--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John" <jr_esq@> wrote: > > > > MMY did not recommend the use of hypnosis since, IMO, it > > promotes self-will and not the will of the unified field. > > The unified field has a will? Far out.
Isn't it just a *trip* that so many people assume it does? You don't necessarily find this assumption in main- stream (read, not Fundamentalist and Supremicist) Hinduism, or much of Buddhism, or even avant-garde Christianity. The belief in God (or the "unified field" or whatever you want to call it) as having a Will and/or having a Plan for All Of This is not a given at all. Many think as I do that if such a thing as a fundamental, core level of existence as God or the Absolute or <insert euphemism of your choice> exists, it's just so NOT That Kinda Guy. It has been described by the great mystics and spir- itual leaders of the planet as "devoid of attributes," and as Just Fuckin' Not Involved in this universe. I can groove with that. It strikes an intuitive reson- ance with me. I think of God/the Absolute/whatever as a kind of Operating System. It just exists; it doesn't plan ahead or have desires for how All Of This "should" turn out. I just roll my eyes and tune out the moment someone I'm talking with or chatting with online starts refer- ring to "God's will," or something similar. I find the whole concept offensive and demeaning. WHO, after all, could conceive of a sentient cosmic uber-being so powerful as to have created All Of This and at the same time so petty as to feel that it had to micromanage it? That's just insulting.
