Law of Attraction

[Kenny]

I disagree with the Subjective Reality explanation to the Problematic Questions raised. We attract everything to ourselves. If we focus on things that we don't want we will get them. If two people are competeing for the same thing and are both sending the attraction vibration and one gets it and not the other it is because the "winner" was sending out greater attraction vibration. If they are both attracting it strongly and relatively equally then they will both get it -- both competing for the same promotion -- a new position is created and they both get the same promotion. Two people hold the same winning lottery ticket numbers etc.

Abused child -- yes the child attracted it to themself. The child's spirit isn't child like. The child's spirit might be trying to help someone else on their spiritual journey.

In order to be creators we must first have free will but we can't impose our will on the free will of others without karmatic consequences (evoking spirit, witchcraft etc). If a man really wants a woman she has the free will to not want him and if her not wanting him energy is greater than his wanting her energy her will prevails. There is a metaphysical tug of war going on in the Universe.

[Akashic_Librarian]

You don't fully understand what Subjective reality is. You are the only consciousness. There is no other person. There are no seperate beings. You are The All, Source, God, all focussed on one body at this time.

[Paul C]

Originally Posted by Akashic_Librarian

You don't fully understand what Subjective reality is. You are the only consciousness. There is no other person. There are no seperate beings. You are The All, Source, God, all focussed on one body at this time.

Indeed, Subjectivism in a nutshell (or should I say: nutshell in Subjectivism).

And kenny, struggle can only exists within a Subjective universe if you intend for there to be struggle.

[I AM]

Hi All!
If subjective reality it the reality I live in, why are there people who don’t believe the same why I do. Why did I have a small city filled with people which I never new existed, and really still don’t care that it does exist, come into my existence by reading an article. I personally don’t agree with subjective reality. Please don’t think that I am challenging your beliefs, because I believe in what works for me, as I hope your beliefs work for you.
I think we are all beings of the Universe interacting with each other to learn or play or love. I can create whatever I want in this life for me, as you also can create your desires.

[songwriter]

My opinion is that not only you have intentions. You can have intentions but they may go against many other people intentions. So a thing won't manifest then. And it's not you who creates the other intentions.
The child can be wanting to be happy... but the abuser can intend to torture the child, so there you got it.

This is not what Steve explains and majority opinion here, but well, we're not a religious cult or so... so I explain my own opinion.

[I AM]

[QUOTE=outback;10230]
I definitely don't agree with the "I" create everything portion of it. God creates it all in His "mind" (for lack of a better word)... So there is one consciousness creating and experiencing everything and it is God, Source, whatever you call it. But your awareness is not God. For your awareness to be God, you'd have to be able to experience everyone's perspective simultaneously and if you could do that I am sure everything would make perfect sense. You wouldn't be asking "Why did I do that? Why did she do that?" The fact that you are asking questions like that, or if I were to ask you what the purpose was and you can't answer, simply means you are not creating it. Saying "I" create it all is like looking in the mirror and having your reflection tell you "he" creates the motions of his own mouth... It does not have a mouth, nor does it create anything.
QUOTE]

When "I" create anything in my existence, I create it as God, or at least the part of me that is God. I have free will to create good and bad. If I create anything “bad” it is because I focused on that desire. If I am always worrying about debt and bills, I create more debt and bills. If I focus on love and happiness, I manifest love and happiness. Why do I have free will if I am just a bunch of hardware running a software program? - I AM

[I AM]

Originally Posted by songwriter

My opinion is that not only you have intentions. You can have intentions but they may go against many other people intentions. So a thing won't manifest then. And it's not you who creates the other intentions.
The child can be wanting to be happy... but the abuser can intend to torture the child, so there you got it.

This is not what Steve explains and majority opinion here, but well, we're not a religious cult or so... so I explain my own opinion.

What if I want to win the lottery? It goes against all the other people’s intentions that play. Is it wrong if I win? Please don’t feel I am trying to force my beliefs on anyone. This is what I believe, and it works perfectly for me at this time. Who knows, we could all be wrong.

I AM

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by I AM

Hi All!
If subjective reality it the reality I live in, why are there people who don’t believe the same why I do. Why did I have a small city filled with people which I never new existed, and really still don’t care that it does exist, come into my existence by reading an article.

Oh this is very easy.

If you closely watch your thoughts over the period of a day, you'll notice that a high percentage of your thoughts are random and relatively inconsequential.

Therefore lots of random, relatively inconsequential things regularly manifest in your life. Eg you chance across a magazine article which turns out to be quite irrelevant to any real concern you might have about anything.

I recommend that people stop watching mindless TV.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by I AM

What if I want to win the lottery? It goes against all the other people’s intentions that play. Is it wrong if I win?

Errrr, not at all.

The universe has infinite organising power. That's what it needs, since there are so many people with so many thoughts (and gasp! they even change their minds ever so often).

So the universe will organise everything in its own perfect way. For example, suppose you and me both manifest the intention to win the lottery. And you win this month.

Well, maybe the universe will arrange for me to win next month.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by outback

As for many people wanting something and only one or few people getting it... Many people might desire a particular thing, but only the ones with the programming that says they'll get it will get it. It's as simple as that even though it might go against the "I have 100% control to create anything I wish" thinking. The so called winner(s) had to win, and the loser(s) had to lose for their individual paths to work out; and obviously noone has 100% control.

The assumption here is that the thought-manifestators have perfect control over their thoughts and are all manifesting in a zero-sum game (eg a single prize that can't be shared).

Actually we don't have anything close to perfect control. If we did, we could already alter reality with direct miracles. Eg think "Lazarus, rise from the dead" or "walk on water".

It is actually a good thing that we do not have perfect control. For example, in some ancient schools of meditation, it is already known that you can manifest your intentions into reality (they don't use the same terminology, but the idea is there). However, the gurus will not teach such things to the students until the students have gone through years of ethical / moral training - you know, basic essential stuff like kindness, compassion and love.

Without such ethical grounding as a foundation, people who master IM may just go way wrong, manifesting things which they, as very flawed human beings, mistakenly think they want and are best for themselves.

Because, dear friends, in the end, it's not about winning the lottery, or earning a million dollars or having a great big house plus sports car and helicopter. In the end, it's still about kindness, compassion, love and all that.

[Radical]

I'm sorry, but I can't agree with any of this new age/pseudoscience bunk.

Also, to the people claiming children bring abuse upon themselves, I personally think you are very ignorant to believe this.

I really hope that there aren't many people who seriously believe all the claims of LoA, such as children bringing abuse upon themselves, or rape victims bringing attacks upon themselves, or victims of accidents bringing accidents upon themselves etc. What kind of society would this create...?

I'll tell you what kind of society this would create, it would create a very unfair two tier society. On one side we would have all the people who have been lucky in their lives, born into good families, highly intelligent etc, stuck on their high horses. While on the other side we would have all the less fortunate people, who on top off all their bad luck, have to put up with all the luckier ones (people more likely to believe in LoA) looking down upon them with their smug faces, telling them it's all their own fault.

PS I don't have an unfortunate life or anything, I just want to make people realise the flaws of LoA.

[Acting Like Godot]

In another model of reality, there is the concept of co-creators. We are all co-creators of reality. The sum total of our individual thoughts create reality.

So you can point at all good things in your reality, as well as all bad things - wars, rapes, child abuse etc - and basically all this has come about as a consequence of the sum total of our thoughts.

Obviously, for example, wars wouldn't happen, if at least some people somewhere weren't having thoughts of violence and fighting.

Finally, Radical - although I did not want to go into it initially - past lives explain lots of the circumstances which don't otherwise seem explainable by the individual's thoughts in the present life.

Of course, the very mention of "past lives" will make you even more skeptical - I fully accept that - I was too, until I started to learn more about the research done by various scientists and scientifically-trained people. Eg google "Dr Brian Weiss" - he's trained at Harvard, Yale, Columbia, and what-have-you.

In fact he hid his early research into past lives for years, believing that if it were known that he was looking into such an area, it would ruin his career.

[Acting Like Godot]

Radical:

Just a little scenario for you to consider.

Suppose years ago, you took a holiday. You saw an interesting sight - eg a statue or a mountain or something. In other words, light reflected off the object, entered your eyes, and your brain perceived this as a statue and mountain, briefly creating a few electrical impulses in your brain (we call these thoughts). You also thought to yourself, "Oh what an awesome mountain. I'll always remember this scenery."

Now it's 2006. You think back on your holiday. You close your eyes and you can still visualise what that mountain looked like. You can even remember thinking back then: "Oh what an awesome mountain. I'll always remember this scenery."

Are you:

(1) recreating electrical impulses; or

(2) just reconnecting with old electrical impulses.

If (1), how are you recreating the impulse? Based on what? There is no mountain before you right now.

If (2), where are those old electrical impulses now? In other words, where do thoughts go, after you've thought them? Surely they must go somewhere? otherwise how could you "reconnect" with them?

Are they stored somewhere in your brain? If they are, then your brain must be storing more and more electrical impulses, as the years pass. Therefore we would expect to see much more electrochemical activity in a 50-year-old man's brain as opposed to a five-year-old child. In fact, the older man's brain must be almost akin to a live wire after storing an additional 45 years' of electrical impulses. But this isn't the case.

Further assume (2). Your thoughts have gone "somewhere". But of course. Thoughts are after all electrical impulses generated in the brain. And energy cannot be destroyed or created - high school physics tell you that - it merely changes from one form to another.

So you have managed to reconnect with your old thought impulses which have gone "somewhere". Those thoughts must still exist in some form or another, otherwise you would not be able to remember them, or reconnect with them.

Where did they go? Is it into some isolated corner of reality, where they cannot possibly affect any other part of reality?

Is that possible? Can you actually think of any other form of energy (heat, sound, light) which, when travelling freely, will not affect any other part of reality? Eg can light pass through a dark room and the room still remain dark?

If thoughts are electrical impulses, and electrical impulses are energy, and energy cannot ever be destroyed, and your old thoughts from years ago aren't still in your brain, and they have gone elsewhere, where is that? And what effect might they be having on their surrounding reality, wherever that might be?

[Radical]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

Finally, Radical - although I did not want to go into it initially - past lives explain lots of the circumstances which don't otherwise seem explainable by the individual's thoughts in the present life

So you believe that all our misfortunes in this life are caused by wrong doings in past lives?

Even if this were true, which I highly doubt, then the Universe/God/Whatever is an extremely evil and cruel being.

Even if we did have past lives, they weren't us, they were a totally different person who had very different experiences. We have no memories of existence before our birth in this life, and so this life is all that we are.

[Acting Like Godot]

Continuing from my previous post.

Thoughts = electrical impulses = energy

Therefore they cannot be destroyed, but can only be changed from one form to another.

Generally, wherever energy passes to, it has at least the potential to affect reality.

Thoughts can also be qualitatively very different. Eg experientially, you know that when you have a sexual fantasy / solve a maths equation / chitchat with your friends / fall asleep and dream, the kind of thoughts you have are qualitatively very different.

If thoughts can be qualitatively very different, and thoughts are energy, and energy cannot be destroyed, and has travelled to someplace, and has at least the potential to affect the objective reality of that place -

then we can see, quite plausibly, that different thoughts could have very different effects on reality. Yes?

Choose your thoughts carefully.

[Radical]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

If (2), where are those old electrical impulses now? In other words, where do thoughts go, after you've thought them? Surely they must go somewhere? otherwise how could you "reconnect" with them?

Are they stored somewhere in your brain?

Ever heard of memory???

Memory is a function of the brain: the ability to retain information.

[Radical]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

If thoughts can be qualitatively very different, and thoughts are energy, and energy cannot be destroyed, and has travelled to someplace, and has at least the potential to affect the objective reality of that place -

then we can see, quite plausibly, that different thoughts could have very different effects on reality. Yes?

Lookup "Neurons" - the fundamental unit of the nervous system that works by conducting electrical and chemical signals throughout the brain.

[Alvin]

Originally Posted by Radical

I'm sorry, but I can't agree with any of this new age/pseudoscience bunk.

PS I don't have an unfortunate life or anything, I just want to make people realise the flaws of LoA.

Fair enough Radical, I think we're all old enough to choose our own beliefs

Does this mean though, that no matter what we say you won't be open to it?

Originally Posted by Radical

So you believe that all our misfortunes in this life are caused by wrong doings in past lives?

Even if this were true, which I highly doubt, then the Universe/God/Whatever is an extremely evil and cruel being.

Even if we did have past lives, they weren't us, they were a totally different person who had very different experiences. We have no memories of existence before our birth in this life, and so this life is all that we are.

This is where it gets interesting. Assuming that we do have past lives, it's true that these past 'us-es' weren't the 'us-es' we know now, specifically, not the ego-self that we currently identify ourselves with.

Rather, they and us are the higher selves of ourselves, the 'spark' or 'pure soul' if you will, of us without the ego-selves attached. It's this pure soul that journeys from life to life picking up the lessons learnt from each ego-self during each lifetime and improving ourselves towards a higher state of being; Buddhahood, enlightenment, Nirvana, whatnot.

It's an often quoted concept that someone who's born unlucky this time round (with AIDS for example) is responsible because of the karmic debt he incurred; he did something bad so he gets something bad.

But another way of looking at karma is that everything that happens is not the result of reward or punishment, but the result of a cause and effect process designed to help push you towards enlightenment.

Some even say that at the moment of reincarnation, our higher selves have choice, that key elements of our present lives like sex, environment, key events, have been chosen by yourself to help you learn and become a better being.

And another overarching point of view is that to a Buddha, all life trapped within this cycle of birth and rebirth is suffering (one of the four noble truths is that life is suffering), no matter if you're a multi-billionaire or the poor person who starves on the street (I'm not trivializing this if that's what you're thinking).

But to a Buddha who enjoys enlightenment, our state of being is pretty poor indeed!

In the end, you are right in one respite Radical, I can't prove any of this. If I've died and been reborn, I don't remember any of it although there are people who do. Reading the literature on those who have (like Godot, I recommend Dr Brian Weiss), and the thousand years old teachings of the east like Buddhism, Hinduism and Taoism, and considering that even early Christian sects also had these beliefs and other pagan religions had also, this reincarnation thing seems to make more sense to me than the idea of living once, and to a Day of Judgment.

We do seem to have strayed a bit from the LoA

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Radical

So you believe that all our misfortunes in this life are caused by wrong doings in past lives?

Even if this were true, which I highly doubt, then the Universe/God/Whatever is an extremely evil and cruel being.

Even if we did have past lives, they weren't us, they were a totally different person who had very different experiences. We have no memories of existence before our birth in this life, and so this life is all that we are.

Well, it is a complicated topic. So my answers in this forum necessarily have to limit their own scope. Otherwise I shall be typing here all day. But let me try to address some of your points anyway.

Past lives are closely linked to the concept of karma. Many people however mistakenly believe that karma is ALL about how your past lives affect your present life, and how your present life will affect your future life.

Wrong.

Karma is simply all about how your actions and intentions will attract corresponding consequences into your own life. In other words, you sow what you reap. What comes around goes around. Etc.

Therefore whatever you do today could well attract consequences today. Or tomorrow. Or next week, or next year, or 10 years from now.

For example, if you kick a dog, it may bite you (immediate consequence). Even if it doesn't, somehow a corresponding consequence will happen sometime. Somehow you'll receive some kind of response from the universe for this act of cruelty.

And when you die, there will certainly be things ("good" or "bad" or simply "amoral") you had done earlier in this life for which the consequences haven't manifested yet. So these will carry over into your next life, and you'll face the consequences there.

Karma is actually amoral. It doesn't tell you anything about what's good or bad. It just tells you that the universe will respond perfectly to whatever you think or do.

Now, if you think about this part of what I wrote:

<b>Karma is simply all about how your actions and intentions will attract corresponding consequences into your own life.</b>

... you may begin to see that Steve Pavlina's model of IM is simply an attempt to manipulate karma. For example, in his model, you relax, go deep into your own head, and think a thought "I shall earn $1,000,000 a year", you are trying to attract a specific karmic consequence (for all thoughts, especially those with a strong, clear intention, have karmic consequences).

This kind of manipulation is merely a 21st century twist on something that has been known for a long, long time. For example, Buddhism teaches you to be kind, compassionate, loving, to think virtuous thoughts, be a good person etc. Why? So that you attract the corresponding karmic consequences into your life; and raise your chances of finding happiness and avoiding suffering.

As for this, which you wrote:

Even if we did have past lives, they weren't us, they were a totally different person who had very different experiences. We have no memories of existence before our birth in this life, and so this life is all that we are.

... well, yes, you are right in a sense. That memory is deliberately obscured from us for certain reasons. If you are really interested, you can go for past-life regression hypnosis (I have) - but I don't recommend it unless you have a specific issue that you'd like to resolve and you think that it has something to do with a past life.

Reason why I say this is that personally I find that this present life has enough challenges for me. Who needs to know about past lives, when the present one already is so interesting.

Anyway, about cruelty, bad events that occur through no fault of your own etc -

well, basically there are two responses you could choose.

(1) Repay your karmic debts. That is, suffer. Which is what most people do.

(2) Transmute the suffering. This is a higher path. Basically, you still suffer, but you take the attitude that in this suffering, there is something you can utilise for your dharma (your life purpose - the reason why you were placed where you were, for your present life). For every suffering you go through necessarily contains the seeds for transformation (this is another Buddhist idea which you may or may not agree with).

For example, suppose you are a prisoner-of-war, stuck in a hellhole of a prisoners' camp. The dharma seeds may lie in the fact that you have the opportunity to try to be strong, and to help your weaker fellow prisoners. Or suppose you are handicapped through a car accident. The dharma seeds may lie in the fact that you subsequently become a wheelchair athlete, and inspire other handicapped persons to seek to live with hope and passion. Etc.

Of course, everyone's dharma path is different. You can think of your dharma path as something like what Steve blogged about "Lightworkers" - you gotta do what you're supposed to do.

[Acting Like Godot]

Yup, neurons and memory.

Your electrical impulses ran along your neurons and synapses when light reflected off the mountain and fell into your eyes and your optic nerve sent signals to your brain.

What happened next?

Those electrical impulses vanished from your brain, when you walked away from that mountain scene, back to your car, where you started thinking about where to go for dinner, and how far is it to the next motel, and where did you put your care keys now.

(In other words, other electrical impulses started running).

Where did the earlier impulses (mountain-related) vanish to?

How come, so many years later, you can close your eyes and reconnect your mountain-related electrical impulses?

You call it memory. Ok, so that electrical impulse was still running around in your brain somewhere for all those years? All the way to the year 2006? Aha. Now you see the problem. If that were the case, as you grew older and older and had more thoughts, memories and perceptions, and all of them were electrical impulses still running around in your brain, it would be sizzling with voltage by the time you were 50.

Whereas if you did a brain scan, you'd notice that actually the amount of electricty running around your brain is more or less constant through the years. (It fluctuates with mental activity, that's about it).

So "memory" is the term we like to use - but the term itself doesn't explain how the process occurs.

=========

If you don't like the memory example, try another one.

I just thought to myself, "Next month I will win the lottery."

This thought is an electrical impulse. It just ran through my brain. Electricity is energy. Energy can't be destroyed. Where did it go? Wherever it went, does this energy have or not have the potential to affect its surroundings?

[Markus74]

The thought that people have attracted EVERYTHING that happens to them is insulting and offensive. For not to say dumb.

Why would a child attract or manifest an abusive father for example?

[JBRU]

Originally Posted by I AM

If subjective reality it the reality I live in, why are there people who don’t believe the same why I do. Why did I have a small city filled with people which I never new existed, and really still don’t care that it does exist, come into my existence by reading an article.

Are you consciously aware of your gall bladder? Right now? If you had a case of gall stones, you can bet you would be!

You can think of your ego as a cell in the body of greater consciousness. You don't know about all the other cells that make up the whole, but then you don't need to. You can just do your job and get along just fine. Sometimes a new set of information comes along. That doesn't mean it didn't exist before, just that you weren't aware of it and that now you need to be.

[JBRU]

Originally Posted by Markus74

The thought that people have attracted EVERYTHING that happens to them is insulting and offensive. For not to say dumb.

Why would a child attract or manifest an abusive father for example?

One explanation for this was linked to in the discussion of Steve's blog post, Life the Ultimate Game. It explains the beliefs of Hinduism, including reincarnation, in relation to video games.

If you play a video game, you can choose to play it on the "beginner" level of difficulty. The challenges aren't as difficult and you likely don't need anyone's help to get past them.

In this analogy, the consciousness of the child of an abusive parent may have chosen the "advanced" level of difficulty when choosing to manifest physically. The challenges are difficult and they may need help from someone else to get past them.

[Markus74]

Originally Posted by JBRU

In this analogy, the consciousness of the child of an abusive parent may have chosen the "advanced" level of difficulty when choosing to manifest physically. The challenges are difficult and they may need help from someone else to get past them.

If it's just a game, or 'experience' that they wanted to have, then why should we pity those little abused children? They wanted it this way, they got it. We should be glad for them. The abuse helped them to grow.

Unless of course they can't cope with it and commit suicide. But I guess that's not bad either, since in a video game you have multiple lives.

Same player, shoot again.

[Markus74]

Originally Posted by Listener

I think what people are missing when they blame the victim for bad things happening is that they are confusing the fact that intentions can assist in manifesting results with the idea that all results come only from intentions. It's just silly.

So which intentions get manifested and which won't? What are the criteria? What happens if there are two opposing or contradictory intentions? Who will 'win'?

As for the child abuse example, there are two ways to look at it then:

1. The child intended an abuse by a rapist
2. The rapist intended a child that he could abuse

Which one would it be?

[JBRU]

Originally Posted by Markus74

If it's just a game, or 'experience' that they wanted to have, then why should we pity those little abused children? They wanted it this way, they got it. We should be glad for them. The abuse helped them to grow.

We can pity the child because the child did not make that choice. The choice was made before they were born by the soul/spirit that would come to inhabit their body. We can help the child get through and past the experience and perhaps learn something that will help them along their path to enlightenment.

It is the universal connectedness that leads us to the emotion of pity and the action to help; we can imagine ourselves in that situation and empathize or do what we can to assist.

Unless of course they can't cope with it and commit suicide. But I guess that's not bad either, since in a video game you have multiple lives.

Well, it is only a metaphor and there are limitations. Your point, though flippant, is somewhat valid; Hinduism believes in reincarnation and that lessons are learned in each life that lead you to enlightenment.

Life is not a video game, though. I don't want to see anyone hurt any more than I want to cut my finger when I wash the dishes. That doesn't mean it doesn't sometimes happen.

[Markus74]

Originally Posted by JBRU

We can pity the child because the child did not make that choice. The choice was made before they were born by the soul/spirit that would come to inhabit their body. We can help the child get through and past the experience and perhaps learn something that will help them along their path to enlightenment.

But isn't the child this soul that came in the body?? So why pity it? And if the soul isn't equivalent to the child, then what is the child?

It is the universal connectedness that leads us to the emotion of pity and the action to help; we can imagine ourselves in that situation and empathize or do what we can to assist.

Ok, but what if the child had attracted the rapist? Or did the rapist attract the child?

Well, it is only a metaphor and there are limitations. Your point, though flippant, is somewhat valid; Hinduism believes in reincarnation and that lessons are learned in each life that lead you to enlightenment.

So getting rape and/or killed can lead to enlightment?

Life is not a video game, though. I don't want to see anyone hurt any more than I want to cut my finger when I wash the dishes. That doesn't mean it doesn't sometimes happen.

I totally agree. But that view isn't congruent with the Law of Attraction or IM.

[JBRU]

Originally Posted by Markus74

But isn't the child this soul that came in the body?? So why pity it? And if the soul isn't equivalent to the child, then what is the child?

The child is the physical shell that is currently housing the soul. We are all bits of ego attached to these physical shells. Unless we achieve enlightenment, we cannot understand the purposes and goals of the soul.

So getting rape and/or killed can lead to enlightment?

A physical shell being raped and/or killed can be an event on the soul's journey to enlightenment.

I totally agree. But that view isn't congruent with the Law of Attraction or IM.

It is a congruent view. Look at the intention that is Steve's "Million Dollar Experiment:" In an easy and relaxed manner, in a healthy and positive way, in its own perfect time, for the highest good of all, I intend $1,000,000 to come into my life and into the lives of everyone who holds this intention.

Some key phrases there are "in its own perfect time," and "for the highest good of all." I can put forth the desire for all suffering in the world to end. If it isn't the best time for that to happen or it should not happen for some reason beyond the my understanding, it won't happen.

I think you may be confusing the intentions and desires of individual egos with those of the higher consciousness to which we are all connected. What we attempt through the law of attraction is to align our ego's desires with our highest good. If we fail to do that, the desires of our egos remain unfulfilled.

[Markus74]

Originally Posted by JBRU

The child is the physical shell that is currently housing the soul. We are all bits of ego attached to these physical shells. Unless we achieve enlightenment, we cannot understand the purposes and goals of the soul.

So if the child is but a physical shell and its soul is way more ancient, then why pity the little child getting raped? Especially since, according to this theory:

A physical shell being raped and/or killed can be an event on the soul's journey to enlightenment.

So why consider a rape or murder something bad if it can lead to enlightment? And why punish the rapist or murderer then, who only helped that soul on its way to enlightment?

Some key phrases there are "in its own perfect time," and "for the highest good of all." I can put forth the desire for all suffering in the world to end. If it isn't the best time for that to happen or it should not happen for some reason beyond the my understanding, it won't happen.

So, in fact you don't matter. Maybe you put for desires at the right moment, maybe not. Which comes down to luck or chance again. Since YOU're unable to decide when something should happen.

[added: Could you please answer this question too: "Did the child attract the rapist? Or did the rapist attract the child?"]

[JBRU]

Originally Posted by Markus74

So if the child is but a physical shell and its soul is way more ancient, then why pity the little child getting raped?

Because we share a connection to greater consciousness with the child, we can feel pity for the ego of the child; the experience is traumatic. We feel a desire to help the child, perhaps, because we want to help the child learn whatever they were supposed to from this experience; to prevent it from having to be experienced by any other children.

So why consider a rape or murder something bad if it can lead to enlightment? And why punish the rapist or murderer then, who only helped that soul on its way to enlightment?

Raping and murdering do not lead to enlightenment. Engaging in either of those activities would be moving in the opposite direction.

We punish these activities because they are not acceptable to our society. Even if we were to say the child "asked" for this experience, the punishments would still exist. The reason for the punishment on a metaphysical level is that the murderer/rapist is acting in ways that are understood to be against the greater good of all and in order to move humans as a whole towards enlightenment, we must not allow them to engage in those actions.

So, in fact you don't matter. Maybe you put for desires at the right moment, maybe not. Which comes down to luck or chance again. Since YOU're unable to decide when something should happen.

One's ego does not matter, no. What is most successful is to align one's desires to the will of the greater consciousness. Once this is done, the results flow naturally.

It seems like luck or chance when that alignment is haphazard. The better one gets at creating that alignment, the less it seems like chance.

[added: Could you please answer this question too: "Did the child attract the rapist? Or did the rapist attract the child?"]

I'm unable to answer that question. A) It's completely hypothetical. There isn't a child or a rapist. They are constructs of our conversation. B) If we were to discuss a specific example, I would be unable to know the specifics of each participant's innermost thoughts.