.

I share what I share not because I have it in mind to force them to believe it. However, there is a difference between saying nothing and being forceful.

Despite what somebody like Tolle would say our mind is not the enemy. Our mind is not something separate from us. To a large extent the thoughts that appear within our mind are a reflection of how our "will" is manifesting at any particular moment. If we don't like the thoughts that appear we need to deal with the parts of mind that are causing our will to manifest in an undesirable way. Trying to pretend that we aren't our mind by focussing on our presence won't lead to a permanent positive result. That said, I doubt that Tolle is 99% correct, even though his book is written in a way where some people end up believing that it is.

If you were actually living according to your higher self to the degree you suggest, you wouldn't minimize and mischaracterize people who try to help as you have done, and you would have better discrimination about some of the sources you promote. Just because you don't allow yourself to see the errors they include, this doesn't mean that they are error free.

P.S. I bet you Scientologists and fundamentalist Christians would say that the belief system they are caught up in is helpful, but is it?



I Am Dude wrote on Oct 24^th, 2011 at 9:18pm:

I find the more I talk about living spiritually and in attunement with my higher self, the more it detracts from actually being in that blissful state of presence, and I have found that many times it can be more of an ego-satisfier than anything else.  I see those who post and debate in order to solidify their own beliefs and convert others to their way of thinking, or to give off the appearance of being someone or something, rather than to truly help others.  As I practice detaching from the fear-bound ego that had such a strong grasp on me before, this becomes more and more apparent.  Let's remind ourselves of why we are actually saying what we say before we say it, and if we find it more self-serving than helpful to others, it should be dismissed and used simply as a lesson to strive to become less attached to ego.  It is not so much the external content which is important, but how it is perceived and used that matters.  If a source of information is found to be beneficial to 99%, and is unfortunately harmful to the 1% who misinterpret, misunderstand, or misuse the information, then the intent of those who propagandize against the source should be questioned, regardless of the intent of the source.  I for one will be quick to recommend sources which have proven to be a positive influence in my life and which have assisted in the evolution of my consciousness to higher states of union with my internal divine power.  There is a clear distinction between the recommendation of such empowering and inspiring sources of information and the attempt to steer people away from those same sources.  One comes from love, and one from fear.  :)

Here's an addition to my last post.

Here's another way to put it Dude.

People take the time to speak about something that is important to them, and then you write a post as if you are above it all because supposedly you live according to your higher self.  If that's what living according to my presence and saying no to my ego is about, then no thanks.

Hi Recoverer,

'If it means nothing to people that I was caught up in the nondual thought system 20 years ago and found my way free of it'

I'd be interested to know what it was about non-duality which you found, in your experience, so pernicious an influence.If you have written about this before can you give a link to it. Thanks.

Heisenberg69 wrote: "Regarding the old duality/non-duality schism it seems to me that non-duality (putting it inelegantly !) simply means that we are all made of the same 'godstuff'.I think the sceptics of non-duality main objection is the fear that without good/evil duality, anything goes, anything is tolerated. I think that often this fear is more apparent than real.When one's guiding star is love (or the biggest version of it one can currently perceive) then those concerns melt away...
My two penneth."

Recoverer responds:

"Regarding what Heisenberg said, some people get attracted to nonduality because it speaks as if oneness is a reality and people get attracted to this viewpoint. Nothing wrong with that. :)  However, people can find out about the oneness without making the mistakes nondual teachings include, as listed below:

1. Nondual teachers are enlightened and therefore infallible. If a person concludes that a teacher is enlightened then he will probably also conclude that this teacher is infallible and limit what he believes according to what the teacher says. Therefore, a person who was truly responsible, wise and caring of others, wouldn't claim to be enlightened and make it so people end up rigidly believing according to what he says.

2. Nondualists say that individuality is an illusion and there is only one self. This isn't true. Souls do in fact exist and this fact doesn't make it so oneness can't exist.

3. Related to number 2, nondualists sometimes tell themselves that they don't need to worry about what is going on for themselves because there individuality is only an illusion. Like it or not, all of us eventually have to take responsibility for our existence.

4. Say there was a person who was in a room that was messy, and he tried to stop getting annoyed by the mess by focusing on the space the room is located in. Nondualists do something similar. If they don't like their thoughts, they try to focus on their awareness, their presence. Just as it is better to clean up the mess that exists in a room rather than pretend that it isn't there, it is best to deal with the thought patterns that trouble us, rather than intentionally develop a dissociative-state-of-mind where it only seems as if our thoughts aren't ours. Since our mind aspect of being is just as much a part of who we are as our awareness aspect of being, we cannot separate ourselves from our minds, even though some people believe that they do.

5. Nondualists believe that the World is only an illusion, so we don't need to worry about what takes place within it. Since this World comes from that which is real and people do in fact experience what takes place within it for better or worse, it is more than a mere illusion. Therefore, if we see others suffer it "does" matter. I say this because there are nondual gurus who tell their followers that they don't need to worry about the suffering that takes place in the World because it isn't real. I know of people who have become indifferent towards the suffering of others because they decided to believe according to what their gurus said about the supposed unreality of this World.

6. Some people get engrossed in nondual teachings because they don't want to have to deal with their issues. Nonduality seems like an easy out because according to such teachings all you need to do is overcome your ego. If people got to know the gurus and other people who teach such a viewpoint, they would find that despite what they claim, they haven't overcome their so-called ego. My feeling is that anybody who truly understood what is needed to grow spiritually wouldn't place so much emphasis on overcoming the ego. They would understand that is more of a matter of whether an individual is manifesting in a loving way, rather than a self-centered way. Such growth doesn't come to be by denying one's uniqueness. It also doesn't come to be by battling it out with an entity (the so-called ego) that doesn't exist in the way that some people have defined it.

Or in other words, the search for oneness is fine, but it is important to determine whether a thought system that presents itself as if it represents oneness actually does. Since everything comes from source, things don't need to be denied and negated to the extent nonduality does so.

 

Hello Heisenberg:

I posted what I just posted, and then found your post. I believe it might answer your question. When my new site becomes available it will have some free sample chapters from my books that speak about this matter with more depth.


heisenberg69 wrote on Oct 25^th, 2011 at 2:12pm:

Hi Recoverer, 'If it means nothing to people that I was caught up in the nondual thought system 20 years ago and found my way free of it' I'd be interested to know what it was about non-duality which you found, in your experience, so pernicious an influence.If you have written about this before can you give a link to it. Thanks.

Recoverer

I am sorry you chose to feel disrespected.  Perhaps you are overly identified with your perceived roll on this forum.

Forums are a great place to communicate about what is true, which is why I spoke of the truth that I have been experiencing in my life and presented a source which may help others realize and live this same truth, whereas another has chosen to try to falsify that truth.  I am speaking of the truth that comes in the discovery of one's divine being and the loss of false attachments which cause unnecessary suffering.

Perhaps you did not have luck with nondual teachings because you have misunderstood them. 

The mind is not the enemy, unless it is used unconsciously, in which case it will usually reek havoc upon the individuated consciousness which uses it.  The key is to understand that who we are is not our mind, but who we are is the eternal divine consciousness which underlies the mind and is omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient, and the mind is simply a tool and need not be responded to out of ego.  The problem is when one overly identifies with the mind, they tend to accept every thought they have as truth, and allow their untrained mind to run the show, creating negative results in all areas of their life.  It is only when one is free of false attachments of ego that one's mind can be used to its full potential and for the greatest good.

The goal of focusing on presence is not to pretend that we aren't our mind silly, it is to experience our divine state of being that underlies our thoughts and emotions.  It is from this state that one is most connected with source, as my experience has shown me, and the most blissful states are experienced without the influence of mind.  Living in this state brings an infinite amount of inspiration, joy, peace, fulfillment, and love into one's life, and this is something I want to share with others in hopes that they strive to live in their own divine grace, free from false attachments. 

I believe my discrimination to be just fine, which is why I am able to benefit from a large variety of sources without having the fear-based tendency to focus on negativity and flaws and instead to extract just what I need and what is beneficial and inspiring from each.  To not focus on errors is to not give them power. 

The truth in any system of belief is shown in the results that are brought about by it in one's life.  I am not God-realized by any means, but as I have been making more and more effort to put the truths I am learning into practice, the more and more I am seeing the positive benefits manifest in my life in all areas.  It is such an amazing thing to be able to feel inspiration and joy and tap into my divine throughout my day, and have the things I want come to me with seemingly no effort, and it is something I want to help others to realize in their own lives as well. 

I see too many people living in negativity, and too many seemingly positive people simply wrapped up in a false ego gratification state of mind.  The key is to find true and eternal peace, happiness, and love, and this will not come from the things of the ego which are only temporary, but can only come from that which is infinite and eternal and innately possesses only these highest qualities.  I am speaking of our divine self, our highest self, the God within us.  I urge everyone to make the effort to find your own inner divine.  Living in our highest grace will not only transform our lives, but will transform the world, and as we all know, the world needs transformation now more than it ever has before. 

It may be more beneficial to focus on leading people to sources you believe are of the highest positive influence, rather than focusing on deterring people away from the sources you do not agree with.  Perhaps if I was surrounded and influenced by people who do what you belief to be "helping," I would not be on this wonderful path to inner realization, and I would not be living in a state of more love, peace, and compassion than I ever have been before (and frankly, that I see most people living in).  God knows, you have condemned many of the sources I have spoken of throughout the years.  But when I look at where the things I have learned from them have led me and are still leading me, I sure am glad I didn't listen to your scare tactics.  The results in my life are proof enough of that. 

People are different. There are different roads to the same goal. So there's no need to walk the same path in the same exact style. I don't always agree with your views, but I like reading your thoughts dude and recoverer. I'm glad you two break the still water and create interesting posts and keep topics alive. Thanks.

Dude:

Please see my responses within brackets.


I Am Dude wrote on Oct 25^th, 2011 at 3:11pm:

Recoverer I am sorry you chose to feel disrespected.  Perhaps you are overly identified with your perceived roll on this forum. [It is more of a matter of feeling as if you have minimalized what I said and don't understand my motives. Regarding my role on this forum, put it this way, not too long ago I went to a new age fair and there were some young Hari Krishnas there. I felt like speaking to them about what they do, but didn't because I believed it would be disrespectful. To some extent the same possibility exists on a forum. That's part of the reason I wrote 2 books and I am creating website. So people can find what I have to say only when they want to. When on a forum I'm between a rock and a hard place when it comes to sharing information. On the one hand I don't want to be disrespectful, on the other hand I don't want to refrain from being helpful.] Forums are a great place to communicate about what is true, which is why I spoke of the truth that I have been experiencing in my life and presented a source which may help others realize and live this same truth, whereas another has chosen to try to falsify that truth.  I am speaking of the truth that comes in the discovery of one's divine being and the loss of false attachments which cause unnecessary suffering. [It is fine to let go of unnecessary attachments, but one needs to make certain that one does so in a true way. After years of seeing what takes place with nondual teachings I've found that people often don't gain as much transcendence as they believe they are gaining. What I just said is not a statement on how much transcedence you have gained.] Perhaps you did not have luck with nondual teachings because you have misunderstood them. [There are different interpretations, but I am quite familiar with what nondual teachings are about. When I was involved with them I did grow some, but only so far, because in some ways they are inaccurate and incomplete. It wasn't until I was able to free myself from the inaccuracies that I was able to really grow spiritually. On the other hand I know of people who have been involved with nondual teachings for years, and are quite stuck. One isn't going to find out what nondual teachings are about simply be reading a book or two. Years of experience does make a difference.]  The mind is not the enemy, unless it is used unconsciously, in which case it will usually reek havoc upon the individuated consciousness which uses it.  The key is to understand that who we are is not our mind, but who we are is the eternal divine consciousness which underlies the mind and is omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient, and the mind is simply a tool and need not be responded to out of ego.  The problem is when one overly identifies with the mind, they tend to accept every thought they have as truth, and allow their untrained mind to run the show, creating negative results in all areas of their life.  It is only when one is free of false attachments of ego that one's mind can be used to its full potential. [I partly agree with what you said above.  Understanding that our mind aspect of being is a part of who we are doesn't mean that we give in to thought patterns that don't benefit us. Because we have the mind aspect of being we are able to learn, develop ourselves and make decisions. Our awareness aspect of being needs our mind aspect of being just as our mind aspect of being needs our awareness aspect of being. It is great that people inwardly become aware of their awareness aspect of being, but quite often people get into this thing where they so much want to be identified with their awareness that they end up denying their mind aspect of being to an extent that is unnecessary and not based on an accurate understanding of what their nature is all about. The same happens with this ego thing, they so much want to become a part of the oneness that they falsely believe they have to deny their uniqueness. In a way these two approaches are a stage people adhere to until they find that such approaches have limits.] The goal of focusing on presence is not to pretend that we aren't our mind silly, it is to experience our divine state of being that underlies our thoughts and emotions.  It is from this state that one is most connected with source, as my experience has shown me, and the most blissful states are experienced without the influence of mind.  Living in this state brings an infinite amount of inspiration, joy, peace, fulfillment, and love into one's life, and this is something I want to share with others in hopes that they strive to live in their own divine grace, free from false attachments.  [My extensive exposure to nonduality has shown me that many people go overboard when it comes to not identifying with their mind. Often because nondual teachers place such emphasis. It is fine to use our inner being as a reference point, but abidance is more about finding where true fullfillment comes from, not from focussing our attention in a particular way.]    I believe my discrimination to be just fine, which is why I am able to benefit from a large variety of sources without having the fear-based tendency to focus on negativity and flaws and instead to extract just what I need and what is beneficial and inspiring from each.  To not focus on errors is to not give them power.  [Not everybody will respond to sources in the same way. If you're able to read them without becoming overly influenced that's fine. However, I've found that many people do get over influenced by sources that aren't as truth-based as they claim. Because it is possible to experience some positive effects even when involved with a not completely accurate source, people often don't realize how much they are being misled and limited.] The truth in any system of belief is shown in the results that are brought about by it in one's life.  I am not God-realized by any means, but as I have been making more and more effort to put the truths I am learning into practice, the more and more I am seeing the positive benefits manifest in my life in all areas.  It is such an amazing thing to be able to feel inspiration and joy and tap into my divine throughout my day, and have the things I want come to me with seemingly no effort, and it is something I want to help others to realize in their own lives as well.  [I'm not saying this applies to you, but there are many people who have gone through a glorious honeymoon period while with a guru, but then eventually they found that they were going down the wrong path. Check out the book "Enlightenment Blues" as an example. Also, it could be that to some extent you are applying Tolle's teachings in a way that doesn't match how everybody does so. I believe that your experience before reading him might play a role in your interpreting his words in a way that are beneficial. I believe it worthwhile to consider the first link I provided on this thread. I might shed some light on how Tolle's teachings have affected him.] I see too many people living in negativity, and too many seemingly positive people simply wrapped up in a false ego gratification state of mind.  The key is to find true and eternal peace, happiness, and love, and this will not come from the things of the ego which are only temporary, but can only come from that which is infinite and eternal and innately possesses only these highest qualities.  I am speaking of our divine self, our highest self, the God within us.  I urge everyone to make the effort to find your own inner divine.  Living in our highest grace will not only transform our lives, but will transform the world, and as we all know, the world needs transformation now more than it ever has before. [What you say above basically sounds fine to me.]  It may be more beneficial to focus on leading people to sources you believe are of the highest positive influence, rather than focusing on deterring people away from the sources you do not agree with.  Perhaps if I was surrounded and influenced by people who do what you belief to be "helping," I would not be on this wonderful path to inner realization, and I would not be living in a state of more love, peace, and compassion than I ever have been before (and frankly, that I see most people living in).  God knows, you have condemned many of the sources I have spoken of throughout the years.  But when I look at where the things I have learned from them have led me and are still leading me, I sure am glad I didn't listen to your scare tactics.  The results in my life are proof enough of that.  [Similar to what I said before, people respond to sources of information in different ways. Perhaps you have a better knack than usual to benefit by what you read. However, it is important to not underestimate how much the false bits of information we are exposed to limit us.  It is also important to determine whether a source will have a negative effect for others, even if it doesn't effect us in a negative way. I believe it is worthwhile to add that I've known people who were really good at experiencing bliss, but they weren't psychologically balanced.]

When you meet someone who seems to feel they have the market cornered on "the truth" Me thinks it is time to trudge pack and begone.

Beau:

If somebody finds out that so-called enlightened people aren't what they claim and that not all of the things they say are true, should it be against the law for a person to say what he has found?

Can't a person share what he has found without being a person who believes he has "the market cornered on truth?" If you read the introductions to my books you would see that I make a point of saying that I'm not infallible, and that I'm not beyond being wrong.  So-called enlightened people, especially gurus, do often represent themselves as if they are infallible. If you check out the links I provided you'll see that I'm not the only person who is willing to question what Tolle is about.

At least when I speak I try to make valid points, rather than falsely accusing somebody as you have accused me. I don't believe you accomplish much when you do such a thing.




Beau wrote on Oct 25^th, 2011 at 5:05pm:

When you meet someone who seems to feel they have the market cornered on "the truth" Me thinks it is time to trudge pack and begone.

Thanks Volu, but I wonder if my days at a forum like this are numbered. Even though I really make an effort of trying to share what I have found through years of experience, I don't want to be pushy. I guess people will have differing thoughts as to what is pushy and what isn't. I know there are times when I have been pushy.

You know, if I joined a fundamentalist Christian forum and questioned some of the things people at such a forum believe, I'd get similiar responses. People would assume that I didn't know what I was talking about. All I can say is that I'm not the only person who through "experience" has found what the whole nonduality thing is about. It would be great if we could share what we found, but perhaps many people prefer to learn the hard way.







Volu wrote on Oct 25^th, 2011 at 3:34pm:

People are different. There are different roads to the same goal. So there's no need to walk the same path in the same exact style. I don't always agree with your views, but I like reading your thoughts dude and recoverer. I'm glad you two break the still water and create interesting posts and keep topics alive. Thanks.

Albert, Chill man. I wasn't calling you out. If anything I thought you'd be in agreement with that statement. I think any person can say whatever they want ...but that includes me.

Experience is the only true teacher! 

I am simply offering channels through which those who have interest in evolving spiritually can explore the concepts being presented and determine for themselves whether they resonate with truth.  These are channels which I have found beneficial to the development of my consciousness and which may very well be beneficial to others as well, as I am not so different from anyone else, especially in communities such as this one. 

You seem to have a campaign to block these very channels through which personal growth is had.  Your intentions will produce far greater fruits by focusing on what does work and not what doesn't work, as the propaganda against these sources displays a negative mindset which may be beneficial for yourself to release.  The impulsive need to speak up the moment ACIM is mentioned or something of the likes shows an ego attachment in relationship to the material that probably needs to be loosed up, IMO. 

But, you are a good guy and I enjoy our relationship on this forum.

Beau:

Considering that a fair number of the posts before your post were written by me, it seemed sensical to conclude that you were refering to me. Plus, I considered how you spoke well of Tolle in the past. Perhaps you were referring to people who refer to themselves as enlightened. If so, I apologize for concluding differently.

Regarding chilling out, you're right, to some degree I need to chill out.

Just so it is clear, I don't mean to imply that everything Tolle says is wrong. If a person is wise they'll take what is useful.


Beau wrote on Oct 25^th, 2011 at 6:44pm:

Albert, Chill man. I wasn't calling you out. If anything I thought you'd be in agreement with that statement. I think any person can say whatever they want ...but that includes me.

Dude:

Regarding any impulsiveness I have, I do try to hold back at times, but sometimes it is hard. I feel like I need to do something, and perhaps my 2 books and site will alleviate the need.

You know, talking about this sort of thing on a forum has its shortcomings. For example, I am not in a position to accurately state what level of consciousness you are experiencing.

When you read Tolle were there some things you didn't agree with? I figure I would agree with some of the things he wrote.



I Am Dude wrote on Oct 25^th, 2011 at 6:54pm:

Experience is the only true teacher!  I am simply offering channels through which those who have interest in evolving spiritually can explore the concepts being presented and determine for themselves whether they resonate with truth.  These are channels which I have found beneficial to the development of my consciousness and which may very well be beneficial to others as well, as I am not so different from anyone else, especially in communities such as this one.  You seem to have a campaign to block these very channels through which personal growth is had.  Your intentions will produce far greater fruits by focusing on what does work and not what doesn't work, as the propaganda against these sources displays a negative mindset which may be beneficial for yourself to release.  The impulsive need to speak up the moment ACIM is mentioned or something of the likes shows an ego attachment in relationship to the material that probably needs to be loosed up, IMO.  But, you are a good guy and I enjoy our relationship on this forum.

Quote:

2. Nondualists say that individuality is an illusion and there is only one self. This isn't true. Souls do in fact exist and this fact doesn't make it so oneness can't exist. 3. Related to number 2, nondualists sometimes tell themselves that they don't need to worry about what is going on for themselves because there individuality is only an illusion. Like it or not, all of us eventually have to take responsibility for our existence.

Greetings Recoverer.

   I wasn't familiar with dualism versus nondualism teachings before now, so I checked it out on the internet:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nondualism

   I agree with you about nondualism most likely being an erroneous belief. Not only do I embrace the belief in all of us being of separate consciousness from God, though spiritually connected to God, I believe our ultimate goal is to first achieve Soul consciousness, then eventually God consciousness so we can be active co workers with God in this physical plane and/or the other planes (focus levels) that exist.

   I don't like considering the physical world to be only a world of maya (illusion). I believe the physical plane to be reality, yet only a portion of total reality which makes up all of existence (all focus levels, planes, dimensions, etc.). Notice I always say I believe first because I don't want anyone thinking I know the answers (for ego's sake or whatever reason). I always try to avoid ego's entrapments, but find it necessary to have an ego up to a point for survival in the physical.


Quote:

Thanks Volu, but I wonder if my days at a forum like this are numbered. Even though I really make an effort of trying to share what I have found through years of experience, I don't want to be pushy. I guess people will have differing thoughts as to what is pushy and what isn't. I know there are times when I have been pushy.

   I hope you reconsider and stay on the board. I love reading your posts and I don't think you're pushy at all. If you ever meet my wife, you would find out what pushy really is.    :)

Ralph

I honestly cannot recall a time when I was reading or listening to Tolle that I stopped and thought, "hmm, that doesn't sound right."

He does speak of the "pain body" which was a fairly new concept for me, as the aspect of our egoic self from which our emotional pain is birthed, and which actually thrives in this emotional pain, drawing us to experience more and more of it, and as something that is dissolved through the detachment of ego.  When I first heard him mention it I thought, "hmm, this is different."  The more in detail he went the more it made sense.  Not a concept or term I need to incorporate into my daily living, although the ego detachment is something I do embrace.  That is, a healthy, nondillusional detachment.

I do not ever recall him claiming to be enlightened, although I do recall him defining enlightenment in a way that makes it accessible for everyone to attain, as simply being in a state of knowing of your true self.

Is there anything he has written or said that you do not agree with?  Out of the things you claim certain nondual gurus teach that are false, I do not recall Tolle saying any of those things, or saying anything to an extent that would cause one to become disillusioned.  I believe I would have picked up on it.

The link you provided was a person who became overly attached to Tolle's teachings, which is extremely ironic and even paradoxical in that Tolle teaches detachment.  The guy clearly took it to an unhealthy extreme and is most likely a rare case.  If you look at the responses to Tolle's youtube videos you will see an abundance of people who have been positively influenced by his work, and a total lack of those who were hurt by it.   

Bruce Moen wrote on Oct 19^th, 2011 at 9:16pm:

I agree, there is a point when the effects of our physical lives drop away and we enter a new way of being.  Some call that way enlightenment.  I feel it is just part of the natural progression of learning to experience and express PUL to an ever greater degree. Probably doesn't matter what we call it.  Probably doesn't matter how long it takes us.  As eternal beings we only have forever to work on it and whatever comes after enlightenment. Bruce

   In some ways, this is relatively true, and yet in my communications with the Co-Creator, I haven't gotten such a passive/Yin feeling from 'him" about this issue.   He seems to be rooting (and working his butt off) for all of us to do this sooner than later.  There are probably really big picture reasons for this. 

  Certainly my own Disk has been putting pressure on me to complete this process sooner than later.  Again, i'm sure there are probably good reasons for this as well. 

  Maybe it's as simple as The Whole at the most creative, PUL attuned level, wants to be completely healed and truly whole?  As long as one part hurts, all hurt to some extent.  The more who fully heal themselves, the faster and easier the healing process for all becomes.

  So, I would say that "probably" it does matter some, relatively speaking, how long it does take us.  Not in a comparison way or anything like that, but related to the above process of healing of the Whole I touched on.

p.s., hope you and Pharon are doing well down in sunny FL--please tell her i say "hello!"
   

Beau wrote on Oct 25^th, 2011 at 6:44pm:

Albert, Chill man. I wasn't calling you out. If anything I thought you'd be in agreement with that statement. I think any person can say whatever they want ...but that includes me.

  I love you deeply Beau.  You are mature enough to handle the following or so I am hearing/feeling. 

  Yes you were, and deep down you know it, but you did it in a very subtle and indirect manner, and on some level were looking to incite. 

Sometimes, though, in your case, it's a matter of the right hand doesn't always fully know what the left hand is doing.  Meaning, some definite unconsciousness involved.  This is not related to who you are as a being, as a consciousness per se, but more to body imbalances which affect your mind and at times letting yourself be unduly influenced by outside energies which do not have yours or anyone's best interests at heart. 

  If you knew Albert like I know him on a deep Spirit level, you would know that, unusually so, he does have others best interests at heart.  This is not to say that he is free of error or of issues, but try to tune into his intent and Spirit more and you won't judge him so harsh as you sometimes do.

  Thank you for listening

Hi Recoverer,

thanks for you reply. Firstly, I completely agree (and I suspect most people on this board) with your first point, blind following is never good.

Regarding your other points let me elaborate on my idea  that the schism between duality and non-duality may be more apparent than real.I believe that they are explanations operating on fundamentally different levels.

Let me give an everyday example to explain what I mean.Suppose that a mother has a teenage daughter who falls deeply in love and she is jilted.The daughter is devastated, she feels her life is at an end and considers suicide.From her mother's (meta/non-dual) perspective she sees that there will be others, life goes on, part of life's rich tapestry etc etc. It seems to me that we on this board are like bystanders tring to decide who is 'right'. Some of us identify more with the daughter's (duality) perspective and others the mother's meta perspective.

Who is right ? They both are depending on your perspective !

I stand by what I said Justin and you are mistaken. I was referring within that statement to what Albert had said about Guru's....not to Albert himself. But if you see yourself in what I said and take offense perhaps that's something to be looked at.

Heisenberg,

I like your example of the daughter vs. mother way of thinking about duality - except if your daughter were Juliet or Ophelia from Shakespeare's works - she might not realize that there are more fish in the sea before she went crazy or died out of grief...

Of course from a meta view, that wouldn't be a real worry, as she might be initially set back by her actions, and then evolve anyway, but in the near term - better for the mother to really sit down and get the message through.

The thing about the "every source of information may be valuable" (with proper discernment) approach is, that there are consequences of thought and action (even if, on a grander scale the small scale doesn't matter).  The "Juliet example" shows that there is much suffering to be had if we don't help each other in approaching sources of information. 

We are not meant to detach from all others as we evolve in spirit.  Love of others implies that we are connected even if we feel our own spiritual connectedness in a non-dualistic way.  We still try to help out and guide others - and this implies using our well condisered opinions and our plunge back into the physical world with its dualities. 

M

I'm at work and busy so I can't say much, but I'll say this.

Thank you Ralph.

Everybody else including Ralph, perhaps it was a mistake for me to speak of Tolle as I did. Perhaps it would've been wiser if I said something such as the following:

Yesterday when I drove home from work I made a point of not having a lot of unnecesary mental activity such as being impatient with traffic (not that I'm usually impatient with it) and I tuned into beingness. It felt good; however, I noticed that doing so now feels different than doing so about 30 years ago. I used to feel peace and beingness 30 years ago, but now I feel more love than I used to and the peace has a nicer feeling than it used to.

Why? Because, I've let go of limiting thought patterns that limited me 30 years ago.  It is fine for a person to reduce unnecessary inner noise by realizing that he (or she) is engaging in mental activy that doesn't serve a positive purpose; however, until he deals with his limiting thought patterns he will limit his ability to tune within and be aware of the formless part of himself and the oneness we are all a part of.

recoverer,

"Thanks Volu, but I wonder if my days at a forum like this are numbered. Even though I really make an effort of trying to share what I have found through years of experience, I don't want to be pushy. I guess people will have differing thoughts as to what is pushy and what isn't. I know there are times when I have been pushy."

I've had similar thoughts several times. It's another flaw with light polarity - wanting to help but end up imposing, and I don't like being there. Going away though I miss the conversation about spiritual subjects which I find rare in the physical life, where who's related to who, where they live and what line of work seems to be a recurring mundane interest. All boring body stuff to me.

"You know, if I joined a fundamentalist Christian forum and questioned some of the things people at such a forum believe, I'd get similar responses. People would assume that I didn't know what I was talking about. All I can say is that I'm not the only person who through "experience" has found what the whole nonduality thing is about. It would be great if we could share what we found, but perhaps many people prefer to learn the hard way."

DIY sticks because it's your experience becoming a known and not a belief based on others' experience. The seeds which we deem to be good are planted by handing over our very best advice, and if not cared for, people should be totally free to ignore that or else polarity and control issues come into play and the situation gets messy.

Dissent, disagreeing, friction, and yet not diminishing each other, I like that concept, but the road to that place can only be found by walking there. Pushy I know all about in a forum environment. Being afraid to voice one's opinion is equally challenging and not right too.

DocM wrote on Oct 26^th, 2011 at 12:01pm:

Heisenberg, I like your example of the daughter vs. mother way of thinking about duality - except if your daughter were Juliet or Ophelia from Shakespeare's works - she might not realize that there are more fish in the sea before she went crazy or died out of grief... Of course from a meta view, that wouldn't be a real worry, as she might be initially set back by her actions, and then evolve anyway, but in the near term - better for the mother to really sit down and get the message through. The thing about the "every source of information may be valuable" (with proper discernment) approach is, that there are consequences of thought and action (even if, on a grander scale the small scale doesn't matter).  The "Juliet example" shows that there is much suffering to be had if we don't help each other in approaching sources of information.  We are not meant to detach from all others as we evolve in spirit.  Love of others implies that we are connected even if we feel our own spiritual connectedness in a non-dualistic way.  We still try to help out and guide others - and this implies using our well condisered opinions and our plunge back into the physical world with its dualities.  M

I agree with what you write above but would just like to add a couple of points.When it comes to offering advice/opinions/experience its always a good idea to make it explicit that its one's own opinion/experience.Some past posts I have read seem to suggest that what they have written is THE truth. This annoys people because it would invalidate their own experience (in the same way that a patient would hate a doctor telling them that their acute pain is not so bad !). I think one of the great strengths of the Moen/Monroe approach is 'don't take my word for it, go and find out for yourself !'.

Secondly, be specific.For example in the past some posters have railed against 'New Age' beliefs without specifying which one's they're talking about ! Innuendo and 'blunderbuss' attacks serve nobody.

Needless to say these are general comments not aimed at anyone in particular.
D

Thanks Recoverer, and OutOfBodyDude, you both gave me something to think about.

You are welcome kind sir.  Don't strain yourself now!  Follow your heart and what feels right.  Your intuition is your best guide.

heisenberg69 wrote on Oct 26^th, 2011 at 5:27am:

Hi Recoverer, thanks for you reply. Firstly, I completely agree (and I suspect most people on this board) with your first point, blind following is never good. Regarding your other points let me elaborate on my idea  that the schism between duality and non-duality may be more apparent than real.I believe that they are explanations operating on fundamentally different levels. Let me give an everyday example to explain what I mean.Suppose that a mother has a teenage daughter who falls deeply in love and she is jilted.The daughter is devastated, she feels her life is at an end and considers suicide.From her mother's (meta/non-dual) perspective she sees that there will be others, life goes on, part of life's rich tapestry etc etc. It seems to me that we on this board are like bystanders tring to decide who is 'right'. Some of us identify more with the daughter's (duality) perspective and others the mother's meta perspective. Who is right ? They both are depending on your perspective !

  Sure, but in cases like the above, often such challenge is specifically chosen for consciousness growth.  Especially by and through our closer relationships with others.

  Sometimes involvement with misleading sources is also sometimes chosen for purposes of consciousness growth, but I am also aware that sometimes it's just a consequence of being involved with a world/dimension like this, and I know both in my own experience and tuning into others, our nonphysical guidance teams are not so blase about us getting involved with these limiting sources. 

  However, it seems, few of us truly listen in a more deep and consistent manner, to those more purely creative levels of being.  If there were more who did, both more individuals would be more "enLightened" and the world as a whole would not be quite so imbalanced.  Obviously, not enough of us are listening and paying attention enough.  It's partly because of the nature of this dimension, there's A LOT of static built up here.

  Taking the "metaperspective" is relatively true, of course, and in the longest term, most ultimate perspective, everything will probably work out for the best (but not without effort on our parts!).

  Yet, from my experience and communications with differing levels of guidance--especially with the most expanded levels of same, i'm in fundamental disagreement with attitudes about consciousness growth as Bruce Moen expressed. 

   Those that I've contacted who are intune with the most purely creative and expanded levels of consciousness are not blase and passive about this whole process of consciousness growth.  There is an odd admixture of both a detachment, and yet a very real concern and care with the state of this world, and with many individual consciousnesses. 

  They seem to take and work towards the "sooner is better than later" approach, but at the same time are very patient and extremely understanding when we don't choose or want similar. 

  The reason why, relates what I said in my reply to Bruce's quote.  It's about the healing of the Whole.  This is very important, it's the most important thing there is universally and that is The Truth, in all capital and bold letters. 

Since these consciousnesses are far more intune than myself, I will err on the side of their perspectives rather than the limited perspectives and perceptions of my own, and of most around me in this world. 

  Meanwhile, I will likewise try to be patient and very understanding of both my lack of choosing sooner than later, and others, and yet be concerned and active in trying to affect positive change. 

  It's a delicate balance.  More nonphysically focused "guides" or helpers, or whatever you want to call them, tend to do a much better job at this and maintaining this all important, delicate balance than most of us who are more physically focused.  It's easier for them, there is less baggage and distortion effect when one is not so intensely involved in with the physical focus.

  Albert is a helper that came in from a very expanded and PUL attuned dimension and specifically came as a messenger, but he is intensely involved with the physical, and it's harder for him to achieve and maintain that all important balance.   But I'm grateful he chose to come here, because eventually, he will be one who will help facilitate much positive change for this world. 

  I don't base this on personal opinions, feelings, or inclinations, or intellectual thoughts, etc. but on guidance messages i've received.  There was a time when we didn't particularly get along on a more personal level.

  I'm not  exactly comparing the two btw, but there were many who bashed Yeshua in his day, many who put him down, called him names, said he was ignorant, unwise, crazy, etc. and no doubt some considered him an overly pushy, upstart young man.   I would have been one who defended him then.

  If one has plumbed their shadow side and has really started to work out the kinks in same, and one is really starting to attune to PUL in a consistent manner, etc., then the opinions, thoughts, etc.  of others will not personally bother one, even if such people are saying things as "the truth" or not (which btw, Yeshua often times did, for he was fully intune with it).  One personally cares less about what and how others say things to self or those close to self.

Meanwhile, there is much to be gained in the saying of "fake it till you make it."

You're welcome.


crossbow wrote on Oct 28^th, 2011 at 2:19am:

Thanks Recoverer, and OutOfBodyDude, you both gave me something to think about.

wrote on Oct 28^th, 2011 at 11:20am:

heisenberg69 wrote on Oct 26th, 2011 at 5:27am: Hi Recoverer, thanks for you reply. Firstly, I completely agree (and I suspect most people on this board) with your first point, blind following is never good. Regarding your other points let me elaborate on my idea  that the schism between duality and non-duality may be more apparent than real.I believe that they are explanations operating on fundamentally different levels. Let me give an everyday example to explain what I mean.Suppose that a mother has a teenage daughter who falls deeply in love and she is jilted.The daughter is devastated, she feels her life is at an end and considers suicide.From her mother's (meta/non-dual) perspective she sees that there will be others, life goes on, part of life's rich tapestry etc etc. It seems to me that we on this board are like bystanders tring to decide who is 'right'. Some of us identify more with the daughter's (duality) perspective and others the mother's meta perspective. Who is right ? They both are depending on your perspective !   Sure, but in cases like the above, often such challenge is specifically chosen for consciousness growth.  Especially by and through our closer relationships with others.   Sometimes involvement with misleading sources is also sometimes chosen for purposes of consciousness growth, but I am also aware that sometimes it's just a consequence of being involved with a world/dimension like this, and I know both in my own experience and tuning into others, our nonphysical guidance teams are not so blase about us getting involved with these limiting sources.    However, it seems, few of us truly listen in a more deep and consistent manner, to those more purely creative levels of being.  If there were more who did, both more individuals would be more "enLightened" and the world as a whole would not be quite so imbalanced.  Obviously, not enough of us are listening and paying attention enough.  It's partly because of the nature of this dimension, there's A LOT of static built up here.   Taking the "metaperspective" is relatively true, of course, and in the longest term, most ultimate perspective, everything will probably work out for the best (but not without effort on our parts!).   Yet, from my experience and communications with differing levels of guidance--especially with the most expanded levels of same, i'm in fundamental disagreement with attitudes about consciousness growth as Bruce Moen expressed.     Those that I've contacted who are intune with the most purely creative and expanded levels of consciousness are not blase and passive about this whole process of consciousness growth.  There is an odd admixture of both a detachment, and yet a very real concern and care with the state of this world, and with many individual consciousnesses.    They seem to take and work towards the "sooner is better than later" approach, but at the same time are very patient and extremely understanding when we don't choose or want similar.    The reason why, relates what I said in my reply to Bruce's quote.  It's about the healing of the Whole.  This is very important, it's the most important thing there is universally and that is The Truth, in all capital and bold letters.  Since these consciousnesses are far more intune than myself, I will err on the side of their perspectives rather than the limited perspectives and perceptions of my own, and of most around me in this world.    Meanwhile, I will likewise try to be patient and very understanding of both my lack of choosing sooner than later, and others, and yet be concerned and active in trying to affect positive change.    It's a delicate balance.  More nonphysically focused "guides" or helpers, or whatever you want to call them, tend to do a much better job at this and maintaining this all important, delicate balance than most of us who are more physically focused.  It's easier for them, there is less baggage and distortion effect when one is not so intensely involved in with the physical focus.   Albert is a helper that came in from a very expanded and PUL attuned dimension and specifically came as a messenger, but he is intensely involved with the physical, and it's harder for him to achieve and maintain that all important balance.   But I'm grateful he chose to come here, because eventually, he will be one who will help facilitate much positive change for this world.    I don't base this on personal opinions, feelings, or inclinations, or intellectual thoughts, etc. but on guidance messages i've received.  There was a time when we didn't particularly get along on a more personal level.   I'm not  exactly comparing the two btw, but there were many who bashed Yeshua in his day, many who put him down, called him names, said he was ignorant, unwise, crazy, etc. and no doubt some considered him an overly pushy, upstart young man.   I would have been one who defended him then.   If one has plumbed their shadow side and has really started to work out the kinks in same, and one is really starting to attune to PUL in a consistent manner, etc., then the opinions, thoughts, etc.  of others will not personally bother one, even if such people are saying things as "the truth" or not (which btw, Yeshua often times did, for he was fully intune with it).  One personally cares less about what and how others say things to self or those close to self. Meanwhile, there is much to be gained in the saying of "fake it till you make it."

I think its good that you know who you are and what you're about and that there are people such as yourself and Recoverer willing to help people 'get up to speed' as it were.The one point I would make is that 'enLightenment' can't be foisted on people..One of the previous posters made the comment (from memory) that if they could make people attuned to PUL, hang niceties/PC they would.To my way of thinking that would defeat the object; indeed , logically, if it could be done that way Higher Sources or beings would have made us all enLightened a long time ago !

D

"When you set up someone as an authority, never forget that the belief you have in this authority is just your own opinion." --Alan Watts

  I completely agree with you David.  However, i fail to see how impersonally stating a perspective different than anothers, or the popular or consensus opinion is even remotely akin to trying to foist enlightenment on others?  This is EXACTLY what our "guides" do with us daily (try to impersonally help us see things in a different light or different way)--it's just a more subtle process with them because for most it's harder to fully tune in and "hear" them and they have a wider range and depth of "tricks" to do this.   On forums like this, we have these limited, clumsy words.

  Here's something I've found interesting about the person I was talking about before, yes he's disagreed with people on certain issues before (perhaps too much so at times) , but i've rarely, if ever, seen him get personal and negative to others, even when (or especially when) others did not show him the same impersonal courtesy. 

  He has almost always responded in an even, kind, impersonal manner and kept it about the idea, topic, or concept at hand.  That is something I've always admired about said person, especially since i've observed it consistently over some 6 yrs.

   Yeshua use to say you would know the real teachers or helpers by their fruits.  I would update the saying a bit to fit our modern world, and add onto that, "and on forums, by how they react to those who disagree with them and especially to those who sling personal insults, try to belittle, minimize, etc them."

  Here's the rub though, real teachers, especially the most intune/mature ones, are rarely ever popular, well liked or well received during their actual times in the Earth.  Why, because there is a greater differential between their frequencies and the majority of those around them, and Like ever attracts, begets, and likes Like, and unlike on the deeper mental and spiritual levels tends to repel, dislike, etc unlike especially the slower frequencies in relation to the fast frequencies (the more differential involved, the more intense the dislike). 

  I once had a dream wherein "Bruce Moen" told me, "go find (a certain person), he is more intune than i."  By intune, my dream guidance meant more spiritually mature, aware, and balanced.  My "Disk" or guidance used the symbol of Bruce Moen because i've long thought he was a pretty intune guy (somewhat unusually so, roughly about a 1 in a 700, 000 using Monroe's terms  and expression ;) :D )   A little bit of a cheeky joke that last one.

 

 

Beau wrote on Oct 29^th, 2011 at 11:50am:

"When you set up someone as an authority, never forget that the belief you have in this authority is just your own opinion." --Alan Watts

  Great advice for the Earth plane and for the process or creation of limited beliefs based on conditioning, intellectual thought process, many in physical, human interactions, and general physical based "knowing". 

   Doesn't apply as much in the more expanded levels of the nonphysical, for there, some of us recognize there is such a thing as higher authority (ala Tom Campbell's "Big Cheese", B.M.'s "Planning Intellligence", Bob Monroe's "Is this the 'Son of God'?, etc), and that the way of wisdom is listening and practicing "Not my will, but the Will of the Creative forces be done." 

  It's that persistent selfishness, arrogance and strong self will so common in the Earth and in humans, which keep so many from realizing their own innate Sourceness and fully consciously attuning to same and which keeps humanity stuck and very imbalanced.  Why, because i don't like "authority", i know better, and i will do what i want, when i want.

  Ironically though, by listening and giving up that self will and practicing the above, we make ourselves fully equal to those in the highest authority, the Co Creator Gods.  We become that.

  What a catch 22 for us humans eh!   ;) ;D   Part of the reason of why I'm transferring my consciousness to an E.T. body next time around.  Less inherent static to deal with.

I think it applies universally. Someone's guide will always be their own opinion. That is my opinion. That doesn't mean we shouldn't have guides for ourselves, but I feel invoking my guide "for the benefit" of others is a little presumptuous. But I realize that others feel differently and I have no problem with that as long as they don't attempt to constrain me based on what I MIGHT consider their biased guidance.

Justin:

Do you have any links where Tom Campbell speaks about the Big Cheese?

Beau wrote on Oct 29^th, 2011 at 12:38pm:

I think it applies universally. Someone's guide will always be their own opinion. That is my opinion. That doesn't mean we shouldn't have guides for ourselves, but I feel invoking my guide "for the benefit" of others is a little presumptuous. But I realize that others feel differently and I have no problem with that as long as they don't attempt to constrain me based on what I MIGHT consider their biased guidance.

  By your standards and definitions, that dude Jesus must have been one of the most presumptuous and arrogant people around.  After all, he was often telling people that they needed to change their beliefs and ways.   ;D    Sermon on the Mount, Oh Lordy.   :o

  Man, you just can't win in this Earth with humans can you.  Heck, if your truth speaking is potent enough, you just might get strung up by the more "enlightened" ones out there. 

    The funny thing about the shadow is that if you make friends with and accept a part of you that either you or society (or the majority) deems distasteful, unwanted, destructive, or what not, then often you tend to express that part of you in more helpful, less destructive ways, and the less you tend to label and judge others for the same activity. 

  Which is why i never get upset about others preaching to me or ever label another one of those nasty "preacher" labels, however subtly or not so.  It's the people who really dislike it, label others, etc. who often most need to examine and make peace with their own shadow. 

  Anyways, it's been real, and fun, but it's time to go back to silent, monk mode.  After all, I don't want to be transforming too many beliefs too  fast, that can cause spontaneous combustion in some folks and we don't want that! 

Ever with love and humor. 


:P

You are not Jesus, Justin, but yes I think the Jesus who is personified in the bible is pretty presumptuous.

recoverer wrote on Oct 29^th, 2011 at 12:44pm:

Justin: Do you have any links where Tom Campbell speaks about the Big Cheese?

  Not right off hand, but if you go to the google books site which has his book for free, you can type in "Big Cheese" and you will get all the references to same, highlighted. 

  Apparently, according to T.C. at least, the Big Cheese even has the "authority" to um...recycle those consciousnesses who just keep on keeping on the mean, selfish or extremely "high entropy" side, but he does add that such action has been extremely rare.

To Beau,

   Too right mate, but that wasn't my point at all, and you know it.  You just expressed exactly the opposite of what i mentioned about admiring about Albert.

  I impersonally challenged your beliefs and perspective, and you turned around and got personal with it and insulted me, insinuating that I was comparing myself to the Teacher of teachers.

  But, it's all good as long as mirrors exist. 

I you can't see that I am pointing something out to you, Justin. It's no problem. I understand that you are on a mission from God in your own way just as I am, sort of. I called you out because you chose to play the Jesus card. What you said was just as insulting. It did seem that you were saying that Jesus was not presumptuous in an off handed way. I don't know what Jesus was actually like, but my wisdom tells me that the bible does not do him justice.

To write what we write to each other we must both find each others views or at least some statements offensive. I don't mean it against you personally. I just disagree with you, because I don't trust your guidance. I trust mine. No worries though, for if you stated something I agreed with, as you have done in the past, I would be right there with you.

Sorry if you found what I said offensive or insulting, but I guess if you did then I made my point since I don't think of him as the "teacher of teachers", but perhaps a teacher of students.

I have Tom's book, but I thought there might be some other things he wrote about the Big Cheese at his forum.


wrote on Oct 29^th, 2011 at 1:06pm:

recoverer wrote on Oct 29th, 2011 at 12:44pm: Justin: Do you have any links where Tom Campbell speaks about the Big Cheese?   Not right off hand, but if you go to the google books site which has his book for free, you can type in "Big Cheese" and you will get all the references to same, highlighted.    Apparently, according to T.C. at least, the Big Cheese even has the "authority" to um...recycle those consciousnesses who just keep on keeping on the mean, selfish or extremely "high entropy" side, but he does add that such action has been extremely rare.

Justin,

"After all, I don't want to be transforming too many beliefs too fast, that can cause spontaneous combustion in some folks and we don't want that!"

'We' is a slow changer anyways, and it's slowly sinking in that the I is the one that really needs transforming and focus. 'Selfish' gets tossed around, perhaps a fear popping up regarding that particular aspect not being allowed to meddle anymore - nobody to "help" anymore. Tips, advices, cheeky humorous pokes and so on has a different vibration than preaching, which is saving, which loses the point completely. When it comes to preaching, I'll be more aware of it on my part and try to toss both it and the bathwater out of my being. It sucks.

Reading the quoted text I see your dark side saying it wants carthe blanche for you and your friend. Yeah, could be a lot worse, and you're courageous to attempt embracing it. No balance without it. My dark side enjoys shock humour. Funny responses and a way to learn about what's below the surface.

There are a few threads where the Big Cheese comes up, Albert.

Here ya go: http://www.my-big-toe.com/forums/search.php?st=0&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&keywords=Big+Cheese

  Volu, it was a joke.  I don't think i transform any beliefs on here, and that is not my intent per se anyways. 

  A forum is not really a good venue for that anyways.  It's best done by mostly silent example and in person. 

  For example, i've had friends become vegetarian after hanging out with me and being influenced by my example and reasons, and not once did i preach to them, or even indicate that i believed they should be become vegetarian.   They liked what they saw in my example, and thought the reasons why i did it made sense.  But the point is, less animals are being tortured and mistreated for human consumption. To me, that is a "good thing" no matter how you cut it.

  That was the true way of Jesus, and along with his "miraculous" good works, his silent example is what really transformed people's beliefs and ways.   So far, i'm just a candle in comparison to his Star. 

  Shiver me timbers, arrgh matey.  I do admit, i'm pretty scary!   Care Bear Stare. ;D

Joking or not, the observation is what it is, it just is, what it is, as with the unpopular dark sides. My motion through life doesn't include your star Justin, but I kinda get the importance for you. 'Our lord' is more than talking about it though, not that you were saying it. Care Bear Stare - you put on the costume for halloween already? ;)

Reaching their own decisions is very cool and the polarity mess don't apply. Kinda boring though, so I've decided to arrange a silent rally (fluffy wool shoes) against the nature terrorists that eat faceless energy with their faces. Plants aren't elephants, but need yo crush them like one? (tm) Righteous stuff, man.