is there fate in action?

[Raz]

I feel like the universe has a fate the same way a seed is fated to become it´s manifested potentiality, but at the same time there is allot of wiggle room for diversity.
How do you feel about fate in your present point of view? The last scene in this video illustrates how I feel about it splendidly =)

[isis]

I don't think there's wiggle room. In other words, I think everything is preordained.

[1109]

I think Ra said something along the lines of "breakfast is near certain but the kind of cereal is unknown, however some brands may be more likely to be chosen than others". It's my understanding that we incarnate with a general plan and our subconscious will attempt to guide us in the right direction. If we miss a guidepost then it will probably show up again but won't necessarily be identical, some plans may fail and then we'll have to carry out plan B instead. During the life review we'll have to forgive ourselves for these misses.

[Night Owl]

Do we make choices or do we observe choices being made?

If you're pretty sure you can make a choice, could that choice have been different as it is was done out of your built up experience and knowledge. Every choice is made to feel the least possible amount of cognitive dissonance. That doesn't leave room for a lot free choices. I think it is possible that you can decide if there's little room or no no room at all.

[anagogy]

I feel like the universe has a fate the same way a seed is fated to become it´s manifested potentiality, but at the same time there is allot of wiggle room for diversity.
How do you feel about fate in your present point of view?

I believe that some events in our lives are predestined, however, they are predestined by us before hand. However, like everything in this universe, such predestination requires a counter balance of variables that are not predestined.

"However, the higher self aspect can program only for the lessons and certain predisposing limitations if it wishes. The remainder is completely the free choice of each entity. There is the perfect balance between the known and the unknown."

[isis]

I like to think everything that can happen already has & that everything that can happen currently is happening always & constantly, right now, in every now.

"The Creator does not properly create as much as It experiences Itself."

"The nature of true simultaneity is such that, indeed, all is simultaneous."

I see "every event, every situation" as myself/creator. I don't see imperfection in any happening - I just see myself/creator/fate.

The way I see it, thinking that something/anything wasn't fated to be is seeing separation/imperfection/mistakes in creation rather than unity/harmony/a powerful creator that is all things.

[AnthroHeart]

Have we existed an infinite number of years?
What makes it possible to BE everything?
Just flowers alone there are thousands of varieties.

[isis]

What makes it possible to BE everything?

Power? I don't think anything has a beginning...no person, no event, no anything.

[isis]

The *infinite* creator has no beginning, right? Well, if the creator is everything then how can anything have a beginning? That's how I see it.

[Diana]

What makes it possible to BE everything?.

The wave function. Matter and energy can function as either a particle (one possible outcome chosen) or a wave (all outcomes possible, in other words, infinite possibilities).

To be in the wave function is precisely what meditation and other approaches to being "in the now" seek to achieve. Though it's not usually put in these terms.

Observations of the subatomic realm have given us huge clues into our potential as creators and infinite beings.

[Aion]

Totally not how wave functions work... a wave is still finite...

Also, the wave-particle duality has only been actually demonstrated with photons and since we use photons to see things we can't really tell beyond that yet. We know that we don't see anything until observation but it's uncertain if that is just in terms of photons or matter in general.

[AnthroHeart]

Totally not how wave functions work... a wave is still finite...

Also, the wave-particle duality has only been actually demonstrated with photons and since we use photons to see things we can't really tell beyond that yet. We know that we don't see anything until observation but it's uncertain if that is just in terms of photons or matter in general.

How does infinite potential exist if not as a wave?

[anagogy]

The way I see it, thinking that something/anything wasn't fated to be is seeing separation/imperfection/mistakes in creation rather than unity/harmony/a powerful creator that is all things.

I guess it depends how we conceptualize "fate".  I don't believe in mistakes, or imperfection, but perhaps the "perfect simulation of mistakes/imperfection".  The same in all respects, except that the potential for it was built in.  And I would ask the same about those who think fate means "no choice".  But really what is perfection, anyway?  What standard are we using for perfection?  In the absence of a standard, I guess everything is perfect however it is.  I can only measure the value of the concept of "mistake" in terms of: did it succeed in encapsulating the intentions of a given point of consciousness.  From the point of view of Source, I'm sure everything is fulfilling its intention perfectly. So in that sense, I believe everything is fated, but in the sense that all of our choices are already made or written into the script, I'm not so sure about that.    

What is the difference between "choice" and the "perfect simulation of choice"? What is the difference between separation and the perfect simulation of separation?  

This isn't meant to answer anything, I'm just thinking publically.

[anagogy]

Have we existed an infinite number of years?

We are existence itself.  Years exist relative to *us*, we don't exist relative to years.  The relative does not dictate or define the absolute. Time both arises and dissolves within us.

What makes it possible to BE everything?

Nothing "makes it possible".  It is just the normal state of affairs when consciousness isn't focusing through a specific perspective. What makes it possible for a blank canvas to contain a whole painting? It is just the nature of the canvas to be the background upon which all else occurs.

Just flowers alone there are thousands of varieties.

The variations only exist when looking through the linear structured senses of some kind of body. These senses deliver a skewed perspective of the true reality, which is beautiful in its own way (that's why we have bodies)  Outside of that framework, everything is just formless non dimensional awareness, and you can't tell one thing from another thing, because there are no "other things".

[Night Owl]

The way I see it, thinking that something/anything wasn't fated to be is seeing separation/imperfection/mistakes in creation rather than unity/harmony/a powerful creator that is all things.

I guess it depends how we conceptualize "fate".  I don't believe in mistakes, or imperfection, but perhaps the "perfect simulation of mistakes/imperfection".  The same in all respects, except that the potential for it was built in.  And I would ask the same about those who think fate means "no choice".  But really what is perfection, anyway?  What standard are we using for perfection?  In the absence of a standard, I guess everything is perfect however it is.  I can only measure the value of the concept of "mistake" in terms of: did it succeed in encapsulating the intentions of a given point of consciousness.  From the point of view of Source, I'm sure everything is fulfilling its intention perfectly.  So in that sense, I believe everything is fated, but in the sense that all of our choices are already made or written into the script, I'm not so sure about that.    

What is the difference between "choice" and the "perfect simulation of choice"?  What is the difference between separation and the perfect simulation of separation?   

This isn't meant to answer anything, I'm just thinking publically.

I couldn't have said it better

[Indigo Blue Dragonfly]

I love this topic as I am currently involved in a book project on synchronicity. At times, things can seem fated to happen, but that may not be so. I agree that everything is in a state of becoming and has potentials to deviate as it so chooses.

Watching The Man In The High Castle last night and the older Japanese diplomat gentleman who reads his I-ching daily stated:

"Fate is fluid. Destiny is determined by men"

I am tossing that statement around as whether it is true for me or not. What do you think?

http://www.amazon.com/The-Man-In-High-Ca...B00RSGFRY8

[Diana]

Totally not how wave functions work... a wave is still finite...

Also, the wave-particle duality has only been actually demonstrated with photons and since we use photons to see things we can't really tell beyond that yet. We know that we don't see anything until observation but it's uncertain if that is just in terms of photons or matter in general.

From physics.bu.edu:

"Wave-particle duality is not confined to light, however. Everything exhibits wave-particle duality, everything from electrons to baseballs. The behavior of relatively large objects, like baseballs, is dominated by their particle nature; to explain the behavior of very small things like electrons, both the wave properties and particle properties have to be considered. Electrons, for example, exhibit the same kind of interference pattern as light does when they're incident on a double slit."

and, regarding all possible outcomes from whitis.techtarget.com:

"Superposition is a principle of quantum theory that describes a challenging concept about the nature and behavior of matter and forces at the sub-atomic level. The principle of superposition claims that while we do not know what the state of any object is, it is actually in all possible states simultaneously, as long as we don't look to check. It is the measurement itself that causes the object to be limited to a single possibility."

Certainty does not exist in the subatomic realm, which, no matter how much scientists want to resist the idea, suggests infinite possibilities for everything.

[Diana]

From an article at scienceandnonduality.com about David Bohm, physicist, and his theories:

The holomovement is a key concept in David Bohm`s interpretation of quantum mechanics and for his overall worldview. It brings together the holistic principle of “undivided wholeness” with the idea that everything is in a state of process or becoming (or what he calls the “universal flux») For Bohm, wholeness is not a static oneness, but a dynamic wholeness-in-motion in which everything moves together in an interconnected process. The concept is presented most fully in Wholeness and the implicate order published in 1980.
...
The theory of the Implicate Order contains an ultra-holistic cosmic view; it connects everything with everything else. In principle, any individual element could reveal “detailed information about every other element in the universe.” The central underlying theme of Bohm’s theory is the “unbroken wholeness of the totality of existence as an undivided flowing movement without borders.”

Full article here:

David Bohm, Implicate Order and Holomovement

And his book, Wholeness and the Implicate Order:

http://www.amazon.com/Wholeness-Implicat...0415289793