+- Bring4th (https://www.bring4th.org/forums)
+-- Forum: Bring4th Community (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=16)
+--- Forum: Olio (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: The mysterious nature of time (/showthread.php?tid=2614)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
RE: The mysterious nature of time - zenmaster - 10-01-2011
(10-01-2011, 11:33 AM)3DMonkey Wrote: I do think I understand. In fact, it is what Im trying to explain as my view.
But your view seems to be addressing a conceptualization with a lot of different attachments. Why are you introducing these? Why are those necessary?
(10-01-2011, 11:33 AM)3DMonkey Wrote: A definitive agreement: "we can and must do that"
Why do you think "we must do that"?
RE: The mysterious nature of time - AnthroHeart - 10-01-2011
(09-30-2011, 11:13 PM)3DMonkey Wrote: And this woman too. She is a wonderful representation of "this"
Thanks, an interesting perspective. This is a wonderful video I've found to help me face and process catalyst. Try to watch it without giggling or getting offended.
RE: The mysterious nature of time - Meerie - 10-01-2011
if any one wants to see how us people in Bavaria curse, go watch the following vid. He is a comedian and he talks about the rich and how he is not jealous of all their riches. He then gets more and more agitated and insulting. It culminates around 3:30.
RE: The mysterious nature of time - AnthroHeart - 10-01-2011
Thanks Meerie. I don't speak Bavarian, but I still could feel catalyst being generated. So it seems the effects of catalyst are beyond language.
RE: The mysterious nature of time - 3DMonkey - 10-01-2011
(10-01-2011, 12:10 PM)zenmaster Wrote:(10-01-2011, 11:33 AM)3DMonkey Wrote: A definitive agreement: "we can and must do that"
Why do you think "we must do that"?
I don't.
(09-30-2011, 09:11 AM)zenmaster Wrote: We ourselves can and must do this,
(10-01-2011, 12:10 PM)zenmaster Wrote:(10-01-2011, 11:33 AM)3DMonkey Wrote: I do think I understand. In fact, it is what Im trying to explain as my view.
But your view seems to be addressing a conceptualization with a lot of different attachments. Why are you introducing these? Why are those necessary?
My view is that detachment is impossible, and those who think they have achieved it are fooling themselves.
That's what I meant with the 'snake toy', and that's what I meant with "finding themselves on the opposite side of the table, and that's what I mean when I simple say "circles"
(10-01-2011, 12:40 PM)Meerie Wrote: if any one wants to see how us people in Bavaria curse, go watch the following vid. He is a comedian and he talks about the rich and how he is not jealous of all their riches. He then gets more and more agitated and insulting. It culminates around 3:30.
Language is right up there with time's mysterious nature
RE: The mysterious nature of time - zenmaster - 10-01-2011
(10-01-2011, 01:19 PM)3DMonkey Wrote:That was in the context of after having found, or rediscoverd, or integrated, or accepted, or developed a new condition which supports a deeper or broader aspect of the creator, so to speak. It tends to be expressed by our beingness. I'm not talking about a peak experience of 'oneness' and that somehow showing a way. I am talking about the experience of 'intersubjective emergence', which is a completely natural condition, sustained by some degree of consciousness.(10-01-2011, 12:10 PM)zenmaster Wrote:(10-01-2011, 11:33 AM)3DMonkey Wrote: A definitive agreement: "we can and must do that"
Why do you think "we must do that"?
I don't.
(09-30-2011, 09:11 AM)zenmaster Wrote: We ourselves can and must do this,
After a certain amount of individuation, there is a more outward or intentional dialog. My understanding is that this has some correspondence to the green/blue chakra opening.
(10-01-2011, 01:19 PM)3DMonkey Wrote:(10-01-2011, 12:10 PM)zenmaster Wrote:(10-01-2011, 11:33 AM)3DMonkey Wrote: I do think I understand. In fact, it is what Im trying to explain as my view.
But your view seems to be addressing a conceptualization with a lot of different attachments. Why are you introducing these? Why are those necessary?
My view is that detachment is impossible, and those who think they have achieved it are fooling themselves.
But your particular attachments, those conditions which you were pointing out, are not necessary. That is what I was trying to say. Also, this isn't about achieving something - it's about finding something which is plainly obvious. So it's very much like you are saying someone is a fool for not needing a toy because they eventually outgrew it.
(10-01-2011, 01:19 PM)3DMonkey Wrote: That's what I meant with the 'snake toy', and that's what I meant with "finding themselves on the opposite side of the table, and that's what I mean when I simple say "circles"Yes, I am not addressing that context or those concerns, as they are not relevant. When faced with the mirror, you either recognize the reflection or you act like a bird. Or to put it another way, the circle is not a circle, but a spiral upwards. There are things which support the upward movement, like attention and acceptance. So the 'circles' remains (in some evolving form) and is addressed according to one's acceptance (developed acceptance). Meanwhile, what supports further individualization is something which may emerge from an intersubjective context which is quite telepathic. People can trust, they can be honest. These things are just rare because of perceived survival needs extended beyond their appropriate agency.
There is no (widespread) social or context yet for applying a more accepting or more expanded consciousness. But there are pioneers who are trying to create a bridge back. And, of course, some people would frame these pioneers as being selfish, others as being loving, still others foolish, depending on bias and their own filters and abilities. You can't introduce such a idea to many, because the very thought contradicts or distracts from what they came here to do. That is, work on 'third density values'. But that's fine. I don't see anything incompatible with the two perceptions, just like the child's world is compatible with the adult's world by virtue of the understanding of the adult and the neediness of the child.
RE: The mysterious nature of time - Confused - 10-01-2011
Time, Space, and Speed~Caroline Myss~Part 1
RE: The mysterious nature of time - 3DMonkey - 10-01-2011
(10-01-2011, 04:15 PM)zenmaster Wrote: I am talking about the experience of 'intersubjective emergence', which is a completely natural condition, sustained by some degree of consciousness.
After a certain amount of individuation, there is a more outward or intentional dialog. My understanding is that this has some correspondence to the green/blue chakra opening.
Like a meeting? Right? Or a seminar, or a family dinner.
(10-01-2011, 04:15 PM)zenmaster Wrote:(10-01-2011, 01:19 PM)3DMonkey Wrote:(10-01-2011, 12:10 PM)zenmaster Wrote:(10-01-2011, 11:33 AM)3DMonkey Wrote: I do think I understand. In fact, it is what Im trying to explain as my view.
But your view seems to be addressing a conceptualization with a lot of different attachments. Why are you introducing these? Why are those necessary?
My view is that detachment is impossible, and those who think they have achieved it are fooling themselves.
But your particular attachments, those conditions which you were pointing out, are not necessary. That is what I was trying to say. Also, this isn't about achieving something - it's about finding something which is plainly obvious. So it's very much like you are saying someone is a fool for not needing a toy because they eventually outgrew it.
I'm clueless what attachments you see that I have. ... I don't think I ever said that.
(10-01-2011, 04:15 PM)zenmaster Wrote:I find this to be most relevant of all. That no answer is successful in light of any approach being failed within the answer itself.(10-01-2011, 01:19 PM)3DMonkey Wrote: That's what I meant with the 'snake toy', and that's what I meant with "finding themselves on the opposite side of the table, and that's what I mean when I simple say "circles"
Yes, I am not addressing that context or those concerns, as they are not relevant.
(10-01-2011, 04:15 PM)zenmaster Wrote: When faced with the mirror, you either recognize the reflection or you act like a bird. Or to put it another way, the circle is not a circle, but a spiral upwards.I disagree. Where is the upward spiral in context of intact entity after death?
(10-01-2011, 04:15 PM)zenmaster Wrote: There are things which support the upward movement, like attention and acceptance.I disagree. This are just traits of existence. One finds them enjoyable. One finds them disdainful. Either way, these traits are no transcendence of ego. Rather, they are expressions thereof.
(10-01-2011, 04:15 PM)zenmaster Wrote: So the 'circles' remains (in some evolving form) and is addressed according to one's acceptance (developed acceptance). Meanwhile, what supports further individualization is something which may emerge from an intersubjective context which is quite telepathic.Agreed.
(10-01-2011, 04:15 PM)zenmaster Wrote: People can trust, they can be honest. These things are just rare because of perceived survival needs extended beyond their appropriate agency.Again, I disagree with this. Honesty and trust are always here with us. One may recognize, one may ignore. The results are indeterminate.
(10-01-2011, 04:15 PM)zenmaster Wrote: There is no (widespread) social or context yet for applying a more accepting or more expanded consciousness. But there are pioneers who are trying to create a bridge back. And, of course, some people would frame these pioneers as being selfish, others as being loving, still others foolish, depending on bias and their own filters and abilities. You can't introduce such a idea to many, because the very thought contradicts or distracts from what they came here to do.Again, I think they fail to see their own hypocrisy. Don't you see your own statement makes their ideal failed from the beginning? ("they want to do A, but the people won't let them". Doesn't everybody?)
(10-01-2011, 04:15 PM)zenmaster Wrote: That is, work on 'third density values'. But that's fine. I don't see anything incompatible with the two perceptions, just like the child's world is compatible with the adult's world by virtue of the understanding of the adult and the neediness of the child.
And this is the idea that I do not court. There is no adult and child when we speak of everlasting entity existence. This is the pot calling the kettle black. This is sitting on the opposite side of the table facing the chair you were just sitting in.
Frankly, this is ego regurgitated.
RE: The mysterious nature of time - Confused - 10-01-2011
RE: The mysterious nature of time - Confused - 10-02-2011
RE: The mysterious nature of time - transiten - 10-02-2011
(10-02-2011, 02:33 AM)Confused Wrote:
3.33
RE: The mysterious nature of time - Confused - 10-02-2011
transiten.RE: The mysterious nature of time - AnthroHeart - 10-02-2011
Some descriptions of Tao represent it as Infinity, some descriptions resemble intelligent infinity, and some represent intelligent energy. The Tao is described as moving, and infinity just is. The movement is more related around intelligent energy, the creative force of the Universe. One note on semantics, the meaning of a word can change in the moment. So Tao means what you need it to mean in the moment. It's not just the Infinity (that first known thing).
I was riding my bike, and did 15 miles. It had been probably a year since I did any riding, and then 6 miles was about as far as I'd go at once. It became almost effortless, even when riding in 8th gear going uphill. I surrender to a certain extent and let the Light do the work. There was still some muscle work involved as my body is getting used to allowing the light body to work. I'm sort of working my light body's "muscles". At times when I stopped, I'd get off the bike and stand. When you're in the flow, you can rest in a standing position. The light would hold me upright and I could let go as if I were lying down. It even pulled me off center just a little so I was physically unbalanced, and it still supported me.
When you get to a point of surrender, letting go and emotional detachment, the gravitational force of the singularity in our 3rd eye will provide a sort of gyroscopic force that balances us physically. So when I was on my bike, I could shake the bike and it had incredible stability. The light actually moved me to a standing position on the pedals. Something I would rarely even try, but it was effortless. It was stable, even when the light steered the bike, doing weaving patterns. The singularity holds you stable when doing these "little stunts".
RE: The mysterious nature of time - Meerie - 10-02-2011
you know what I asked my self when I watched Confuseds videos? The first one talks about living in the now and becoming co-creator, and the Tao ones just talk about letting go, of desire, of anything, just live in the moment.
Isn't that contraindicative? one is like "anything goes", accept anything, and the other one about creating.
or does the creating result naturally of a state of "being okay with what is in the now"?
RE: The mysterious nature of time - Confused - 10-02-2011
Clemens Brenan: JUNG AND THE TAROT - OUR JOURNEY THROUGH THE UNDERWORLD - part two
RE: The mysterious nature of time - AnthroHeart - 10-02-2011
(10-02-2011, 09:37 AM)Meerie Wrote: you know what I asked my self when I watched Confuseds videos? The first one talks about living in the now and becoming co-creator, and the Tao ones just talk about letting go, of desire, of anything, just live in the moment.
Isn't that contraindicative? one is like "anything goes", accept anything, and the other one about creating.
or does the creating result naturally of a state of "being okay with what is in the now"?
I think when you're starting to learn these things, that dichotomy is part of the learning. In the confusion, thinking through what is right and wrong is naturally part of that.
As you move on, little by little, you naturally allow the light to carry you more. It's all a trust issue. The more you learn to trust the light within you, the more you can "let go", and still be very much in the moment. Such as when I was doing the bike riding and let the light within me do the steering for me. I was sort of like a puppet on a bike, and my hands just turned when needed, perfectly, with like zero effort on my part.
RE: The mysterious nature of time - Meerie - 10-02-2011
I think the problem arises from the wishes or desires that lead one to want to create, and that are ego-based.
because the adept should be okay with whatever circumstances he / she finds themselves in, right? yelling neighbors? no problem! noisy streets and stinking cars? no problem! a job that is low-paid? no problem! no relationship? no problem!
Everything is part of the creation and of the whole. Everything is part of the picture and serves a purpose.
RE: The mysterious nature of time - AnthroHeart - 10-02-2011
Confused, can you find any material on intensifying desires? That's what I was doing. When I had something that would arouse me (seems sexuality was my strongest desire), I would mentally let the story build until it was too much for me, and then I'd back off. Then I'd build it more, then back off. That's how I got rid of desires that I have so far.
Now the things that used to really set me off, even those fetishes I had, produce pretty much no response, even when looking at artworks of them. If there is a particularly stubborn desire, I'll even use masturbation to build the sexual energy, but I don't reach orgasm as I don't want to cut off the flow. I want to build the intensity of the sexual energy as much as possible, and then integrate it into myself. Believe me, this is a very difficult way to tackle desires. The sexual energy has my legs shaking quite dramatically.
I had to be honest with myself in this process. There is a degree of mental fortitude to tackle one's desires in a direct manner without giving into them. I also did the same with fears, intensifying them.
RE: The mysterious nature of time - Meerie - 10-02-2011
so your goal is indeed having no more desires? but then you are not interested in creating either, are you? No desire... no need to create anything!
Because anything, no matter what circumstance you will find yourself in, will be okay.
How does the result of integrating the sexual energy into yourself look like? do you mean that thusly you increase in spiritual mass?
RE: The mysterious nature of time - AnthroHeart - 10-02-2011
I love your style of thinking Meerie.
Creation is a fundamental part of who all of us are. That doesn't go away. We still will create, but we won't have an emotional attachment to what we create (I guess unless we want one, I haven't gotten that far yet).
So in my mind I can create a character now and not have that immediate response to it. Otherwise my projection (the character) would have some control of the energy. We don't really want our creations to control us.
I still have a lot of internal blockages to get through to understand the finer points of the nature of creating things.
It's funny, because I have to bring myself down energetically sometimes in order to not speak at too high a level. The level of consciousness we are at is how we will communicate.
RE: The mysterious nature of time - Meerie - 10-02-2011
(10-02-2011, 10:20 AM)Gemini Wolf Wrote: I love your style of thinking Meerie.Yes that makes sense, thanks for clarifying! by the way I liked what you wrote about these characters that play scenes out in your mind. Seems like you continously have movies there going on, don't you? (you still have not answered my question as to how it feels to integrate the sexual energy. That interests me as well
Creation is a fundamental part of who all of us are. That doesn't go away. We still will create, but we won't have an emotional attachment to what we create (I guess unless we want one, I haven't gotten that far yet).
So in my mind I can create a character now and not have that immediate response to it. Otherwise my projection (the character) would have some control of the energy. We don't really want our creations to control us.
)RE: The mysterious nature of time - AnthroHeart - 10-02-2011
Think of what the orgasm feels like. In men it pulses about 5 or 6 times or so, but not sure about women, if it pulses or not.
I will note that I've opened my kundalini, so my experience may be different than others.
When I'm at the peak of sexual intensity of these characters, it's like the button for the feeling of orgasm is pushed, except it doesn't pulse but it stays on, right on the sexual chakra, and then it tapers off. Sometimes the feeling of an orgasm stream (that continuous non-pulsing orgasm feeling) is in the heart as well. The men's orgasm pulses because the chakra turns on and off the stream so that it doesn't overpower an underdeveloped sexual chakra.
This intensifies the energy around me substantially, so that it can be a little disorienting. Integrating is like letting off the pressure slowly as I allow it to come into my own body. Orgasm streams of the heart and sexual chakra can be almost overwhelming, to where they begin to hurt a little. The body also must get used to the substantial increase in Light, and this can cause muscles to hurt as well. When sexual energy is intense enough, the body's muscles will spasm.
RE: The mysterious nature of time - zenmaster - 10-02-2011
(10-01-2011, 09:42 PM)3DMonkey Wrote:Possibly, it's just any interaction where mind is invoked at a transpersonal level.(10-01-2011, 04:15 PM)zenmaster Wrote: I am talking about the experience of 'intersubjective emergence', which is a completely natural condition, sustained by some degree of consciousness.
After a certain amount of individuation, there is a more outward or intentional dialog. My understanding is that this has some correspondence to the green/blue chakra opening.
Like a meeting? Right? Or a seminar, or a family dinner.
(10-01-2011, 09:42 PM)3DMonkey Wrote:(10-01-2011, 04:15 PM)zenmaster Wrote:(10-01-2011, 01:19 PM)3DMonkey Wrote:(10-01-2011, 12:10 PM)zenmaster Wrote:(10-01-2011, 11:33 AM)3DMonkey Wrote: I do think I understand. In fact, it is what Im trying to explain as my view.
But your view seems to be addressing a conceptualization with a lot of different attachments. Why are you introducing these? Why are those necessary?
My view is that detachment is impossible, and those who think they have achieved it are fooling themselves.
But your particular attachments, those conditions which you were pointing out, are not necessary. That is what I was trying to say. Also, this isn't about achieving something - it's about finding something which is plainly obvious. So it's very much like you are saying someone is a fool for not needing a toy because they eventually outgrew it.
I'm clueless what attachments you see that I have. ... I don't think I ever said that.
Your attachments of:
"perfect mind"
"definitive agreement"
"power"
"fooling themselves"
"circles"
"transcendence of ego"
Do you see? You have made them up due to your attachments.
(10-01-2011, 09:42 PM)3DMonkey Wrote:(10-01-2011, 04:15 PM)zenmaster Wrote:I find this to be most relevant of all. That no answer is successful in light of any approach being failed within the answer itself.(10-01-2011, 01:19 PM)3DMonkey Wrote: That's what I meant with the 'snake toy', and that's what I meant with "finding themselves on the opposite side of the table, and that's what I mean when I simple say "circles"
Yes, I am not addressing that context or those concerns, as they are not relevant.
(10-01-2011, 04:15 PM)zenmaster Wrote: When faced with the mirror, you either recognize the reflection or you act like a bird. Or to put it another way, the circle is not a circle, but a spiral upwards.I disagree. Where is the upward spiral in context of intact entity after death?
(10-01-2011, 04:15 PM)zenmaster Wrote: There are things which support the upward movement, like attention and acceptance.I disagree. This are just traits of existence. One finds them enjoyable. One finds them disdainful. Either way, these traits are no transcendence of ego. Rather, they are expressions thereof.
Who said anything about transcending ego? You have not been conceptualizing what I've been talking about. You don't 'transcend ego' you 'become conscious of its needs' or 'embrace it' or see that activity which it engages. Yes, possibly also with any emotional attachments like disdain or enjoyment. If you do not acknowledge that becoming being more aware of needs is developmental, or it is foolish, then I do not know what to say.
(10-01-2011, 09:42 PM)3DMonkey Wrote:(10-01-2011, 04:15 PM)zenmaster Wrote: So the 'circles' remains (in some evolving form) and is addressed according to one's acceptance (developed acceptance). Meanwhile, what supports further individualization is something which may emerge from an intersubjective context which is quite telepathic.Agreed.
Ok so you now acknowledge there is development after you said it was foolish? Just want to make sure we're talking about the same thing.
(10-01-2011, 09:42 PM)3DMonkey Wrote:(10-01-2011, 04:15 PM)zenmaster Wrote: People can trust, they can be honest. These things are just rare because of perceived survival needs extended beyond their appropriate agency.Again, I disagree with this. Honesty and trust are always here with us. One may recognize, one may ignore. The results are indeterminate.
(10-01-2011, 04:15 PM)zenmaster Wrote: There is no (widespread) social or context yet for applying a more accepting or more expanded consciousness. But there are pioneers who are trying to create a bridge back. And, of course, some people would frame these pioneers as being selfish, others as being loving, still others foolish, depending on bias and their own filters and abilities. You can't introduce such a idea to many, because the very thought contradicts or distracts from what they came here to do.Again, I think they fail to see their own hypocrisy. Don't you see your own statement makes their ideal failed from the beginning? ("they want to do A, but the people won't let them". Doesn't everybody?)
But where is the actual hypocrisy? The attachment ideas you have would indeed make it hypocritical. But you just introduced those ideas as something separate from what the idea itself involves. Do you not see that? It's further separation. You created the idea of "power" which separates by virtue of the powerless. You created the idea of "perfection" which separates by virtue of imperfection, etc. These are unnecessary attachments. They have nothing to do with "intersubjective emergence", inherently. They are only introduced if that is what you bring to it.
(10-01-2011, 09:42 PM)3DMonkey Wrote:What does everlasting entity existence have to do with anything? We live in a developmental context which unfolds from the "now". This is what Ra has been teaching.(10-01-2011, 04:15 PM)zenmaster Wrote: That is, work on 'third density values'. But that's fine. I don't see anything incompatible with the two perceptions, just like the child's world is compatible with the adult's world by virtue of the understanding of the adult and the neediness of the child.
And this is the idea that I do not court. There is no adult and child when we speak of everlasting entity existence. This is the pot calling the kettle black. This is sitting on the opposite side of the table facing the chair you were just sitting in.
"the beginning entity is one in all innocence oriented towards animalistic behavior using other-selves only as extensions of self for the preservation of the all-self. The entity becomes slowly aware that it has needs, shall we say, that are not animalistic; that is, that are useless for survival. These needs include: the need for companionship, the need for laughter, the need for beauty, the need to know the universe about it. These are the beginning needs.
As the incarnations begin to accumulate, other needs are discovered: the need to trade, the need to love, the need to be loved, the need to elevate animalistic behaviors to a more universal perspective."
So just to be clear, in the above excerpt, you see Ra is "calling the kettle black"?
RE: The mysterious nature of time - 3DMonkey - 10-02-2011
Things develop as a course of nature, yes. One person can become aware of their needs, but I do not see it as a checklist where one can mark it off and move upward beyond others or beyond previous self; it is simply a new mixture of energy.
This attachment idea you are projecting is limiting your honesty. I'm not creating these things. I am using words to express my point of view. Perhaps you are giving too much weight to precise word choice.
The hypocrisy is in that these "pioneers" supposedly "trying to create a bridge back" are actually creating the honest reality for themselves where "people frame them as ____". The honesty is that their "bridge" is their own personal bias and not a "bridge" at all.
You have created the need for society expanded consciousness. I say it already is expanded as it resides in reality now.
....
No, Ra admits they see no separation, e.g. between adult and child. The discovering of needs are simply discovery. These needs can be anything, and it does not matter what they are. One need is not more highly esteemed than another. The desire to establish a society consciousness of honest interaction in one need. The desire to go to war and destroy is another need. They are equal in that they are expressions of experience, and they do develop over accumulated catalyst.
You may have your own projections towards my use of "the pot calling the kettle black". To be clear, we all do it, and the fact that we do it is what honestly defines our "third density" existence.
What does everlasting entity existence have to do with anything? For one, it is THE motivation for anyone trying to do "work" with their spirit. It is this concept that Ra has used to give meaning to Harvest. It is this concept that that gives meaning to Densities. It is this concept that facilitates faith and gives one purpose. It is what makes us seekers. It has everything to do with everything, and yet can never be found. I see its effects and understand the purpose of these effects in humankind's psyche. ... Without it, there is nothing. I am living in the nothing. (It isn't a sad place because I am doing what I want to do, i.e. all that bias stuff that everyone else is doing). If there is a state of my being away from this body, in time/space, I tell that being "put up or shut up".
RE: The mysterious nature of time - Confused - 10-02-2011
TAO Universe Nassim Haramein and Marko Rodin 1of4
(10-02-2011, 10:11 AM)Gemini Wolf Wrote: Confused, can you find any material on intensifying desires?
I will see whether I can find something related to this topic, GW. May be I will PM them to you, if I come across videos like that.
However, this is going to be a difficult topic to search for, since you will have many videos on desireless-ness and not the opposite. A slightly difficult and obscure topic to find information through the video format on the internet.
RE: The mysterious nature of time - 3DMonkey - 10-02-2011
This one is fun
RE: The mysterious nature of time - Confused - 10-02-2011
(10-02-2011, 06:59 PM)3DMonkey Wrote: This one is fun
Why do you say that, 3?
I confess I have not watched it yet. However, I would like to understand why it is fun. I need to watch the second part and link it here, before going on to the third that you have posted. How is the little one coming along (Emilia)? Are you allowing the 3rd little one to hold her little sister yet? :@
If you find time, please do email some pictures across of Emilia (if you are inclined, of course), as she unfolds into an entity of her own.
RE: The mysterious nature of time - zenmaster - 10-02-2011
(10-02-2011, 11:43 AM)3DMonkey Wrote: Things develop as a course of nature, yes. One person can become aware of their needs, but I do not see it as a checklist where one can mark it off and move upward beyond others or beyond previous self; it is simply a new mixture of energy.I'm not sure I follow. If it's not you, then are you channeling an entity which is attributing power goals, and foolish transcending of ego, and checklists to the process of development as I am stating it? lol, seriously though. Seems like you are creating these things to me? These things are indeed not necessary, yet you introduced them, apparently as a reaction to some illusory, foolish view of development (which doesn't exist). So, of course, that's certainly projection, and I called you out on it because such a characterization is a separate 'straw man' for some other tangential notion (presumably some fixation on an ego issue). And how is that limiting my honesty? It's like saying someone that has been to the moon is necessarily on a power trip because they have been somewhere else. Yet such a person may have something to share and may not be on a power trip. And, yes, that is an illusion, but that's what povides learning.
This attachment idea you are projecting is limiting your honesty. I'm not creating these things.
(10-02-2011, 11:43 AM)3DMonkey Wrote: I am using words to express my point of view. Perhaps you are giving too much weight to precise word choice.Has nothing to do with being precise. You are talking about hypocrisy with your creation of some kind of illusory, foolish attitude. You are the one bringing up a "checklist" idea. Do you see? I am maintaining that you are talking about something different than what I'm talking about. So we are not communicating. Also, first you say there is no development, then you say there is development. Perhaps you could clarify what is going on there?
(10-02-2011, 11:43 AM)3DMonkey Wrote: The hypocrisy is in that these "pioneers" supposedly "trying to create a bridge back" are actually creating the honest reality for themselves where "people frame them as ____". The honesty is that their "bridge" is their own personal bias and not a "bridge" at all.It's a "metaphor". Do you not understand that someone who has been to a place that another has not bothered to go, may, in fact have something to offer in the form of an opportunity? Such is the nature of experience and learning. (Ra's teach/learning). Healing opportunities work similarly.
(10-02-2011, 11:43 AM)3DMonkey Wrote: You have created the need for society expanded consciousness. I say it already is expanded as it resides in reality now.But it was never in that sense at all. It is a need to communicate just as Ra's 'pain in the leg'. Learning results in expanded consciousness/awareness. It is expanded, socially, to the extent that society has become aware in that 'racial mind'. That extent is, of course, limited. Yet it is evolving, as we all are here. Some slower than others, some faster than others. Whether or not one views such evolution as a goal or necessity is completely irrelevant to the evolution itself. There is a new context that results from evolution. That's the way it is. Is it "better"? No. That is not the point. Is it illusory? Yes. That is also not the point.
(10-02-2011, 11:43 AM)3DMonkey Wrote: No, Ra admits they see no separation, e.g. between adult and child. The discovering of needs are simply discovery. These needs can be anything, and it does not matter what they are. One need is not more highly esteemed than another. The desire to establish a society consciousness of honest interaction in one need. The desire to go to war and destroy is another need. They are equal in that they are expressions of experience, and they do develop over accumulated catalyst.Yes, this is obvious with respect to experience. Needs do change, however based on what has been accepted.
(10-02-2011, 11:43 AM)3DMonkey Wrote: You may have your own projections towards my use of "the pot calling the kettle black". To be clear, we all do it, and the fact that we do it is what honestly defines our "third density" existence.We all do it, that projective mechanism is the default 'how we get something out of the experience'. We enjoy the veiling's constraints, yes. Existence itself is, again, an evolutionary thing. For example, there is the ability to see projection, then there is the later ability to work with it more effectively. The separation is eventually embraced or accepted, and a change occurs which is not very common. There is indeed a difference between the society which results from embracing projective mechanisms, and those which unconsciously engage in it. Acknowledging such a difference is not separative or foolish. It's just a recognition of the obvious.
(10-02-2011, 11:43 AM)3DMonkey Wrote: What does everlasting entity existence have to do with anything? For one, it is THE motivation for anyone trying to do "work" with their spirit.Well, what is compelling is what is motivating.
(10-02-2011, 11:43 AM)3DMonkey Wrote: It is this concept that Ra has used to give meaning to Harvest. It is this concept that that gives meaning to Densities. It is this concept that facilitates faith and gives one purpose. It is what makes us seekers. It has everything to do with everything, and yet can never be found.Not sure I follow. There is no meaning there really as it does not reflect something to learn. It's a state.
(10-02-2011, 11:43 AM)3DMonkey Wrote: I see its effects and understand the purpose of these effects in humankind's psyche. ... Without it, there is nothing. I am living in the nothing. (It isn't a sad place because I am doing what I want to do, i.e. all that bias stuff that everyone else is doing). If there is a state of my being away from this body, in time/space, I tell that being "put up or shut up".'Been there, done that'. Life goes on after that initial discovery. The effects evolve as our processing of the effects evolve. There is simply more if we are willing to give ourselves more.
Again, it is not about 'power' or hierarchy or 'here' denying 'there' unless you somehow want it to be. This is not the necessity which you are claiming. That is what I wanted to clear up. The circle is a spiral. There are indeed those which have an experience which subsumes other's current experiences (with respect to logos integration) and are therefore able to offer opportunities which would otherwise not be provided. Is that important? Not if you do not want it to be.
RE: The mysterious nature of time - 3DMonkey - 10-03-2011
Your honesty is limited because you automatically assume I have not been where you have been. That is your choice. Free to do as you wish.
Of course we are talking about different things. This is communication. This is the only reason I point out that there is never agreement. Not because i'm "projecting". It is our existence= non-agreeing. Never. Doesn't exist otherwise. Acknowledging this is more honest.
"it's a state". Bingo. It is a state.
In an everlasting environment with a veil, one should not assume their state subsumes another's. In a non-everlasting environment, subsumed stature has zero relevancy. In a delusional environment, we always know better ourselves.
We are all geniuses that have it all figured out. This is our reality. This is our "circle." this is what we are capable of creating.
(10-02-2011, 07:28 PM)Confused Wrote:(10-02-2011, 06:59 PM)3DMonkey Wrote: This one is fun
Why do you say that, 3?
How is the little one coming along (Emilia)? Are you allowing the 3rd little one to hold her little sister yet? :@
If you find time, please do email some pictures across of Emilia (if you are inclined, of course), as she unfolds into an entity of her own.
"Fun" because it is playing with numbers. Playing is fun
I guess I need to take more pictures
RE: The mysterious nature of time - Confused - 10-03-2011