Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2021 3:49:49 GMT
LOA works always without fail like a gravity. But the thing is, the created reality sustains as long as one holds the image of the desired reality. Once he stops visualizing or affirming, then the created reality will be collapsed. If any of the reader have ever used reality creation, then you must be knowing what I am talking about. I use reality creation by putting in beliefs into my client’s subsconscious. But of course, this is still dream stuff... Who is doing what? You used reality creation for putting beliefs into your client's subconscious? What? What kind of reality creation is this? I know about how to program other's subconscious mind secretly. But I did not get what you are talking now.
Yes, it's all dream stuff. No doubt! But this law(law of attraction) we have been talking about is actually about how dream unfolds! Did you notice that?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2021 3:50:47 GMT
"Belief creates the reality" Or "Belief attracts the reality" have had deep contention in the past in many places. To attract all other possible reality has to exist(at the level of parallel) but to create the reality, it doesn't have to. I strongly believe belief creates the reality is correct. So then, is that belief, "creating" that causal relationship, or does that causal relationship between belief and future manifest reality, exist as a law independent of whether you believe it to be so, or not...? If you don't believe in separation, Is suffering possible? |
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Feb 26, 2021 23:08:51 GMT
Oh, that's a question that was central for me at one point in time, and one I worked on both consciously and subconsciously for decades. You're over analyzing the dialog. Go back and re-read what she wrote, it was quite simple: "I don't even know what exists outside my own room, unless my mind tells me." Then go back and look at exactly how I replied. Did I contradict what she said, or did I affirm it? Pay attention to the actual words on the page. I think we're having two different conversations at this point. Uh-huh.  Translation: you actually went back and read the words on the page.  |
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Feb 26, 2021 23:21:55 GMT
You two are confusing me 😂😂😂 I’ve already had to deal with ‘no me’ 😂😂 Seriously though, what I meant, was how Tolle, Adya, Sailor Bob etc describe ‘this’. Without referring to memory, thought, imagination, labels..etc. what do I actually know? There’s an assumption that life is carrying on outside this house.. but I don’t know for certain through all my other senses. I imagine this would be akin to watching a baby or young toddler. They just don’t know about anything else.. And as Tolle describes it at one point, we can suppress our "higher functions" - those of mind that fill-in-the-blanks, which brings us down, to a lower level of consciousness, or go the other way. The example he gives is meditating ("going higher") vs. abusing substances ("going lower").
Getting present to the way the mind works, getting present to the senses with all other movements of mind on mute can be illuminating. It can even lead to various substantially altered states of consciousness. Also, not-knowing is a powerful perspective. An opening.
But, life goes on, and the mind has uses. What you sense isn't the product of what you are limited to perceiving by those senses. If you see anything in your room, it's because of light that originated from a process happening elsewhere. Tolle points a person inward, and this is a common way to point. But attention has two different directions to it, and you can get to the same states of mind by directing attention outward. The "Source" he points to, is evident from either direction. You've shifted on this question of "no you", but are you done with inquiry in term of "what is that Source"? |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Feb 26, 2021 23:34:08 GMT
So then, is that belief, "creating" that causal relationship, or does that causal relationship between belief and future manifest reality, exist as a law independent of whether you believe it to be so, or not...? If you don't believe in separation, Is suffering possible? Again, separation is much more encompassing than just a belief. But no, suffering (the adding on of a mental overlay to a natural/basic feeling/emotion) cannot happen unless there's a separate, volitional person being imagined into the scenario...(an entity who suffers). |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Feb 26, 2021 23:44:56 GMT
I think we're having two different conversations at this point. Uh-huh. Translation: you actually went back and read the words on the page. No, I honestly don't grasp what you are saying and how it relates to what I was saying. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Feb 26, 2021 23:48:53 GMT
I use reality creation by putting in beliefs into my client’s subsconscious. But of course, this is still dream stuff... Who is doing what? You used reality creation for putting beliefs into your client's subconscious? What? What kind of reality creation is this? I know about how to program other's subconscious mind secretly. But I did not get what you are talking now. Yes, it's all dream stuff. No doubt! But this law(law of attraction) we have been talking about is actually about how dream unfolds! Did you notice that?
Any laws that you think you see that dictate how the dream unfolds, are actually themselves, part and parcel of the dream-scape....dream-stuff! Those too, like all other perceivables, are empty appearance only. Not Truth. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Feb 26, 2021 23:56:38 GMT
You two are confusing me 😂😂😂 I’ve already had to deal with ‘no me’ 😂😂 Seriously though, what I meant, was how Tolle, Adya, Sailor Bob etc describe ‘this’. Without referring to memory, thought, imagination, labels..etc. what do I actually know? There’s an assumption that life is carrying on outside this house.. but I don’t know for certain through all my other senses. I imagine this would be akin to watching a baby or young toddler. They just don’t know about anything else.. And as Tolle describes it at one point, we can suppress our "higher functions" - those of mind that fill-in-the-blanks, which brings us down, to a lower level of consciousness, or go the other way. The example he gives is meditating ("going higher") vs. abusing substances ("going lower").
Getting present to the way the mind works, getting present to the senses with all other movements of mind on mute can be illuminating. It can even lead to various substantially altered states of consciousness. Also, not-knowing is a powerful perspective. An opening. But, life goes on, and the mind has uses. What you sense isn't the product of what you are limited to perceiving by those senses. If you see anything in your room, it's because of light that originated from a process happening elsewhere. Tolle points a person inward, and this is a common way to point. But attention has two different directions to it, and you can get to the same states of mind by directing attention outward. The "Source" he points to, is evident from either direction. You've shifted on this question of "no you", but are you done with inquiry in term of "what is that Source"? See, again, you seem to be missing what Esponja is getting at, (what I see her saying) and are offering something back that isn't at all related. What I see Esponja describing is that she is seeing that all perceivables, everything sensed, thought, seen, heard, is appearing "immediately," or not at all, and it's in that "immediacy of appearing" that "knowing" IS. This is the same conversation as "when you turn your back on the mountain, do you know for certain it's still appearing"? She's describing the seeing through of an objectively existent world beyond immediate perception. |
|
Esponja
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Esponja on Feb 27, 2021 1:24:00 GMT
And as Tolle describes it at one point, we can suppress our "higher functions" - those of mind that fill-in-the-blanks, which brings us down, to a lower level of consciousness, or go the other way. The example he gives is meditating ("going higher") vs. abusing substances ("going lower").
Getting present to the way the mind works, getting present to the senses with all other movements of mind on mute can be illuminating. It can even lead to various substantially altered states of consciousness. Also, not-knowing is a powerful perspective. An opening. But, life goes on, and the mind has uses. What you sense isn't the product of what you are limited to perceiving by those senses. If you see anything in your room, it's because of light that originated from a process happening elsewhere. Tolle points a person inward, and this is a common way to point. But attention has two different directions to it, and you can get to the same states of mind by directing attention outward. The "Source" he points to, is evident from either direction. You've shifted on this question of "no you", but are you done with inquiry in term of "what is that Source"? See, again, you seem to be missing what Esponja is getting at, (what I see her saying) and are offering something back that isn't at all related. What I see Esponja describing is that she is seeing that all perceivables, everything sensed, thought, seen, heard, is appearing "immediately," or not at all, and it's in that "immediacy of appearing" that "knowing" IS. This is the same conversation as "when you turn your back on the mountain, do you know for certain it's still appearing"? She's describing the seeing through of an objectively existent world beyond immediate perception. Correct. |
|
Esponja
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Esponja on Feb 27, 2021 1:26:38 GMT
You two are confusing me 😂😂😂 I’ve already had to deal with ‘no me’ 😂😂 Seriously though, what I meant, was how Tolle, Adya, Sailor Bob etc describe ‘this’. Without referring to memory, thought, imagination, labels..etc. what do I actually know? There’s an assumption that life is carrying on outside this house.. but I don’t know for certain through all my other senses. I imagine this would be akin to watching a baby or young toddler. They just don’t know about anything else.. And as Tolle describes it at one point, we can suppress our "higher functions" - those of mind that fill-in-the-blanks, which brings us down, to a lower level of consciousness, or go the other way. The example he gives is meditating ("going higher") vs. abusing substances ("going lower").
Getting present to the way the mind works, getting present to the senses with all other movements of mind on mute can be illuminating. It can even lead to various substantially altered states of consciousness. Also, not-knowing is a powerful perspective. An opening.
But, life goes on, and the mind has uses. What you sense isn't the product of what you are limited to perceiving by those senses. If you see anything in your room, it's because of light that originated from a process happening elsewhere. Tolle points a person inward, and this is a common way to point. But attention has two different directions to it, and you can get to the same states of mind by directing attention outward. The "Source" he points to, is evident from either direction. You've shifted on this question of "no you", but are you done with inquiry in term of "what is that Source"? I’m not ‘stable’ in this knowing yet, however, it seems to be available when I look. All I find is an ever present emptiness, like a movie screen or the sky. Everything appearing in it. So everything is made of it. I am both nothing and everything. No idea if that answers your question. Its all ideas, beliefs and concepts other than this. |
|
Translation: you actually went back and read the words on the page. 
