|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 9, 2024 18:25:56 GMT
Very kind of you....  Yeah, it's a label we give to a particular, specific kind of experiential content. From the vantage point of clearly seeing the distinction between that which abides, unchanging, vs. that which is appearance only, those smaller distinctions/labels that mind applies, really don't matter....it's ALL ephemeral, ALL temporal, ALL empty and devoid of inherent existence in it's own right...it depends upon that which abides for it's temporal arising/appearance. The only place is DOES matter, is in distinguishing those appearances that DO appear from those that actually don't appear and are instead, erroneously imagined. That's what the term "illusion/delusion/false" is speaking to. A separate me doesn't really appear....it's imagined. Separation does not really appear....it's always only imagined. Yes, it's mind that slaps those personal judgment based labels upon a particular feeling state. The person 'likes' certain feelings more than others....it's built into the personal experience to likes/dislikes/resists certain conditions, which really is not a problem at all, until and unless there's a separate person imagined into the mix. It's that separate person idea that heaps an overlay of fundamental judgment upon an arising feeling of discord/resistance, to say it 'should not' be arising and that it needs to be controlled by the person. That term "real" often presents a problem in these conversations, which I why I tend not to use it. An appearance IS really appearing, but it's absent inherent existence. Only abiding Awareness as ground "exists" in it's own right. So in that sense, I get why some say that appearing things, thoughts, feelings are not 'real,' but Awareness IS. I think sometimes the "not real" label gets used to deny and sort of denigrade experience....as though not being real/not having inherent existence somehow means we should personally cease to care about it at all. It's true, awakening does lessen the depth of 'concern' that mind applies to unwanted/dis-liked conditions, but it does not completely dissolve ALL caring...all concern. Those who insist it does are as I see it, 'brown-bearing it.'  Ah OK understood. I can see the confusion for a seeker in using that word for sure. Even not real or real is making little sense to me these days tbh. Yeah....the very terms "real/not real" are qualifiers.... mind-based assessments/comparisons. In any given moment where "something" is arising in experience, it's obviously "real enough" that it can be said to be arising in experience! Even in a night-time dream, whatever condition is arising in that dream, in the moment it is arising, is really arising. There's no denying experiential content, whatever it may be, here and now. It's not that sense of "real-ness" that's part and parcel of whatever is presently happening in experience that was ever the problem. Freedom is not obscured by the undeniablity of an appearance-appearing, it's obscured by identifying the appearing "me" and all else that appears, as each having it's own fundamentally discrete existence....that's what imagined separation IS. It's that imaginary 'separate, inherently existent me' that heaps on the overlay of fundamental judgment, that then drags emotions down into condemnation of the very fact of the up/down motion of feelings as the story unfolds. Yes! That's a great way of explaining what it's like when the 'stickniness/attachment is gone.' Absent that stickiness, emotions/feelings arise and then easily pass on through....there's more fluidity. Love this! Yes, true/pure empathy, that is absent that 'feeling bad/sorry/regretful sort of vibe' does seem to increase when the SVP is not driving the bus. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 9, 2024 18:44:06 GMT
Yup. Yes, agreed. If the focus upon LOA is indeed just a sort of 'playing around,' that in itself would indicate non-attachment to outcome...it's only those who depend upon particular manifestations for peace to be/who are deluded, who take it for anything more than 'play...engagement with a particular idea/experience.' Me neither. And in saying that, I do admit, that diverges from what I've said in the past about such. Positive attitude, feelings, thoughts, manifestation, all of 'em, dream stuff...no one actually causing the other. And when it's seen there really is no doer, each of those arisings, are part of an unbroken circle. It's all one movement...we could as much be correct in saying that the manifestation was sensed/known and thus, led to the positive feelings/expectations about it's unfolding as we could say the positive feelings led to the unfolding. But, Neither would be Truth. Exactly. Bingo! You can't "Do" your way to "actual" alignment. Haha full circle ❤️ Yes!  Wow...thanks for pulling that up/bumping up that particular exchange. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 16, 2024 19:47:59 GMT
And yet, Jerry Hicks died of cancer....  It's important to also note, according to Esther/Abe, Jerry was the most proficient practicer of LOA/deliberate creation they'd ever seen...he apparently refused to even engage in conversations where something/someone was being criticized....always had a sunny outlook on life...he ate extremely healthy foods......was not overweight.....loved life to it's fullest. Begs the question, if the person who Abe says is mostly responsible for the 'summoning' of the Abraham channelling cannot through practice of those channelled teachings, avoid the manifestation of fatal cancer, what hope do their students have of mastering these teachings that promise an ability to control manifest conditions? |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 16, 2024 19:52:58 GMT
And yet, Jerry Hicks died of cancer.... It's important to also note, according to Esther/Abe, Jerry was the most proficient practicer of LOA/deliberate creation they'd ever seen...he apparently refused to even engage in conversations where something/someone was being criticized....always had a sunny outlook on life...he ate extremely healthy foods......was not overweight.....loved life to it's fullest. Begs the question, if the person who Abe says is mostly responsible for the 'summoning' of the Abraham channelling cannot through practice of those channelled teachings, avoid the manifestation of fatal cancer, what hope do their students have of mastering these teachings that promise an ability to control manifest conditions? Notice how Abe-Hicks followers ignore the basic tenets of the teachings to find 'reasons/excuses' for why/how Jerry Hicks could manifest such an bodily illness; (I was at one point an AH aficionado and did the very same myself! ) |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 16, 2024 19:58:41 GMT
And yet, Jerry Hicks died of cancer.... It's important to also note, according to Esther/Abe, Jerry was the most proficient practicer of LOA/deliberate creation they'd ever seen...he apparently refused to even engage in conversations where something/someone was being criticized....always had a sunny outlook on life...he ate extremely healthy foods......was not overweight.....loved life to it's fullest. Begs the question, if the person who Abe says is mostly responsible for the 'summoning' of the Abraham channelling cannot through practice of those channelled teachings, avoid the manifestation of fatal cancer, what hope do their students have of mastering these teachings that promise an ability to control manifest conditions? Notice how Abe-Hicks followers ignore the basic tenets of the teachings to find 'reasons/excuses' for why/how Jerry Hicks could manifest such an bodily illness; (I was at one point an AH aficionado and did the very same myself! ) The Abe-Hicks channellings contain morphs like this, throughout. On one hand, the person is completely in control of all outcomes providing he remains in a state of emotional being that is positive/happy. But, when presented with outcomes that defy this supposed "inviolable law of attraction," they then resort to making peace with whatever arose....finding an explanation that removes the judgment from the condition, to elevate it into some sort of 'allowance' of a deeper, more fundamental personal interest....in many cases, a supposed interest of the 'soul' vs. the living body/mind/person. & It's funny, cause SR also removes fundamental judgments from all arising conditions, but it does not do so to assuage a personal interest in controlling further outcomes. The removal of those deep, fundamental judgments are simply the result of an absence. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 16, 2024 20:02:53 GMT
If we take Abraham at their word, it truly does. There's really no getting around the facts there.
What's amazing is that those facts did not derail the Abe-Hicks movement, which goes to show that when it comes to mind-comforting promises of being able to personally control your reality, denial is a powerful tool.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 16, 2024 20:10:33 GMT
And it's precisely that very same need-based interest in a mind-comforting idea (I can create my own reality) that has even folks who say they are interested in Nonduality, claiming even to be SR, still clinging to the veracity of LOA/deliberate creation theory, as an inviolable Truth/law that 'dictates' outcomes.
SR reveals that what is experienced as 'causation' within the experiential story, loses any and all 'substance' from an impersonal vantage point.
Having reference for that impersonal vantage point does not mean one goes on to deny apparent causation/creation within the story, but it does take care of any belief in inviolable 'laws' that dictate/govern what can and what does, manifest.
In other words, SR and a belief in an inviolable law that allows deliberate, personal creation, are not compatible.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 20, 2024 16:56:09 GMT
The "prior to/beyond," (truly transcendent viewpoint) clearly illuminates that even those very ideas of "becoming...of some-thing being created....a process of one apparent some-thing morphing into another," regardless of whether or not we attribute causation/creative catalyst to any of it, is all part and parcel of the 'smoke & mirror' time-bound, apparent aspect of what we call a life experience.
Ultimately, nothing is in a process of being created....no process of becoming....no this something 'caused/created' that something....It's all one, singular, fundamentally undivided expression. The movie/screen metaphor is the best pointer I know of to attempt to sort of capture that singularity and absence of any actual 'process of creation....actual becoming.'
Nothing that is appearing on the screen is actual/existent, beyond it's appearance on the screen. Nothing within the apparent drama is actually "causing/creating" anything else. Nothing is actually in a process of becoming....all of that is appearance only....absent fundamental existence/substance.
Those 'how/why' questions post SR, are seen to be misconceived. As ZD has termed it....causation/creations are regarded more as "correlations"....causality is surface only....still in the story, but absent fundamental substance. What that means is far less depth of personal judgment re: what appears....far less resistance/fighting with a particular arising condition that is not personally 'liked.' There's a sense of what will be, will be, and an acceptance/allowance of whatever that is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 22, 2024 20:37:17 GMT
yeah....Mind naturally takes apparent patterns and correlations within the dream and tries to make inviolable, existential laws out of them. That 'need to know' how/why stuff happens as it does, is active in most seekers and even a temporary glimpse/glimmer of the Absolute Truth which in that moment of clarity, renders the very existential questions, misconceived, apparently does little to quell that quest to possess knowing re: those hows/whys, as one falls back into the slumber of separation.
A continued interest/resonating with LOA ideas should stand as a stark and obvious litmus test as to wakefulness/SR or caught up in the dream of separation.
There is plain and simply no avenue to any kind of a belief in an inviolable, dictating 'law' re: what appears/manifests within a Self realized perspective.
To possess knowing of an inviolable, dictating, Absolute law re: unfolding story content, is what it means to be caught up in imagined separation. An apparent pattern....observable correlations, do not equal "a law of attraction."
|
|
