The Sanskrit word Sankalpa helps us understand how conscious desire serves as the underlying structure for the manifestation of one’s intention.
Sankalpa is the subtlest level of intention at the cusp of choiceless awareness and thought. It is like the seed structure of intelligence around which time, space, and matter consolidate into a manifested event. The fundamental mechanics of intention manifesting into reality is based on the principle that intent in the field of pure potentiality organizes its own fulfillment through the synchronicity of space, time, energy, information, and matter.
“choiceless awareness, seed structure of intelligence, fundamental mechanics of
intention manifesting itself into reality, pure potentiality, synchronicity, etc, etc”
Man, you have a way with words… Not much for substance, but what the heck,
who needs substance?
Who needs substance?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkbdP7sq0w8
All we are is dust in the wind.
But from the dust we create:
“Much of what I will create, will be made from the dust of what has
crumbled”
~ Steve Rother – lightworker
http://lightworker.com/beacons/2009/2009_04-ConsciousCorporations.php
I have faith in myself and believe in the truth which I find in myself and I am
able to create from there. I create in a most simple way, I create heart
labyrinths in nature and find the utmost fulfilment in that.
Tell me Dale, what do you create in your normal daily life that makes you happy?
And from my heart I pray
I pray for our earth and all the people on it.
That they all may find a way to live in peace and can
provide themselves with the basic ingredients
they need for a living.
And I pray that we all grow into an awareness that
in our evolution as a human being, we are, One.
Each of us in our own unique expression of life.
And I believe that Jesus is one of the teachers
that taught this to us, but there are a few more….
Mieke,
“Who needs substance??”
My gosh, this statement is what’s wrong with your belief system!
Mieke, you need to step back for a moment and think deeply about
the logical consequences in believing what you just said.
Trevor, if your reading this, this is what I mean when I say
this belief system is dangerous.. This is really troubling to me!
And I’m sorry, Jesus made it crystal clear about the notion of believing he
was just a wise man, a good teacher or all the rest of the nice things they
said about him. The religious jews at the time new exactly what he meant
when he said “Before abraham was, I Am”. They picked up stones to stone
him, and ultimately crucified him on the cross…. But then like He said,
“No one takes my life away from me. I give it up of my own free will”.
He came for that specific purpose, to lay down his life so that we may
find forgiveness for our transgressions..
He left no other options. Like CS Lewis said, he was a lunatic, liar,
or the Creator of the Universe.
You have three choices, none of yours are on the list.
What is so dangerous about it? No one got hurt, the
world isn’t coming to an end, your brain didn’t implode.
What is so dangerous about it?
CS Lewis was wrong in his 3 choice view that almost
requires someone to pick his answer.
I’ll give you option 4:
He was an enlightened teacher who was later deified and
whose words were twisted in order to create mindless converts
to support a power hungry religion.
Also, do you even know what “I Am” means?
Ei dale:
Observe mieke’s & Trevor’s manner of responding. They address the issue directly & unequivocally. You sir, on the other hand, are non-responsive or at best, give a muddled argument.
Please sir, it is a waste of precious moments to make sense of a pointless matter; make your argument concrete & plausible.
Would you mind addressing Trevor’s question next time? Be precise with your response. That would be simple enough.
Trevor,
“I Am” is a reference to Exodus 3:14, when Moses asked God what his name was –
“I Am that I Am” was his response. Basically saying, I need no other name, I have no peers.
Christ, in this case used the same name, and made the claim to be God. The Jews
of the day saw this as blasphemy and hence their response followed.
By the way, I know you have you gun loaded with some “New Age” nonsense
ready for my response. I can’t wait to hear your new “enlightened” version
of biblical scholarship….
I’v explained to you very specifically what is dangerous about it. You choose to
ignore it and play dumb to receiving it.
But for the benefit of the discerning….
The reason it (Deepak’s belief of moral relativism) is dangerous is because it gives
us no objective standards to determine right and wrong. In the case of Hitler and Stalin,
where they rationalized that killing people because it would ultimately improve life for
others was a justifiable reason in and of itself. Deepak’s version of reality would offer
no reasonable argument against because moral relativism does not allow for objective
standards by which to make moral judgments.
Therefore is dangerous and must be refuted.
‘Choiceless awareness’ should not be confused with thoughtlessness. I believe that Deepak is explaining that as we enter the field of pure potentiality, the shadow self and ego are powerless to the higher self, the higher good in mankind, and that in the gap, the true self and it’s desires and intents reveal themselves. The true self is the enlightened soul and soul connection in all of us, which of course, is beneficial for all mankind when we connect to it [the soul] .
Watch the ego fizzle away when you go into the gap. The ego can’t take the calm, silence, steady awareness and centeredness. The ego is the boisterous, domineering face with alot of fanfare and no substance finally. The higher self doesn’t need or want a parade. It wants silence. And when we show up for that silence, that quieting of the mind, the higher self guides us to the choices that are most beneficial for us and consequently, mankind and the planet, without any exertion on our behalfs whatsoever.
Let peace be instilled in all of us.
‘Choiceless awareness’ should not be confused with thoughtlessness. I believe that Deepak is
explaining that as we enter the field of pure potentiality, the shadow self and ego are powerless
to the higher self, the higher good in mankind, and that in the gap, the true self and it’s desires
and intents reveal themselves. The true self is the enlightened soul and soul connection in all
of us, which of course, is beneficial for all mankind when we connect to it [the soul] .
Watch the ego fizzle away when you go into the gap. The ego can’t take the calm, silence,
steady awareness and centeredness. The ego is the boisterous, domineering face with alot of
fanfare and no substance finally. The higher self doesn’t need or want a parade. It wants silence.
And when we show up for that silence, that quieting of the mind, the higher self guides us to the
choices that are most beneficial for us and consequently, mankind and the planet, without any
exertion on our behalfs whatsoever.
Let peace be instilled in all of us.
And as I pointed out in all cases, you are wrong.
You cannot cite Hitler and Stalin, because they do not share mine or Deepak’s
world view. You’re trying to make correlations where they do not exist in order
to support your argument. This is another Straw-man.
You see how easy that was to do away with? That is why your arguments fail.
Trevor,
Sorry, but not so fast.
I can cite the Hitler/Stalin lesson. Although no matter how many times
I explain it to you you keep missing the point.
The point is this…. It doesn’t have to be about Hitler and Stalin, I use the
case as an example! whether you and Deepak’s religion has anything
in common with it is irrelevant to my point..
Listen very carefully now…. My point is about having an objective standard
(or not) to make moral judgments. The Deepka religion, while its disciples
would most likely oppose the despicable acts, are left with no logical way to
make a moral determination that it is wrong! Get it now?
It’s no wonder you keep accusing me of a “straw man” argument. The problem is you
can’t seem to understand the point!
What if I were to tell you being Christian is dangerous because Osama
Bin Laden is religious and has killed thousands of people for his God.
Therefore belief in a religion makes you dangerous. Doesn’t
make much sense does it?
You’re trying to make the correlation that Hitler and Stalin didn’t have
objective standards to make moral judgments, and this is why they were
dangerous. This doesn’t fly. Of course they did, and this is not why they were
dangerous. Hitler was even raised a Catholic. Stalin and Hitler knew nothing
of the way I or Deepak think, and if you were to have presented it to them, they
would have laughed at you.
Your argument has no basis.
A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation
of an opponent’s position. To “attack a straw man” is to create the illusion
of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition
(the “straw man”), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the
original position.
Trevor, Gee, thanks for the definition!
Your post is so full of just plain bad logic.
I’ll start at the top:
I advocate that an objective standard is necessary to make moral judgments.
If you ask Charles Manson to come up with list of laws and then
hang them in the halls of justice as the basis of all judgments, you have an
objective moral standard, don’t you?
Stick with me on this now, Why do we know that to accept Charlies
standard would be troublesome, or do we? (of course we do, but I would like
you tell me why you know??)
I don’t know how you can speak for Stalin and Hitler….
It is irrelevant whether THEY had an objective standard…
After all their could be many different versions to choose from.
The problem I present is their can only be one, and it must be
given by an all knowing, all loving and just Judge. The folly
that I continue to pound on with your religion is that
you present your world view as a solution to the worlds problems.
I say it is that it is a conflicted, you can’t have it both ways worldview.
Trevor, and don’t say you don’t presume that your worldview will solve
the worlds problems. You’ll force me to go back and copy and paste
ad-infinitum!
You’re changing your argument every time. Before this, you
said you were arguing because you thought this worldview was
dangerous, now you’re claiming to argue because you believe mine
claims it can solve all the worlds problems. You keep moving the goal
post when you realize you cannot win.
You’re still making incorrect correlations. You’re trying to pretend
that mass murderers somehow have a connection. THEY DON’T.
Your argument holds no water, and if this were a court case, it would
have been thrown out on day 1.
Feel free to stop at anytime with your “objective standard.” We’ve all seen
how peaceful Christians are with their ‘holy rules.’ I keep giving you the perfect
example of people who mostly closely share my views, and you ignore it. How
convenient that you ignore actual evidence. Do you really want to compare Buddhists
vs. Christians throughout history on morals and violence? I don’t think so. You’ve
already lost.
Trevor, I do believe it is dangerous,
The only connection mass murderers would have in your worldview is
that they are both entitled to their reality and moral judgments.
I have no idea where you came up with anything else. That’s it, that’s all
I am saying, period!
I’v also explained many times that there is a difference between the creation
and the Creator. We do not share his nature. We Christians are sinful and
while our acceptance of Christ’s sacrifice shields us from God’s wrath, Our
sin nature remains until we die. Christians are guilty of doing many bad things.
This is the great mystery that seperates Christianity from
all other religions. We cannot earn our way to Him by doing good things, it is
a simple choice to accept the way that He alone has provided.
The Bible teaches that to deny this is the only unforgivable sin.
Trevor, perhaps I have not explained it or mislead you. By accepting my worldview,
which is also to accept a objective standard to determine right and wrong, God’s
Word, does not mean peace, love and unity will result. As I said above the sin
nature of man remains. It does mean however, that as the Bible teaches, Christ will
return and when He does it will this time be with a sword… it also says
there will no longer be any doubt as to who He is “Every knee will bow and every
tongue confess”. Again, He and Evil cannot coexist and in His time I”m afraid,
those who are not “covered” by His work on the cross will suffer for their transgressions.
I think it is important to remember in reading this that this is not something
I or anyone else dreamed up. This is what the Bible teaches…. Don’t get mad
at me, I have simply been compelled by the evidence to believe it.
Is it a matter of convenience for me? Sometimes, but many times no. It’s much
easier to just do my own thing. I’ve found the Christian life to be hard work, but
it comes with it’s rewards, to understand my origin, the purpose of my life and my
ultimate destiny..
I don’t think your beliefs can answer any of those three.
A straw man says what?
Interested in the discussion/debate on religion? Watch this:
Zeitgeist:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-594683847743189197&ei=YBUASpugIY-0_AHdwPVF&q=zeitgeist&hl=en&client=safari
At least watch all of part 1, then feel free to move on to part 2 and 3 [the video is worth seeing
at length]. You will see, if you try to process it objectively, and remove your “ego” / personal
identification with your religious beliefs, that the presentation is not anti- any religion, but rather,
pro-truth, and pro-information. After all, we are in the “information age.” Enjoy!
This conversation is quite stimulating. lol
It’s very interesting… intersting indeed…
I tell you, this would make a good show
on TV. It really is kind of enjoyable. Not in a
humiliating kind of way, but in a way that I
actually want to hear what the next person is
going to say kind of way.
It’s like a battle, but so far I dont see any bad
guy-good guy. In fact, it is like an olympic
tournament.
No wonder I found it so entertaining!
I wonder who is going to win the gold?
That is what it’s about right?
Justin, it’s about the “winning and losing” of souls. Two conflicting
worldviews cannot coexist. As a Christian I am compelled to refute
a system of thinking that seeks to redefine who Christ is and the
meaning of the cross. To God, this is the most evil of evils…
Imagine, you make such a supreme sacrifice and then to have some
argue that it didn’t happen? that it is just a misunderstanding or a
hoax foisted upon mankind by people with bad intentions.
Awsome! I got you to reply!
I have been reading all these comments
and I am glad to be conversating in one
of them now.
How exciting! I love good conversations.
Okay lets see, hmmmmmmmmmmm.
I dont know what to say. Oh well.
I wish I could come up with something
at the moment, but find I have nothing
clever to say to that.
That is the point really. Im just writing
for the heck of it.
Perhaps you can reply to this and use
it as a vehicle to express your opinions
more. I’ll think of something then.
I thought of something!
Dale, you speak with such
authority! Do you know for a
fact, complete 100% that
God exists? I’m not saying
that God or Jesus does not
exist, what im saying is if you
know for a complete fact – not
what you read or heard.
Basically my question is: have
you ever had an experience that
proved to you in your life that
God and the Bible are true?
If you have,
then I believe
my question
is perfectly innocent
and reasonable
dont you think?
I daresay, what I just wrote was extremly malicous.
Im sorry. I dissaprove of my behaviour. I did not
have the right.