Evolve to See the Singularity: See Only the Positive in All Things

[Balbrae]

Is it humanly possible to see only the positive in all things? To vanquish duality, such that there is only a singularity of "it's all good?" I say so. I say our enlightened masters could do that. We can do this by getting better at positive thinking, and committing to it. While some advocate acknowledging negative thoughts and allowing them to "go," I ask: why not see the "positive" in "negative" thoughts and have it always be a positive experience? Our minds are miraculous positivity-machines. Let's use them that way! I believe we evolve when we see that the nature of reality is a singularity (seeing that all is good), not a duality (seeing that all is either good or bad).

[Balbrae]

I like the Washington Redskins. They just lost to the Carolina Panthers. Obviously, my preference would have been for the Redskins to win (a positive thought from a Redskins' Fan's perspective). However, rather than seeing their loss as a negative, I choose to see their loss in any positive light I can. For now, I think: their loss is a positive development because____________ (and then I fill in the blank). So let's just say, I settle on the blank as follows: "because they will re-evaluate their game-plan and become more motivated to win, with a 3-and-3 record." It doesn't really matter what the fill-in-the-blank answer is, as long as I can see the truth of it.

Others might argue that I should experience in the "pain" of negativity of the loss (e.g., "Damn! That sucks! They Lost?! Ouch!) so that I can "release" the negativity. My thought is this: I wouldn't need to release negativity if I did not first embrace it. Others claim that this approach is naive and juvenile. They point to the Buddhist practice of acknowledging one's fears and sorrows, to release it. My practice of that practice led me to reject it. I tired of feeling all my sorrow all the time, in effort to release it. I say one is what one focuses on. I choose to focus on the positive aspect in all things. That is what I strive for in this lifetime.

[pianoperformer]

To say that there is only ever good is to lie to yourself, because you know you don't see it that way right now. It is about being completely honest with yourself, but using it for the best.

Further, there is no good and there is no bad. Truth transcends all polarity, including good.

[Balbrae]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

To say that there is only ever good is to lie to yourself, because you know you don't see it that way right now. It is about being completely honest with yourself, but using it for the best.

Further, there is no good and there is no bad. Truth transcends all polarity, including good.

I have posted this point in other threads. Saying there is only ever good is not a lie because, merely by saying that something is "good," makes it so. People put the concept of denial down all the time. However, the practice of denial is good. Denial is good because denial is simply another word for "focus." For example, when one trains one's mind to focus on the task at hand and to exclude mental distractions, one is practicing an advanced form denial. This advanced form of denial denies one's mental bandwidth to other, side-show ideas that do not serve the greater good of the individual.

So if I can see the "good" of something, and deny the "negative" a forum in my mind to hatch ill-begotten misery, why is that a bad thing? Conversely, when one thinks one is being "honest" by "accepting the negative" one is lying because one doesn't have to experience negativity; one can transform everything into a positive experience--even grieving.

To presume that one should accept the negative as part of one's growth misunderstands the nature of the LoA. Under the LoA, one gets what one thinks about, whether they want it or not--without regard to whether the outcome is positive or negative. So we should be quite vigilant about what we think about. For this reason, you can have all the negativity you want--even in the name of "truth." But there is far more to be gained by constantly staying in a positive mode--so-called "truth" be damned because ultimately new truths are created by manifesting positive outcomes from the denial of negative thoughts.

I used to think that accepting negativity and the feelings it generated made me strong. I now see that it made me weak because the mind can generate infinite "negative" scenarios and feelings. I could never keep up with them--or at best it was always a "tie." I don't want to live my life in such a stalemate. I want to thrive. Psychobabble teaches one to be weak and to accept negativity. However, freedom teaches one to deny negativity a world stage.

[OstapBender]

Originally Posted by Balbrae

I believe we evolve when we see that the nature of reality is a singularity (seeing that all is good), not a duality (seeing that all is either good or bad).

But how do you know if something is good if you dont know what is bad? Arent those both judgements interdependent? They make up both sides of a coin, but seeing only one side is not seeing the coin itself, no?

[Balbrae]

Originally Posted by OstapBender

But how do you know if something is good if you dont know what is bad? Arent those both judgements interdependent? They make up both sides of a coin, but seeing only one side is not seeing the coin itself, no?

OstaBender: a belief in two sides of a coin creates duality. But true reality does not contain such a duality. The Course in Miracles teaches that there is only God/Love, which has no opposites. Even if one were to ignore such teachings, we can arrive at the answer by deductive reasoning.

Take the concept of heaven. If there is a heaven, can one experience bliss in heaven without constantly being reminded of a "hell?" I say yes. That is your premise: that one cannot experience bliss in heaven without also knowing the misery of hell. But that doesn't stand to reason that one would suffer in "heaven," or else it wouldn't be heaven. If "hell" is not present in heaven, then it simply doesn't exist anywhere--from the perspective of bliss. Thus, it doesn't exist at all. We experience bliss in the moment--without awareness of negativity or pain.

It is only when our awareness turns to negativity or pain that we instantly lose bliss. Only then are we "aware" of duality--but not because it exists--but because we have created it by the focus of our thought. When we experience bliss, there is only bliss, and we need not know of pain or suffering to enjoy it. In a sense, the mind "ramps up" to a higher vibration of singularity--leaving the world of duality behind. Only when it devolves to a lower vibration is there the illusion of duality.

[pianoperformer]

LoA is not based on what you think — it is based on your deepest beliefs.

Unless you are in denial, you must realize that you have limiting beliefs within you. Perhaps you believe you don't deserve a relationship, or that you can't become wealthy, or that you can't be successful. No matter how much you think positively, these subconscious limiting beliefs are popping up everywhere in your reality. You can pretend they're not there, but if they are there, they are attracting those things to you.

So if you have something in your life that you dislike, it's not about denying that, but going within and reflecting on how you attracted that thing, and what that negativity has to teach you.

If you just deny the negativity, you're not going to change anything.

[Balbrae]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

LoA is not based on what you think — it is based on your deepest beliefs.

I disagree. Think about it: what are your deepest beliefs and how did they get there? Abraham hit the nail on the head when saying, "a belief is just a thought that you keep thinking." In fact, Abraham's recipe for recovery from a belief that no longer serves you is to think new beliefs over and over again. In brain science, this works because of neuro-plasticity, such that "neurons that fire together wire together."

Unless you are in denial, you must realize that you have limiting beliefs within you. Perhaps you believe you don't deserve a relationship, or that you can't become wealthy, or that you can't be successful. No matter how much you think positively, these subconscious limiting beliefs are popping up everywhere in your reality. You can pretend they're not there, but if they are there, they are attracting those things to you.

I don't think we have a quarrel here: your dominant mental thoughts attract their counterparts, as like attracts like. I also agree that we all have limiting beliefs, but I prefer to think of such limitations in a positive light: I focus on the potential for positive change. I am not saying that one cannot discover one's limitation, I am simply saying that it does not have to be a "negative" experience, and can be processed by positive thinking.

So if you have something in your life that you dislike, it's not about denying that, but going within and reflecting on how you attracted that thing, and what that negativity has to teach you. If you just deny the negativity, you're not going to change anything.

I think we can have an honest disagreement here. Let me give you an example. Let's say that you want to make millions off your first platinum album. However, deep inside you hate playing piano scales--and you don't know it. Must you uncover your hatred of playing scales to turn it into something you like? I think you could "over-power" your hatred with love, including by new affirmations "I love playing scales." Now, it may be that introspection is required if your hatred is cross-linked with other thoughts, but the examination need not be a "negative" experience, especially if done with love and in a state of meditation.

[ButterflyWoman]

"Positive" and "negative" are judgments, value calls, and they're wholly contextual. It's possible to come to see that. I don't know if it's possible to come to see everything as "positive", though, nor why you would want to do so. Context and contrast are what make us able to perceive reality the way we do. It would be like taking a black and white line drawing and making all the black lines white, same as the paper.

[pianoperformer]

Originally Posted by Balbrae

I disagree. Think about it: what are your deepest beliefs and how did they get there? Abraham hit the nail on the head when saying, "a belief is just a thought that you keep thinking." In fact, Abraham's recipe for recovery from a belief that no longer serves you is to think new beliefs over and over again. In brain science, this works because of neuro-plasticity, such that "neurons that fire together wire together."

I disagree with this. I could think, "I am a millionaire" until I die, but unless I address my deep limiting belief that it is difficult to earn a million dollars, that will never happen. I am just lying to myself.

My personal favorite approach though is to ask myself whether I really need a million dollars. Perhaps address my limiting beliefs of lack and scarcity, but see what a million dollars would really do for me — what hole do I believe it will fill?

Originally Posted by Balbrae

I don't think we have a quarrel here: your dominant mental thoughts attract their counterparts, as like attracts like. I also agree that we all have limiting beliefs, but I prefer to think of such limitations in a positive light: I focus on the potential for positive change. I am not saying that one cannot discover one's limitation, I am simply saying that it does not have to be a "negative" experience, and can be processed by positive thinking.

I'm not saying it has to be a negative experience. I'm saying that if we are honest, and recognize that we do feel negatively about it, we can use that to grow and transmute those thoughts into Love.

Originally Posted by Balbrae

I think we can have an honest disagreement here. Let me give you an example. Let's say that you want to make millions off your first platinum album. However, deep inside you hate playing piano scales--and you don't know it. Must you uncover your hatred of playing scales to turn it into something you like? I think you could "over-power" your hatred with love, including by new affirmations "I love playing scales." Now, it may be that introspection is required if your hatred is cross-linked with other thoughts, but the examination need not be a "negative" experience, especially if done with love and in a state of meditation.

Honestly, I'd probably just stop playing scales, lol. They're aren't really necessary if you are already pretty good at the piano.

Otherwise, I could look at why I feel bored or annoyed by them. Instead of struggling against them, I could accept them for what they are. I could even learn to have fun with them. But that negative experience is a pointer to help me to know what is wrong within me.

[Balbrae]

Originally Posted by CaterpillarWoman

"Positive" and "negative" are judgments, value calls, and they're wholly contextual. It's possible to come to see that. I don't know if it's possible to come to see everything as "positive", though, nor why you would want to do so. Context and contrast are what make us able to perceive reality the way we do. It would be like taking a black and white line drawing and making all the black lines white, same as the paper.

I'm not sure that context is what I am aiming at with my use of the terms "positive" and "negative." Perhaps a better choice of words, in the context of your post on context, would be desired and undesired. In a dualistic world, desired implicates undesired and vice versa. I know that Abraham is really big on the concept that when we experience what we don't want, we implicitly send signals out to the Universe of what we DO want. However, the singularity I am talking about is based on some scientific theories that, once we "transcend" duality, we arrive at a singularity. I truly believe we can experience what we desire without a focus on what we do not desire.

In the scheme of positive thinking, I think far too much concern is placed on what we don't want.

[Balbrae]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

I disagree with this. I could think, "I am a millionaire" until I die, but unless I address my deep limiting belief that it is difficult to earn a million dollars, that will never happen. I am just lying to myself.

Not exactly. Thoughts do create beliefs. What you refer to here is a situation where you have conflicting core beliefs. Seth talked about this a lot. Let's try the shoe on the other foot. Say you repeat to yourself, "I am impoverished and living on the street" until the day you died. You would not become homeless because you already have somewhere to live and also have another core belief that says, "I can always make ends meet to have a roof over my head." Now, I'm not certain how it works, actually, but it could be that the thought-created reality that was there first, is the one that usually gets preserved, over the conflicting core belief, which is not manifested. I guess this would be the case, generally, because one is already manifested, while the other is not.

But if both outcomes of the conflicting core belief were not manifested, then one would likely get an average of the two (e.g., shabby housing) or the stronger core belief would hold sway (pretty good housing, but no mansion in Hawaii).

[wstein]

Originally Posted by Balbrae

Is it humanly possible to see only the positive in all things? To vanquish duality, such that there is only a singularity of "it's all good?" I say so. I say our enlightened masters could do that. We can do this by getting better at positive thinking, and committing to it. While some advocate acknowledging negative thoughts and allowing them to "go," I ask: why not see the "positive" in "negative" thoughts and have it always be a positive experience? Our minds are miraculous positivity-machines. Let's use them that way! I believe we evolve when we see that the nature of reality is a singularity (seeing that all is good), not a duality (seeing that all is either good or bad).

You can’t banish duality simply by ignoring half of it. Choosing not to look at the other half does not make it go away. To cease duality, you need to drop BOTH halves. I this case, see ALL of all things to the best of your ability. As you are not ‘perfect’, things may occasionally appear positive or negative, just try to remember that it’s your imperfection that make them appear that way.

[Now123]

I agree with Balbrae

Duality was created within the illusion. Basically every guru and knowledge they have to offer was created within the illusion because you manifested it by thoughts. The concept of duality(having to embrace negative in order to feel positive, etc) came into manifestation just like organized religion came into manifestation.

We can go on and say that looking for knowledge outside of us can hold us back from living our dreams. The only way to look through it is from reinforcing new thoughts, changing your thinking, thus changing beliefs.

A belief that if that someone can't experience only positives unless they experience the negatives is still an illusion.

[KeeKee]

I just started something new that I learned from Abraham...very simply put you don't talk about or think about what you don't want (which may be seen as the negative) but talk about and think about what you do want. Because when you talk about or think about what you don't want by the LoA you are still attracting it to you.

[Balbrae]

Originally Posted by Now123

I agree with Balbrae

Duality was created within the illusion. Basically every guru and knowledge they have to offer was created within the illusion because you manifested it by thoughts. The concept of duality(having to embrace negative in order to feel positive, etc) came into manifestation just like organized religion came into manifestation.

We can go on and say that looking for knowledge outside of us can hold us back from living our dreams. The only way to look through it is from reinforcing new thoughts, changing your thinking, thus changing beliefs.

A belief that if that someone can't experience only positives unless they experience the negatives is still an illusion.

Now123: you make a brilliant point! To believe anything, based on manifestations attracted in the world of form (i.e.,'within the illusion') becomes one's illusion. While many claim that truths are truths--without regard to the world of form or illusion, such "truths" may or may not actually be so. For example, some say "natural laws" (e.g., gravity, speed of light, etc.) are undeviating "truths." However, they may not hold up outside our world. Seth explains that there are three types of truth: (1) there are personal truths, which operate only at the personal level; (2) there are worldly truths, which operate only in our world (i.e., the Earth); and (3) there are universal truths, which operate "everywhere," without regard to space and time. So I interpret part of what Now123 to be saying is that one can create a "personal truth" and misinterpret it for a "Universal Truth" on that scale. We hear all the time teachers say that the LoA is operating 24/7/365--it doesn't wait around for us to get our heads right. So, for me, the belief in duality, as Now123 says, is merely one's illusion.

The belief that one must be "real" and see the "negative" in a "real world" to be "honest," when recognizing the "context" and "flip-side of the coin" to the "positive" is one's illusion. To believe that one must befriend the "negative" and give it cookies and milk until it goes away is also an illusion. Now123 underscores a curious relationship between believing in the "negative" and the advent of organized religion. I'll leave it at that, but I agree with Now123 that we create our own illusions with respect to "negativity." I am reminded of the famous quote by Charles Dickens: "We forge the chains that bind us."

Originally Posted by wstein

You can’t banish duality simply by ignoring half of it. Choosing not to look at the other half does not make it go away. To cease duality, you need to drop BOTH halves. I this case, see ALL of all things to the best of your ability. As you are not ‘perfect’, things may occasionally appear positive or negative, just try to remember that it’s your imperfection that make them appear that way.

WStein: While many agree with your point that, "You can’t banish duality simply by ignoring half of it," I politely ask: "Who says so?" There is a famous quote from a book I once read: "Argue for your limitations and you get to keep them." When you say, "You can't banish duality," you presume it exists. But for whom? Humans? Some humans? Do animals fuss in a world of duality? Duality is a creation of the human mind. Scientists at the edge of physics are starting to believe that there is only a singularity, with respect to how the Universe truly operates. You say that you can't banish duality simply by ignoring half of it. Why not? If one does not recognize something in one's mind, does it exist? The world of form is an observer-created reality. Again, going back to our enlightened Masters, I believe they saw only the "good" in people. One need not "drop both halves" because there are no "halves"--there is only the whole, the singularity.

Finally, I would add that many people would quibble with your assumption that people are not "perfect." You've heard the old phrase, "we are not humans having a spiritual experience, we are spirits having a human experience." In this regard, we are perfect spiritual beings. Whether the form of our human bodies is in a state of health or decline, does not make our perfection less so. Whether our core beliefs clash and delay or block our manifestations of a more ideal life does not make us imperfect; we are perfectly creating the reality of conflicting core beliefs and their limited, delayed, or blocked manifestations. I do not believe we are imperfect, and when someone says that, they are creating a limiting belief. Charles Hannel spoke of the highest truths being those that acknowledge our perfection.

Originally Posted by KeeKee

I just started something new that I learned from Abraham...very simply put you don't talk about or think about what you don't want (which may be seen as the negative) but talk about and think about what you do want. Because when you talk about or think about what you don't want by the LoA you are still attracting it to you.

KeeKee: great point! A metaphor I think of is bumper cars with no brakes, only a gas pedal. According to Abraham, the LoA is a law of attraction, not a law of repulsion. So you can't "stop" a manifestation by saying, "No! Go Away! Not You!" Rather, one can only substitute a different thought in its place, and then that different thought gets attracted. Hence, back to the metaphor of bumper cars with no brakes and only a gas pedal. One cannot avert a crash by hitting the brakes because there are no brakes in the operating system of the LoA. Rather, the better strategy is to aim in a different direction and hit the gas pedal to zoom there, instead. Focusing on the singularity of "all goodness" is a great way to consciously direct one's manifestations; akin to hitting the gas pedal and zooming in the "positive" direction.

Great discussion, all!

[jota]

I think that the denial that normal peoples do is different what a loa people do...the denial that Balbrae talk can be interpreted like Bashar say , he say that you can think when something that you dont want happens, that you always manifest what you want , if not happens yet its because there are somethinh to happens but , the manifestatio is a sure thing ...or something like that(the words are not these , but my english dont are helping me )


Since reality is a illusion so , i think she can be wright...there are a member here called Nicbram that claim win millions in lottery that used this way thinking (but almost everybody here doubted that she win)


One then can experiment during a time to see what happens...

Cheers

[designer]

Originally Posted by Balbrae

But there is far more to be gained by constantly staying in a positive mode--so-called "truth" be damned because ultimately new truths are created by manifesting positive outcomes from the denial of negative thoughts.

Wow...that has got to be one of the most amazing things I've read in a long time. You just opened my eyes to a new way of thinking. Thank you!

[wstein]

Originally Posted by Balbrae

... To vanquish duality, ...

Note that I am NOT a fan of duality. My comments above are in response to the original posting.

Originally Posted by Balbrae

WStein: While many agree with your point that, "You can’t banish duality simply by ignoring half of it," I politely ask: "Who says so?"

I say so. Simple logic shows this in many cases, example left and right. Ignoring cruelty, crime, inequity, sad, short, light, etc does not make their opposite go away. If it did, there would be no need for laws or courts or prisons.

Originally Posted by Balbrae

There is a famous quote from a book I once read: "Argue for your limitations and you get to keep them."

Illusions: The Adventures of a Reluctant Messiah, Richard Bach

Originally Posted by Balbrae

When you say, "You can't banish duality," you presume it exists. But for whom? Humans? Some humans? Do animals fuss in a world of duality? Duality is a creation of the human mind. Scientists at the edge of physics are starting to believe that there is only a singularity, with respect to how the Universe truly operates.

Duality exists as much as anything else. So does unity, singularity, trios and other numbers. I totally agree that humans are overly fixated on duality (two-ness) in exclusion to other numbers. This seems to be a bias of the human brain more than anything else.

Originally Posted by Balbrae

You say that you can't banish duality simply by ignoring half of it. Why not? If one does not recognize something in one's mind, does it exist? The world of form is an observer-created reality. Again, going back to our enlightened Masters, I believe they saw only the "good" in people.

Even if you hold that all reality is merely within the mind, ignoring a thought form does not erase it from the mind.

Originally Posted by Balbrae

One need not "drop both halves" because there are no "halves"--there is only the whole, the singularity.

Absolutely but only in the really big picture. This question was asked by a being trapped in the 3D illusion where duality and many other things seem to exist. Until one can merge back with the ALL (source) this issue is of (local) practical importance.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by wstein

Duality exists as much as anything else. So does unity, singularity, trios and other numbers. I totally agree that humans are overly fixated on duality (two-ness) in exclusion to other numbers. This seems to be a bias of the human brain more than anything else.

Actually, I have a habit of thinking in three's and five's. Really.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

I disagree with this. I could think, "I am a millionaire" until I die, but unless I address my deep limiting belief that it is difficult to earn a million dollars, that will never happen. I am just lying to myself.

Well, actually, the thought "I am a millionaire" is supposed to affect & change your deep limiting belief, and thereby affect and change your reality too.

[Balbrae]

Originally Posted by wstein

Ignoring cruelty, crime, inequity, sad, short, light, etc does not make their opposite go away. If it did, there would be no need for laws or courts or prisons.

You miss my point. Let there be life in all its glory, including cruelty, crime, inequity, sad, short, light, etc. Let there be laws, and courts, and prisons. M

[inri]

Originally Posted by Balbrae

You miss my point. Let there be life in all its glory, including cruelty, crime, inequity, sad, short, light, etc. Let there be laws, and courts, and prisons. M

Very well said.

When our beliefs about these things shift, our emotional responses shift and when our emotions shift, the reality that appears before us transforms.

From a place of knowing and seeing the innate perfection in the unfolding of ALL of reality, we actually create and experience a reality where encounters with such things as cruelty, crime, inequity, sadness, etc. simply cease to arise.

While I'm quite aware that I could likely turn on the news to see some of things occurring somewhere, for many years now, my present moment reality very rarely brings me face to face with any of these things.

When our inner reality shifts, the outer shifts and that includes the events and people appearing within our reality.

[Balbrae]

Originally Posted by inri

Very well said.

When our beliefs about these things shift, our emotional responses shift and when our emotions shift, the reality that appears before us transforms.

From a place of knowing and seeing the innate perfection in the unfolding of ALL of reality, we actually create and experience a reality where encounters with such things as cruelty, crime, inequity, sadness, etc. simply cease to arise.

While I'm quite aware that I could likely turn on the news to see some of things occurring somewhere, for many years now, my present moment reality very rarely brings me face to face with any of these things.

When our inner reality shifts, the outer shifts and that includes the events and people appearing within our reality.

Perfectly expressed! By not focusing on a daily barrage of reported strife, you clear your mental bandwidth for different "truths" of your choosing and suited to your joyful expansion and abundant manifestation. One can do this in two ways: (1) by reducing strifeful encounters; and (2) seeing the positive of strifeful encounters manifested. However engaging in the second method leads to the prevalence of the first method. By seeing no "evil," hearing no "evil," and thinking no "evil," one reduces or eliminates "evil" from their everyday experience.

[wstein]

Originally Posted by Balbrae

You miss my point. Let there be life in all its glory, including cruelty, crime, inequity, sad, short, light, etc. Let there be laws, and courts, and prisons.

Seems a bit fatalistic to me. You seem willing to leave ‘life in all its glory’ as it is. Personally I would rather have life reflect who I am. Are you along for the ride or participating in creation? Comes down to personal preference I think.

Originally Posted by Balbrae

My entire point is that how one feels about events occurring in such a scenery can be positive. I'm not saying that events don't happen as they do. I am saying that one's "takeaway" from events, i.e., our positive outlook, is what we can focus on, in the wake of any event. Hence, there can be a positive light or "silver lining" in all events, and we can dedicate our minds to hold them clearly in our vision. For example, there can be resiliency, strength, courage, and compassion of humans, in response to cruelty and crime, and there can be rehabilitation in light of prisons, etc. One controls one's mind and focusing only on positivity can keep one in a state of singularity and can create new truths that overwhelm any historic "negative truth" of any event.

I agree that one can focus on feeling positive or negative about an experience and that this focus greatly colors our experience of that event. I do not consider those ‘feelings’ particularly important other than to guide may future actions. I much more value the experience of all of reality. If I should chose to have an ongoing likable experience why not change the reality ‘cloud’ rather than settle for just the ‘silver lining’? I am a divine being after all.

[Balbrae]

Originally Posted by wstein

Seems a bit fatalistic to me. You seem willing to leave ‘life in all its glory’ as it is. Personally I would rather have life reflect who I am. Are you along for the ride or participating in creation? Comes down to personal preference I think.

Fatalism is the belief that one is doomed to experience a life that is filled with predetermined outcomes, such that one cannot change one's so-called "destiny." Accepting life, "in all its glory" does not equal fatalism, and the arrival of that conclusion based on such a premise by anyone would be in error. Such a conclusion is a non-sequitur. Nothing about my entire thread can reasonably lead one to conclude that I am a fatalist. My thread centers on consciously manifesting a desired outcome, by focusing on the positive in all things. You are free to have life reflect who you are, and when you focus on the "negative," your creations shall so reflect that focus. As for whether I am "going along for the ride" or "participating in creation," instead, the question is rather silly. Under the LoA, it would be impossible for anyone to do anything other than co-create in this universe. I am no exception. Thoughts form reality, mine included. I choose to consciously direct my thoughts, rather than have my manifestations appear by "default," including by a "default" that dwells on "negativity," for the sake of being a so-called "realist" who honors a "dual" nature of reality. I choose to believe that the highest order and nature of reality is a "singular" one.

I agree that one can focus on feeling positive or negative about an experience and that this focus greatly colors our experience of that event. I do not consider those ‘feelings’ particularly important other than to guide may future actions. I much more value the experience of all of reality. If I should chose to have an ongoing likable experience why not change the reality ‘cloud’ rather than settle for just the ‘silver lining’? I am a divine being after all.

You do not consider feelings particularly important? The LoA and the Law of Vibration would disagree mightily. Feelings are very, very important, as they intensify the speed by which intentional manifestations "break through" to our physical plane. The point about the silver lining is that, under the most cynical view of what is "true," one can always focus on a "silver lining." However, if changing the cloud works for you, then more power to you. You are more of an optimist than you appear to give your beliefs credit for.

[wstein]

Originally Posted by Balbrae

Fatalism is the belief that one is doomed to experience a life that is filled with predetermined outcomes, such that one cannot change one's so-called "destiny." Accepting life, "in all its glory" does not equal fatalism, and the arrival of that conclusion based on such a premise by anyone would be in error. Such a conclusion is a non-sequitur. Nothing about my entire thread can reasonably lead one to conclude that I am a fatalist.

By focusing on the silver lining and NOT the cloud you seem to be accepting what the cloud brings you. I see what you are doing is trying to make the best of what you have been handed. It not true fatalism but similar. You are allowing an externally determined outcome and focusing on your experience of it. Much of life in 3D is experience, so perhaps not a bad way to go.

Originally Posted by Balbrae

My thread centers on consciously manifesting a desired outcome, by focusing on the positive in all things. You are free to have life reflect who you are, and when you focus on the "negative," your creations shall so reflect that focus. As for whether I am "going along for the ride" or "participating in creation," instead, the question is rather silly. Under the LoA, it would be impossible for anyone to do anything other than co-create in this universe. I am no exception. Thoughts form reality, mine included. I choose to consciously direct my thoughts, rather than have my manifestations appear by "default," including by a "default" that dwells on "negativity," for the sake of being a so-called "realist" who honors a "dual" nature of reality. I choose to believe that the highest order and nature of reality is a "singular" one.

You do not consider feelings particularly important? The LoA and the Law of Vibration would disagree mightily. Feelings are very, very important, as they intensify the speed by which intentional manifestations "break through" to our physical plane. The point about the silver lining is that, under the most cynical view of what is "true," one can always focus on a "silver lining." However, if changing the cloud works for you, then more power to you. You are more of an optimist than you appear to give your beliefs credit for.

I can see how your statements make sense within the scope of LoA.

For the record, I do not see LoA fundamental to anything. I’m not even sure it’s a ‘law’, probably more like an observation or a technique.

Just presenting my point of view. Believe as you wish, I have no interest in talking you out of anything.

[Bonadea]

(only read through about half of the posts)

You can still see the bad/negative, but see it in a positive light.

Something bad happens to a person, there's still good lessons to be learned in there.

You burn your hand on a stove, you learn not to touch the stove. The focus would be more on the second part.

Cruddy example, but you get the gist. It's not that they don't see the bad part, but there's the understanding on what else is gained.

[Balbrae]

Originally Posted by Bonadea

(only read through about half of the posts)

You can still see the bad/negative, but see it in a positive light.

Something bad happens to a person, there's still good lessons to be learned in there.

You burn your hand on a stove, you learn not to touch the stove. The focus would be more on the second part.

Cruddy example, but you get the gist. It's not that they don't see the bad part, but there's the understanding on what else is gained.

Bonadea: actually, you are making my point. Seeing something in a positive light is not seeing the "bad/negative," but seeing only the positive. That is the point. Even in extreme situations, where it is very difficult for one to see the positive, one can simply "trust" the Universe that positive is there. Think about the amazing power such an individual would have--he or she who can be positive in all circumstances! Such a brilliant mentalist would quickly manifest the most amazing, positive outcomes because his or her dominant mental impression would be a continuous stream of positive outlook and positive emotions!

Also, under the LoA, a person should careful when characterizing "undesirable" conditions as "true"--when their opposite, desired conditions could just as easily be manifested instantly in another dimension, and subsequently be drawn into this dimension. The example given by Abraham was quite clear: an overweight person who desires to be thin should not pronounce that he or she is overweight, on the justification that such a "fact" is "true." Abraham had a real problem with people acting as if they understood what "truth" is and how it operated. Abraham scoffed: "what is truth, anyway? Truth is just what one person believed or said over and over again, and caused others to believe, too. Truth is far more fallible and malleable than one might think!" (This is not an actual, exact quote by Abraham, but is my recollection of the gist of what he was saying.) Abraham teaches that one should say one is "thin"--even if such a statement appears to fly in the face of "facts" that appear to be true. According to Abraham, such a person should think and say that he or she is "thin" because, what one holds in one's mind is what one truly is, in a different dimension. There is only a "lag time" for that dimension to collide with our dimension, such that one attains the manifestation of being "thin" in this physical reality, in due course.

I see it like this: for such a person to say that he or she is overweight is a "lie," in the sense that such a limiting statement blocks its opposite manifestation in the future. That which denies "truth" is a "lie." So how "true" could the so-called "truthful" statement, "I am overweight" be, in the scheme of time and one's potential for a changed manifestation? Not very. That is why I asked in the earlier posts, what is the worse "lie," the current truth, which is a "lie" of the future, or a current "lie" which is a truth of the future? Even where one cannot visualize a "new cloud," as WStein prefers to do, one can definitely see the positive, silver lining in everything.

One transcends the duality of "good/bad," to arrive at the singularity of "it's all good," by seeing only the good in a situation. Whether it is by switching clouds, altogether, or dwelling only on the silver lining, either method should work. The reason it works is because one is denying one's mental bandwidth to falsehoods of the future, while focusing only on truths of the future--regardless of how they appear now.

[Bonadea]

What are you trying to say????


(About the weight issue)

Just kidding around of course