anart said:Raintree said:Here is the crux of my problem. I don't think the DCM would care about giving aid to either STS or STO Beings as I am interpreting the DCM meaning to be as "God" or the Universe. Moreover, since this is a Free Will Universe according to C's and others, "God" does not interfere in any way with creation.
I think that makes sense, though you're missing the part of the equation that indicates that you, and all creation, is not separate from 'God'.
anart said:rt said:So to be painfully clear, I don't think "God" cares about whether I perish or not in this school. It is not because "God" doesn't love me. It is because it is my task to learn to Love "God" and discover what it IS.
What about the idea that it's your task to align yourself (your actions/thoughts/being) with the face of 'God' that is you - realizing that 'God' is not some external creature who cares or doesn't care?
anart said:rt said:So it is up to me to work on myself to be able to graduate to reach a cognizant level of unification with the All or not and for this difficult task I need to have faith in my potential hyperdimensional being, wether it exists or not.
Okay, so you're saying that no matter what - no matter what the level of your being and developmental stage of your soul, it helps you to have faith that you have a higher self that you can communicate with and ask for help. I think that makes sense (but you might want to shoot a little higher than 4D ;) ).
anart said:rt said:If it doesn't, then I will pretend it does till it "grows". Fake it till you make it as the saying goes.
You're applying that saying in a way it doesn't really apply, actually. 'Fake it till you make it' really applies to taking action in your life - active choices and behaviors that a person chooses to do even though they think they can't. It doesn't really apply to imagination, else, imagination is all that results, at least as far as I understand.
anart said:rt said:That is, I choose to "Love" "God" as it IS, both yin and yang. This is what the feminine expression of "thou, I love" means, or so I think.
Sorry if I am going on and on about this faith thing. My cup is almost empty.
I think it makes sense - it really comes down to the idea that has been expressed here many times, which is, that even if a person discovers that they are an 'Organic Portal' it doesn't change their Aim, which is to learn as much as they can and be the best human being they can in order to advance - to give to the Universe in whatever way they can, which is usually up to the Universe to decide (at the end of the day). In that way, I can see your 'fake it till you make it' expression. Basically each of us moves forward with the general understanding that we don't know for certain what the outcome will be, but we do know that nothing matters more than Doing and Being the best we can in our current states and working to improve those states every day in every way we can. Is that close?
dreamrider said:Great thread. Thanks for all the input, particularly the session quotes from the C's.
I generally say the Prayer of the Soul just prior to sleeping and upon awakening (and when I do the EE). I am not aware of consciously expecting anything from saying it, but I feel a sense of connectedness with Spirit / Divine Cosmic Mind and feel loved and protected. It resonates very deeply.
Buddy said:Dingo said:I guess the upshot is, we need to live in 'the now', which is obviously difficult, but in reality we are not, we are working towards something we perceive is going to happen in the future. This could be one area where I come unstuck.
To me, the interesting thing is that "Now" seems to have always been right in front of our faces, but we fail to see it because we've been behaviorally conditioned and our consciousnesses have been trained to live in a linear story line narrative of our lives, instead of actually experiencing our lives and the world, as it is, and fully, OSIT.
Jerry said:This seems to me trying to trick a law by veiling the real intent with a rewording of it. The intent is really that you don't want some things to occur.
If the flow is constricted, then wouldn't it follow that the prevention of the undesirable things wouldn't happen?
Let's call "the not happening of all the things you don't want" - 'E' and "anticipation" - 'A'
A → ~E (A implies not E)
Or: anticipating the not happening of all the things you don't want will constrict the flow of the not happening of the things you don't want.
Wonderful, Jerry! I want to give you a high five so bad.....
If we could combine the NOT logic with a knowledge of actual vs imaginary possibilities, we might have enough data to set up actual experiments!
Dingo said:Bud said:To try and cancel the possibility of a negative happening, is there any evidence in reality at the moment, as it relates to you, that might suggest the possibility that a specific unwanted event, happening a specific way, is possible?
I think the meaning of the word 'possible' must be taken seriously in this context, or one would risk falling into imagination, OSIT.
No there is no evidence, only past experience, and this is obviously the crux of the main issue of worrying about stuff all the time, like money, because we imagine some possible outcome all the time based on the past, and we tend to assume the worst.
Dingo, I really hope you enjoyed that link to the "Holy Grail of no Anticipation", because it's worth a re-read and because it seems to me that people are not picking up on some clues that are available.
The Left brain - Right brain thing is important to contemplate, OSIT.
You could think of it this way: The left brain is the story teller and the right brain is the 'feeler and creator of the Now'.
Try to ditch the 'time' concept by temporarily suspending your left-brain internal story-line. Instead, feel an Eternal Now where there is no 'time' - only cycles and repeating cycles and patterns of motion.
Instead of saying "at any given time", you could say "at any given point on a particular cycle". You are always at some point of some cycle or set of cycles that relate to you as well as coincide with the worldly and cosmic cycles. Whatever cycle you are currently engaged with is part of multiple cycles that steadily increase in scope, rather than 'time'. Whatever has happened in your 'past' happened on a previous point of a cycle which will be coming back around eventually, if not sooner.
This is an important reason for recapitulation and knowing your machine, because only learning lessons will release you from repeating patterns (cycles of motion) if they're undesirable. The more self-aware you become, through recapitulation or other means, the more you should come to know about your own repeating cycles and where you are on any 'circle', so-to-speak.
You said "No there is no evidence, only past experience", but past experience is specific and your worry seems to be generalized. What will help is for you to figure out what cycles repeat for you and what are the usual sequences so that you can recognize and be able to 'predict' things in your own life.
I don't know how old you are, but you could do your recapitulation of your life in cycles of 20 years, then 10 years, then 5 years, etc, going from making the most general statement of what a period of time was about for you and working your way down to the specific details that validate your general statement. You could even count the cycles in a day to determine how many behaviors repeat during the course of a day. How many 'routines', 'rituals', or "regular ways of doing something" make up the entirety of a day for you.
From the most repetitive behaviors in the course of a day, to something you only do once every 20 years or more, place everything you can about your life into a single context like a solar system, or galaxy, with orbiting bodies to represent these habits, or cycles.
If you make an effort to recap in terms of cycles instead of a linear story line, this will give you valuable practice for identifying personal repeating patterns, OSIT. This is the way your life happens anyway, so it's also more realistic.
By fooling ourselves into living a linear narrative, we create an illusion that there are "future moments" that are "fresh and new and full of promise and danger". Well, maybe. But a case can also be made that whatever you are doing now, you've done before and will do again, because there are only cycles.
You could probably combine Jerry's "NOT Anticipation" (which I find wonderful, burble, burble :)) with the idea of actual possibilities which are real for you from your knowledge of your own cycles and patterns and you should be able to see your life more like a model of a living operating system and less like some random walk mystery needing prayerful intervention except for maybe an extraordinary case or two.
Does this make any sense?
For example a man says--'I want to be serious.' But the whole point is in how he says it. If he repeats it even ten thousand times a day and is thinking of how soon he will finish and what will there be for dinner and the like, then it is not prayer but simply self-deceit. But it can become a prayer if a man recites the prayer in this way: He says 'I' and tries at the same time to think of everything he knows about 'I.' It does not exist, there is no single 'I,' there is a multitude of petty, clamorous, quarrelsome 'I's. But he wants to be one 'I'--the master; he recalls the carriage, the horse, the driver, and the master. 'I' is master. 'Want'--he thinks of the meaning of 'I want.' Is he able to want? With him 'it wants' or 'it does not want' all the time. But to this 'it wants' and 'it does not want' he strives to oppose his own 'I want' which is connected with the aims of work on himself, that is, to introduce the third force into the customary combination of the two forces, 'it wants' and 'it does not want.' 'To be'-- the man thinks of what to be, what 'being,' means. The being of a mechanical man with whom everything happens. The being of a man who can do. It is possible 'to be' in different ways. He wants 'to be' not merely in the sense of existence but in the sense of greatness of power. The words 'to be' acquire weight, a new meaning for him. 'Serious' --the man thinks what it means to be serious. How he answers himself is very important. If he understands what this means, if he defines correctly for himself what it means to be serious, and feels that he truly desires it, then his prayer can give a result in the sense that strength can be added to him, that he will more often notice when he is not serious, that he will overcome himself more easily, make himself be serious.'
Cantera said:Now, my confusion is this: If the man remains praying of "wanting" to be serious, doesn't this always prolongs this becoming to a future? I mean, if he needs, then he doesn't have. So, every time he asks, he is acknowledging he lacks seriousness. This is true. But when does he shifts to "I am serious", if his praying is of wanting? Would one, for example, become serious someday and then one would recognize this and stop the praying?
I thought of what the implications of, instead of praying "I want to be serious", think of, "I am serious". Maybe this would carry some self-deceit, if done in a wrong way, making one believe one is what one is not. However, done with the method G. proposed, concentrating in the whole meaning of what he is saying (even thought it's probably not possible, at least in the beginning, like he said), wouldn't it give similar results? I want to know this in case I want to make some prayers myself :).
Thanks in advance and peace.
ka said:I stumbled upon a strategy to aid prayer and mindfulness that may be of interest to others:
At the beginning of 2014 I made the resolution to be ready to see truth from outside my habitual fields of attention. I pray that my comfortable routines, my conditioning, my emotional defenses, preconceived ideas, and structures of thought do NOT insulate me from Truth.