|
Post by Figgles on Sept 24, 2020 19:04:29 GMT
I just saw you, in my mind's eye, responding back to me that finally you see it....in this crystal clear visualization, you are saying that the idea that seeing something in mind's eye "creates/causes" the visualized manifestation to ensue, is the purview of the SVP. How long will that reality take to become manifest...? Enigma visualizes to heal people. Enigma is the causing the healing? Or Enigma is in the flow of creation? When Enigma visualizes to heal somebody, does he expresses the SVP? Well, you'll have to ask him to get the full story regarding how he experiences/regards it, but 'imagining a healed/improved circumstance' need not invoke an imagined 'healer' nor need it invoke imagined causality relative to the intent/imagining/expectation. "Simply Being at one with the flow of creation," seems to me a good way to put it....and so long as there's an absence of "doership/doer" there is no SVP being imagined into the equation there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2020 19:17:06 GMT
Enigma visualizes to heal people. Enigma is the causing the healing? Or Enigma is in the flow of creation? When Enigma visualizes to heal somebody, does he expresses the SVP? Well, you'll have to ask him to get the full story regarding how he experiences/regards it, but 'imagining a healed/improved circumstance' need not invoke an imagined 'healer' nor need it invoke imagined causality relative to the intent/imagining/expectation. "Simply Being at one with the flow of creation," seems to me a good way to put it....and so long as there's an absence of "doership/doer" there is no SVP being imagined into the equation there. so Enigma does the visualisation then it's called "being in the flow" but If I do, the it's called "SVP". Correct?
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Sept 24, 2020 19:33:15 GMT
Well, you'll have to ask him to get the full story regarding how he experiences/regards it, but 'imagining a healed/improved circumstance' need not invoke an imagined 'healer' nor need it invoke imagined causality relative to the intent/imagining/expectation. "Simply Being at one with the flow of creation," seems to me a good way to put it....and so long as there's an absence of "doership/doer" there is no SVP being imagined into the equation there. so Enigma does the visualisation then it's called "being in the flow" but If I do, the it's called "SVP". Correct? It's all in the way you talk about/describe it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2020 19:43:21 GMT
so Enigma does the visualisation then it's called "being in the flow" but If I do, the it's called "SVP". Correct? It's all in the way you talk about/describe it. ha ha enjoy your own fantacy world.
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Sept 24, 2020 19:45:46 GMT
It's all in the way you talk about/describe it. ha ha enjoy your own fantacy world. I'm not married to that view....we can talk about it. Isn't that the whole point of a discussion forum? Explain to my why that is not so. Seems to me you used to be much more patient and much more interested in the dialogues here...has something changed?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2020 2:20:19 GMT
ha ha enjoy your own fantacy world. I'm not married to that view....we can talk about it. Isn't that the whole point of a discussion forum? Explain to my why that is not so. Seems to me you used to be much more patient and much more interested in the dialogues here...has something changed? If Enigma visualize to create something in his reality, then that's being in the flow but If I visualize to create something in my reality then it's SVP? It appears like who speaks, eh? Whether it is SVP or being in the flow depends upon who speaks, yes?
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Sept 25, 2020 15:46:16 GMT
I'm not married to that view....we can talk about it. Isn't that the whole point of a discussion forum? Explain to my why that is not so. Seems to me you used to be much more patient and much more interested in the dialogues here...has something changed? If Enigma visualize to create something in his reality, then that's being in the flow but If I visualize to create something in my reality then it's SVP? It appears like who speaks, eh? Whether it is SVP or being in the flow depends upon who speaks, yes? It's not about 'who' speaks. It's about 'what' is said. The most basic difference between you and E is how you both talk about/describe "creation." You seem to regard it as a process, one of causality/effect, one that involves an entity who catalyses it, whereas E doesn't. You also don't see 'infinite possibility' in terms of the dream-stuff/content, rather, you express certainty regarding what content will appear in the future based upon what's happening now. (I'm using the term 'seem to' here for a reason. I'm not 100% clear what your stance is on all this, as at times you seem to me to be saying different things.) You talk about "a perceiver/creator,"...a some-thing that has intent, which then catalyses the creative process towards a particular tragectory/outcome, whereas E is very clear, there is no actual "perceiver/creator/experiencer/entity" who/that has intentions or intends stuff, but rather, just intention itself arising and correlating with (not actually causing) the experiential, sequential ensuing of manifest condition. So, when E talks about "healing conditions within the dream," it's not from a position of taking himself to ultimately be 'a healer.' He's clear that the intention to heal and the healing are not the doings of an actual entity, but rather, arising appearance within the dream.....he doesn't take himself to be a something that 'causes/creates' stuff in the dream, by taking action in the dream. He's clear that the intent, the seeing in mind's eye, the manifestation, are all arising, appearance only....ultimately, one unified movement, no facet of that experiential equation actually "causal to" another. (Feel free E to correct me if I'm misinterpreting your position).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2020 18:46:56 GMT
If Enigma visualize to create something in his reality, then that's being in the flow but If I visualize to create something in my reality then it's SVP? It appears like who speaks, eh? Whether it is SVP or being in the flow depends upon who speaks, yes? It's not about 'who' speaks. It's about 'what' is said. The most basic difference between you and E is how you both talk about/describe "creation." You seem to regard it as a process, one of causality/effect, one that involves an entity who catalyses it, whereas E doesn't. You also don't see 'infinite possibility' in terms of the dream-stuff/content, rather, you express certainty regarding what content will appear in the future based upon what's happening now. (I'm using the term 'seem to' here for a reason. I'm not 100% clear what your stance is on all this, as at times you seem to me to be saying different things.) You talk about "a perceiver/creator,"...a some-thing that has intent, which then catalyses the creative process towards a particular tragectory/outcome, whereas E is very clear, there is no actual "perceiver/creator/experiencer/entity" who/that has intentions or intends stuff, but rather, just intention itself arising and correlating with (not actually causing) the experiential, sequential ensuing of manifest condition. So, when E talks about "healing conditions within the dream," it's not from a position of taking himself to ultimately be 'a healer.' He's clear that the intention to heal and the healing are not the doings of an actual entity, but rather, arising appearance within the dream.....he doesn't take himself to be a something that 'causes/creates' stuff in the dream, by taking action in the dream. He's clear that the intent, the seeing in mind's eye, the manifestation, are all arising, appearance only....ultimately, one unified movement, no facet of that experiential equation actually "causal to" another. (Feel free E to correct me if I'm misinterpreting your position). Why does Enigma visualize it If something has to happen by itself? His visualization is not needed for healing, eh? that healing would have happened without him doing the visualization, no? If he sees himself not causing the event through his visualization, why doesn't he even visualize a particular outcome? He could simply be without doing anything because he knows he is not causing anything, eh?
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Sept 25, 2020 19:54:09 GMT
It's not about 'who' speaks. It's about 'what' is said. The most basic difference between you and E is how you both talk about/describe "creation." You seem to regard it as a process, one of causality/effect, one that involves an entity who catalyses it, whereas E doesn't. You also don't see 'infinite possibility' in terms of the dream-stuff/content, rather, you express certainty regarding what content will appear in the future based upon what's happening now. (I'm using the term 'seem to' here for a reason. I'm not 100% clear what your stance is on all this, as at times you seem to me to be saying different things.) You talk about "a perceiver/creator,"...a some-thing that has intent, which then catalyses the creative process towards a particular tragectory/outcome, whereas E is very clear, there is no actual "perceiver/creator/experiencer/entity" who/that has intentions or intends stuff, but rather, just intention itself arising and correlating with (not actually causing) the experiential, sequential ensuing of manifest condition. So, when E talks about "healing conditions within the dream," it's not from a position of taking himself to ultimately be 'a healer.' He's clear that the intention to heal and the healing are not the doings of an actual entity, but rather, arising appearance within the dream.....he doesn't take himself to be a something that 'causes/creates' stuff in the dream, by taking action in the dream. He's clear that the intent, the seeing in mind's eye, the manifestation, are all arising, appearance only....ultimately, one unified movement, no facet of that experiential equation actually "causal to" another. (Feel free E to correct me if I'm misinterpreting your position). Why does Enigma visualize it If something has to happen by itself? His visualization is not needed for healing, eh? that healing would have happened without him doing the visualization, no? If he sees himself not causing the event through his visualization, why doesn't he even visualize a particular outcome? He could simply be without doing anything because he knows he is not causing anything, eh? We're getting quite deep into a conversation that's based upon surmising. Let's let E answer first as to whether he does in fact utilize 'visualization' and how he goes about it before I go any further in answer for him. I know in my personal experience, the experience of 'sending out healing vibes/focusing upon the highest outcome,' when there's a difficult circumstance arising, is far more about "being at peace in the present moment" just for the sake of being at peace in the present moment, than it is about trying to exert creative force on the unfolding of the story. I'd be more apt to describe it as 'bringing the highest imagined condition possible' here, into the present moment, for the comfort and joy in experiencing it now, which means there's no strong sense of need or attachment involved in terms of what must be in a future moment. It's the difference between allowing intent/positive expectation to blossom here and now vs. trying to harness intent/positive expectation because there's an emotional need to control the future outcome.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2020 2:18:51 GMT
Why does Enigma visualize it If something has to happen by itself? His visualization is not needed for healing, eh? that healing would have happened without him doing the visualization, no? If he sees himself not causing the event through his visualization, why doesn't he even visualize a particular outcome? He could simply be without doing anything because he knows he is not causing anything, eh? We're getting quite deep into a conversation that's based upon surmising. Let's let E answer first as to whether he does in fact utilize 'visualization' and how he goes about it before I go any further in answer for him. I know in my personal experience, the experience of 'sending out healing vibes/focusing upon the highest outcome,' when there's a difficult circumstance arising, is far more about "being at peace in the present moment" just for the sake of being at peace in the present moment, than it is about trying to exert creative force on the unfolding of the story. I'd be more apt to describe it as 'bringing the highest imagined condition possible' here, into the present moment, for the comfort and joy in experiencing it now, which means there's no strong sense of need or attachment involved in terms of what must be in a future moment. It's the difference between allowing intent/positive expectation to blossom here and now vs. trying to harness intent/positive expectation because there's an emotional need to control the future outcome. ha ha everytime he would come and answer when you caught up like that and then you start to say amazing E, awesome E, But now he is not showing up and you don't know what to do! Once again the question is, when Enigma knows he can't cause anything, why is he even start to visualise something? For what?
|
|