That is an interesting interview with Anita Moorjani, Neno. I am pleased after watching it. I think the part where she says that she realised that the results of the medical tests she had already had would reflect which ever decision she took is interesting. I expect that will catch the attention of one or two quantum physicists.

I've been trying to find something that debunks AM but I haven't found anything. To debunk her would mean to demonstate that she wasn't dying and that the NDE was not associated with teh cancer reversal. Has anyone else seen anything?

The interview (previous post)has so many points from which one could start a conversation. HEre's one quote I like:
Quote:


I have drained myself being loving without accomplishing much, just as she describes, and not practiced self-love enough.

This is one of he reasons it is important to me to call it PUL rather than just "love."

Self-love has been and still is one of my hardest lessons. I took all those Bible lessons about loving your neightbor seriously but always felt I had to reprimand myself. Changing that has been a slow process. I dd realize that if you love your neighbor as yourself and don't love yourself much, then maybe you wouldn't have to love your neighbor either!

In my early 20's I came across a book called The Heresy of Self-Love. Even the title contains a sharp lesson. It certainly alowed me to focus on the fact that nowhere in religious teaching had I come across anything about loving myself. I couldn't do it (love myself) but I became able to at least talk about it, to move from thinking self-love was narcissistic to seeing it is everything.

Another lesson came from of all places a pratitioner of Wicca, Starhawk, who wrote clearly about the self-hater in many people. She has a great quote in one of her books from ..Doris Lessing I think...that talks about that. Reading that was another profound realization of what I was doing to myself.

I realy think one of the functions of culture that keeps us from our higher self is to teach us to not love ourselves. I think organized religion also teaches that. It is one of the things that keeps us bound to culture (rather than enlightened). Anita makes it sound so simple. But I'm glad she is talking about it. This is a good distinction to make, between being loving and being love.

<<It is my understanding that PUL is the very foundation of our being, whether we know it or not.>>

Doc-

Exactly.  PUL is misunderstood by many folks.  They mistake it for an emotion, and think it's something they "have" as opposed to something they are.  It's not a commodity that they can send back and forth to each other.

PUL, as you say, is a state of being.  It's probably the very essence of Existence or God.  Or "All That Is." 

Someone once said PUL is what a new mother has for her newborn child.  No, not really.  She is feeling an emotion that to her is pure and unconditional.  Over time, however, because in her case it's an emotion, it will change. 

Genuine PUL, however, never changes.  It simply IS.

R

Love and the Heart Centre

Those who know the workings of the subtle bodies and can see and know the soul's centre's of consciousness can see that these centres of consciousness each possess their own energetic structure and dynamics.

And all the body's organs function exactly as reflections of the functions of the respective centres of consciousness of which each organ is associated.

And the design and function of every part of the human body reflects exactly the design and function of the same associated part within the soul and subtle bodies.

Some might wish to learn about the soul and its workings from the anatomy and function of the body. 

The workings of Blood and the Heart and their relation to the cells of the body are exact reflections of the workings of Love and the Heart Centre and their relation to the body of humanity.



Blood and the Heart:

Blood is life and health to every cell throughout the body. Blood carries everything that every cell requires. Blood gives, and blood takes away.

Blood must be in motion for the life it carries to pass to the cells of the body.

When blood is stationary or confined, it dies and turns toxic. 

Blood flows through the heart in only one direction, like an arrow.

The heart supplies blood to all cells in the body, except to itself. The heart does not, cannot, supply blood to itself.

There is a one-way valve at the exit of the heart, where the blood flows forth, called the aortic valve, and this valve ensures blood does not flow back into the heart.

When the heart contracts to pump forth blood to all the cells of the body, the aortic valve (which has three cusps) opens wide to accommodate the flow of blood, and in so doing the valve seals shut the arteries in the aorta which supply blood to the heart. The heart pumps forth life-blood to all other cells but does not take a single drop for itself.

After the heart has given forth its blood to all the body's cells, there is a back-pressure which closes the valve back to the heart and in so doing opens the entrances to the arteries that supply blood to the heart.

Only after the heart has supplied the body with its needed lifeblood does the heart receive blood for itself, and even then it does not pump that blood to itself as it does to all the other cells in the body, but rather, the blood comes around to nourish the heart by a natural design that is independent of the heart. A backpressure generated by the structure of the body's arterial system and by all the collective cells within the body causes blood to enter the coronary arteries and circulate around the heart and nourish the heart in preparation for its next exertion of giving lifeblood to the cells of the body. And then again, not by its own effort, but by natural systemic design, it will receive blood back for itself, but always only after it has given that same blood forth to other cells. 

The heart does not put itself last; it does not even consider itself at all; it just gives forth its lifeblood and leaves the greater system to provide its needs.  



 

Quote:


Hi Lucy,

I'm not sure if this will answer your question or not, but hopefully it will shed some light on the subject.

I would agree that PUL is the very foundation of our being, the substance, the essence of what we are only in the sense that God alone is this underlying foundation or the ground of our very being that we call PUL.  This is what I have believed and have spoken of for many years.  Yet it seems as though, to our limited mind anyway, PUL is more as a guiding light.  Something that we are striving to evolve within our very being.  If PUL is a state of being, and I have thought it is, then there obviously are other states of being that exist as well.  In addition it seems as though there is an element of chaos that resides within our consciousness.  Or at least we can hypothesize this because of the way we express ourselves in our interactions with each other and the varying intents behind the expression.

Love is something that can only be given. I think it is correct to say that it is to the exact degree we are able to love and understand one's self, it is to that exact same degree we are able to love and understand others.  So the more we give love and understanding to our self, the more we are able to give love and understanding to others when interacting with them.  The deciding factor as to whether or not it is love being given resides in our intent.  The underlying motivation of our thought and action.  Is the intent love based or is it fear/ego based?  Discerning our intent, our motivation, is not always easy and the resulting outcome of an action does not always reflect one's intent accurately.  So how do we know we are growing spiritually?  How do we know we are evolving, rather than devolving?

If our capacity to love, to give, to exhibit humility and compassion in our daily interactions is significantly increasing, while our ego, fear and material attachments are significantly decreasing, we then can know that we are evolving, improving the quality of our internal being, our consciousness.

It seems to me that spiritual growth/evolving our consciousness (same thing) is directly related to and results from our innate ability (the guiding light within) to interact from loving intent.  It is not about how much we do, wear ourselves out in the service of others, it is about the reason, the incentive, the impetus that drives our thought and actions as we experience and interact with all that we perceive as external from us.   Real spiritual progress, real improvement in the quality of our consciousness must come from the inside, that which is internal.  This involves self love and understanding.  A part of self love involves the understanding of our true intent, our true motivations, as well as the assimilation, the integration of what we create in our lives through our interactions.   In other words, it is through our interactions with others that changes occur within our being, modifies what we are internally. 

We can unquestionably know that we are growing spiritually if we are truly knowledgeable in regards to our true intent, if we are kind, humble, compassionate, helpful, balanced and focused on what we can contribute to the well-being of others in our day to day interactions.  Others will also see our capacity to love, to give, to display compassion and humility.  A highly evolved individual sticks out from the crowd like a shining jewel.  These individuals are beloved and held in the highest esteem by everyone who meets them.  They have gentle and highly effective personal power that is fearless, egoless.  These individuals live gracefully in the face of the unknown because this is a simple and very natural process that occurs when there is an absence of fear within one's being.

If on the other hand our spiritual state is stagnate or of low quality, ego driven and our interactions with people are manipulative, and we are trying to impress them for material or ego ends, then we are failing in our efforts to grow spiritually and improve the quality of our being, even if we have convinced people otherwise, and thereby will have deluded one's self. 

Eventually we will have no difficulty telling the difference between real spiritual growth or delusions of spiritual growth about our self if (and that's a big if) one actually wants to know the truth.

Kathy

Hi Volu,

It seems my words have been confusing, rather than helpful to you.  That was not my intent and I'm truly sorry.

I'm not quite sure I understand what you're saying.  Perhaps if you could ask more specific questions I could grasp your meaning better and try to improve on further explanation.

Certainly one can be the benefactor, on the receiving end, of someone's loving intent, however love in and of itself is something that can only be given.  Think of love as essence or substance that is radiated from a being.  Love in and of itself is a radiant substance. In this way it is PUL (the guiding light within).  To the degree an individual is able to radiate love, the purity, the clarity of it, is dependent upon a number of factors such as if one has cross-purposes within their intent.

Kathy

  Quick p.s. relating to my last reply.  It is usually the moderately evolved/intune folks who tend to garner the most positive reactions and feelings from the majority around them.  This is because there isn't quite the difference in "vibes" with the other or either extremes, and there are more of those who are near that themselves, and Like attracts, begets, and often likes Like on the deeper mental level of existence within the physical and much of the nonphysical.

Kathy,
"I do think most, if not all people can easily recognize a highly evolved individual though.  How they respond or interact with that person is more of a reflection of their own quality of consciousness.  If they respond negatively, it is because they are harboring fear."

The same can be said about any guru or anyone we like/love/adore, and as a follower: protect his or her position as an authority and at the same time one's own ties to the individual. Someone respond with reason to her or his words, as followers, dub it 'negatively', and then say they're merely harboring fear.