GENIUS FORUMS

The most "logical" understanding or revelation is that you cannot go out of yourself. "It is always your own thoughts that you perceive" (Ralph Waldo Emerson).

What this means is that when you believe you are relating to a thing as if it is outside of you, you are, in truth, relating you to you. "Outside" is the grand illusion, which also makes "inside" the grand illusion. So, when you see a thing, be it a dot on the screen of your mind or be it a complex pattern of fractals on a website, you are always you looking at (the emanation of) you.

Since the ongoing activity of you is always SELF interpretation, the question worthy of asking is: if I am the thing I see, hear, touch, taste and smell, why am I interpreting that which is already me as if it is not already me?

Cause, and effect.. you are analysing the cause of your effect. If classic music is the cause, what effect does it have on you? For some people it is a nice effect, and for other people it isn't as nice as pop music. Red, and Blue... your red, could be my blue.. we would never know that we were seeing different colours.

movingalways wrote:The most "logical" understanding or revelation is that you cannot go out of yourself. "It is always your own thoughts that you perceive" (Ralph Waldo Emerson).

What this means is that when you believe you are relating to a thing as if it is outside of you, you are, in truth, relating you to you. "Outside" is the grand illusion, which also makes "inside" the grand illusion. So, when you see a thing, be it a dot on the screen of your mind or be it a complex pattern of fractals on a website, you are always you looking at (the emanation of) you.

Since the ongoing activity of you is always SELF interpretation, the question worthy of asking is: if I am the thing I see, hear, touch, taste and smell, why am I interpreting that which is already me as if it is not already me?

Mensa says: And if you do trans-send your spirit out of yourself, your thoughts go too.

I've experienced a very strange thing when I was 22. My spirit self transported itself out of my body. But, I didn't go anywhere. I sat with my legs dangling at the side of my bed, but, I couldn't see my legs or body. I'm staring at my hand and all I see is my skeleton hand--no flesh. I rub my eyes like they are there and look again, but still I see a skeleton hand. I'm trying hard to go into the living-room where friends are, but, I can't get off my bed. I look again at my skeleton hand. I remember feeling completely mythed by not being able to see my hand or body.


Mensa says: I had my first strange occurence at age 19, when I raised myself out from my body from my bed. Everything was colorless and I floated around my apartment with no control of where I was floating to. I knew I was going to bump in the stove and sure enough I did, and bounced right off again, then I floated towards the bathroom and I knew that I was going to fall down the stairs and I did. To know these things proves I was thinking. It was crazy strange, because I was all folded up at the bottom of the stairs, stuck and I couldn't help myself. So I hollered out to God to help me, and immediately I was back in my body, but not before the people downstairs opened their door and saw me there. But, how could they see me when I was not in the flesh?

How could my spirit consciousness fall down those stairs, unless I was in the flesh, but I wasn't. This was no dream I know this. This may have been a death experience for me where my spirit or consciousness left my body, but returned when I hollered out for God to help me.

I'll never forget that experience of floating uncontrolled around the room, I was experiencing an out-of-body feeling both times. It was not pleasant at all.

The reason I mention these episodes is because I know you're right when you say, you can't get out of yourself, your thoughts stay with you, because my thoughts never left me.

Pincho Paxton wrote:Cause, and effect.. you are analysing the cause of your effect. If classic music is the cause, what effect does it have on you? For some people it is a nice effect, and for other people it isn't as nice as pop music. Red, and Blue... your red, could be my blue.. we would never know that we were seeing different colours.

PP, what I am saying is that you and music are one in your awareness. Music emanates from you (all thought forms are permanent "things" within your conscience - I and the Father are One - The Kingdom of God/Heaven is within) with the name "classical" only arising because of your intellectual conditioning. It is the very naming of form that brings about the sense of being separate from the form.

When you become aware of music, are you and the music not in the flow of pure awareness, that is, until your mind begins its busyness of naming and describing what you believe is "coming into you from out there?"

In other words, any boundaries you put on your awareness, such as naming music form as "classical" or "rock" or "jazz" is that which causes you to believe you (the subject) and music (the object) are of different thought natures. They are not.

mensa-maniac wrote:

movingalways wrote:The most "logical" understanding or revelation is that you cannot go out of yourself. "It is always your own thoughts that you perceive" (Ralph Waldo Emerson).

What this means is that when you believe you are relating to a thing as if it is outside of you, you are, in truth, relating you to you. "Outside" is the grand illusion, which also makes "inside" the grand illusion. So, when you see a thing, be it a dot on the screen of your mind or be it a complex pattern of fractals on a website, you are always you looking at (the emanation of) you.

Since the ongoing activity of you is always SELF interpretation, the question worthy of asking is: if I am the thing I see, hear, touch, taste and smell, why am I interpreting that which is already me as if it is not already me?

Mensa says: And if you do trans-send your spirit out of yourself, your thoughts go too.

I've experienced a very strange thing when I was 22. My spirit self transported itself out of my body. But, I didn't go anywhere. I sat with my legs dangling at the side of my bed, but, I couldn't see my legs or body. I'm staring at my hand and all I see is my skeleton hand--no flesh. I rub my eyes like they are there and look again, but still I see a skeleton hand. I'm trying hard to go into the living-room where friends are, but, I can't get off my bed. I look again at my skeleton hand. I remember feeling completely mythed by not being able to see my hand or body.


Mensa says: I had my first strange occurence at age 19, when I raised myself out from my body from my bed. Everything was colorless and I floated around my apartment with no control of where I was floating to. I knew I was going to bump in the stove and sure enough I did, and bounced right off again, then I floated towards the bathroom and I knew that I was going to fall down the stairs and I did. To know these things proves I was thinking. It was crazy strange, because I was all folded up at the bottom of the stairs, stuck and I couldn't help myself. So I hollered out to God to help me, and immediately I was back in my body, but not before the people downstairs opened their door and saw me there. But, how could they see me when I was not in the flesh?

How could my spirit consciousness fall down those stairs, unless I was in the flesh, but I wasn't. This was no dream I know this. This may have been a death experience for me where my spirit or consciousness left my body, but returned when I hollered out for God to help me.

I'll never forget that experience of floating uncontrolled around the room, I was experiencing an out-of-body feeling both times. It was not pleasant at all.

The reason I mention these episodes is because I know you're right when you say, you can't get out of yourself, your thoughts stay with you, because my thoughts never left me.

I encountered a metaphor a while back which helped me understand the experience of which you speak, and that is, the metaphor "thoughtbody." Man is always a "thoughtbody" or a mentality in every moment of his conscious awareness. And, as long as he believes himself to be of a different substance and essence from that of which he is aware via his senses, he will continue to "bump into things." So even though, during this experience, you seemed to be of spirit to yourself, and not of flesh, this is not so, for you remained attached to your flesh mentality of believing in dual worlds (flesh and spirit).

Overcoming one's flesh mentality is to bring it home from whence it came - from within one's omnipresent I AM (THAT), "precept by precept, line by line, here a little, there a little."

movingalways wrote:

Pincho Paxton wrote:Cause, and effect.. you are analysing the cause of your effect. If classic music is the cause, what effect does it have on you? For some people it is a nice effect, and for other people it isn't as nice as pop music. Red, and Blue... your red, could be my blue.. we would never know that we were seeing different colours.

PP, what I am saying is that you and music are one in your awareness. Music emanates from you (all thought forms are permanent "things" within your conscience - I and the Father are One - The Kingdom of God/Heaven is within) with the name "classical" only arising because of your intellectual conditioning. It is the very naming of form that brings about the sense of being separate from the form.

When you become aware of music, are you and the music not in the flow of pure awareness, that is, until your mind begins its busyness of naming and describing what you believe is "coming into you from out there?"

In other words, any boundaries you put on your awareness, such as naming music form as "classical" or "rock" or "jazz" is that which causes you to believe you (the subject) and music (the object) are of different thought natures. They are not.

Ok, you and the Father are one. A child is taught to believe in Father Christmas, and an adult chuckles at them beneath their breath. At 15 a person believes in Father Christmas, you have an opinion of them that is that they haven't grown up yet. The white beard, and the cloak, and it is a costume. A 15 year old believes in God, and I feel as though they believe in Father Christmas still. I feel that as the Earth comes to an end, their lives will just wait for it to happen as they will not study Science to save it. I am glad that not all of us expect miracles to save us.

Pincho Paxton wrote:

movingalways wrote:

Pincho Paxton wrote:Cause, and effect.. you are analysing the cause of your effect. If classic music is the cause, what effect does it have on you? For some people it is a nice effect, and for other people it isn't as nice as pop music. Red, and Blue... your red, could be my blue.. we would never know that we were seeing different colours.

PP, what I am saying is that you and music are one in your awareness. Music emanates from you (all thought forms are permanent "things" within your conscience - I and the Father are One - The Kingdom of God/Heaven is within) with the name "classical" only arising because of your intellectual conditioning. It is the very naming of form that brings about the sense of being separate from the form.

When you become aware of music, are you and the music not in the flow of pure awareness, that is, until your mind begins its busyness of naming and describing what you believe is "coming into you from out there?"

In other words, any boundaries you put on your awareness, such as naming music form as "classical" or "rock" or "jazz" is that which causes you to believe you (the subject) and music (the object) are of different thought natures. They are not.

Ok, you and the Father are one. A child is taught to believe in Father Christmas, and an adult chuckles at them beneath their breath. At 15 a person believes in Father Christmas, you have an opinion of them that is that they haven't grown up yet. The white beard, and the cloak, and it is a costume. A 15 year old believes in God, and I feel as though they believe in Father Christmas still. I feel that as the Earth comes to an end, their lives will just wait for it to happen as they will not study Science to save it. I am glad that not all of us expect miracles to save us.

PP, expanding one's awareness is to get beyond one's conditioning to all humanISMS, including religion, a conditioning/prejudice which you are displaying here. Wisdom books of the nature of consciousness, of which the bible is one, are not to be read with the literal intellect of collective human beliefs, such as by the religious or scientific mentality. "I and the Father are One" is a statement of living metaphor of thought/consciousness/awareness that goes beyond all human literal/surface/childhood interpretations.

Rather than criticizing a few words you do not understand, why did you not respond to the subject matter I presented?

movingalways wrote:
Rather than criticizing a few words you do not understand, why did you not respond to the subject matter I presented?

Because I don't understand it. I can't find the nature in it. It seems to be made up. I know so many substances in nature, but none of them I could call the father, none of them I could call the infinite me, and really none that are the grand illusion. I mean.. I know we see as an illusion, but we know what we are seeing if we go to the lowest scale. In death we become part of the Universe, but at that time.. I will not be me I will be split into billions of particles.. so it isn't in me, it's my particles which are billions of creatures... the hive. But me..now.. I am not part of the Universe, I have been separated from it to do a job, like a bee.