Does anticipating something reduce its probability?

[gottathink]

Just had another thought on this.

Everything is just ‘in a state’ and anticipation anchors something down which kills the process, i.e it is no longer in a state of process thus ceases to exist.
I’m not quite sure I’m explaining this or if I fully comprehend what I’m saying. It’s similar to @Chu’s description of a tree of life. But it seems to me we have to contribute our ideas to our desired reality, if we expect something to happen it’s like we grasp for it and end up choking it to death.

Because no one is an island and our own reality is not the only reality in process, the reason STO thinking when we contribute ideas to our desired reality works, is because DCM has to accomodate a collective reality. Everyone else desires matter also, if we want to lock a particular outcome in for ourselves that could preclude certain machinations that would enable someone else’s desired outcome. It simply doesn’t work on a grand scale with billions of participants. We all have to participate and give to life rather than take from it. Then the universes can work much more efficiently to sustain a collection of consciousness.

 

[Ryan]

We had an interesting discussion in the Au-Asia-Am Reading Workshop this evening about non-anticipation related to Chapter 23 of The Wave and Chapter 4 of Iain McGilchrist's The Master and His Emissary.

In The Wave, Laura talks about the difference between anticipation and intent. The Cs say that when one acts with intent, realisation follows action, and then anticipation enters the picture, which needs to be balanced with "mental exercises of denial and faith of a non-prejudicial kind". If we look at it in terms of a Gurdjieffian octave, it may be that action fills the first interval (Mi-Fa) and then non-anticipation fills the second interval (Si-Do).

McGilchrist points out that what we bring into reality precedes our usual conscious awareness: before we can "know" how to act on our intent, we have pre-conscious knowledge of what it is we actually intend, perceived in gestalt by the right hemisphere, and as a re-presentational model by the left hemisphere. What seems likely to me is that the left hemisphere then assists the right hemisphere with the realisation of the intent, however also looks at the creation process through the lens of intrinsic utility, thus upon realisation, the left hemisphere's immediate urge is to "grasp" for the result, which can disrupt the final part of the process unless the Emissary can be reigned in by the Master (ie. non-anticipation) and the Maidens of the Wells protected.

So, mental exercises of denial and faith of a non-prejudical kind may allow us to attend to the creative process in a way that harmonises with the Universe's response to our request for access, made via our intent.

A: [..] All there is is lessons. This is one infinite school. There is no other reason for anything to exist. Even inanimate matter learns it is all an "Illusion." Each individual possesses all of creation within their minds. Now, contemplate for a moment. Each soul is all powerful and can create or destroy all existence if know how. You and us and all others are interconnected by our mutual possession of all there is. You may create alternative universes if you wish and dwell within. You are all a duplicate of the universe within which you dwell. Your mind represents all that exists. It is "fun" to see how much you can access.

In this way perhaps we can, without risking the traps that New Agers tend to fall into, "create our own reality" more consciously. Just a few thoughts!

 

[gottathink]

That’s interesting @Ryan, I hadn’t thought about there being a specific mechanism within the brain relating anticipation to disruption of the process of creation. It is worthwhile to make efforts to understand exactly what it entails in order to characterise precisely the mental exercises we need to master to deal with this earthly situation we are born into.