--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@...> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- 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? > > Actually it gives me the creeps! > > I mean the UF - if it exists - is simply what the universe > is before it gets all random and foamy and *long* before > the chaos becomes visible as the whirly subatomic stuff we > all know and love.
As Hagelin describes the unified field, It is an ocean of Intelligence. As such, It is the Observer, the Process of Observing, and the Observed. This universe and any other universes which come out of the Unified Field cannot be random and chaotic since It is Intelligence. In particular, this universe is based on Natural Laws in which the subatomic particles and galaxies are subjected to. > > Ascribing intentions to it is absurd but worshipping > it is deeply weird. I always used to wonder what the unified > field charts were trying to say, it was clear that they > had an intention beyond simply informing the observer > what the TMO thought was going on. > > But of course, if you buy the mystical idea of consciousness > then the charts make sense, on their own terms. But until > nature demonstrates that it's something other than blind chance, > electromagnetism and entropy I'll be giving the charts a miss. > > > > 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. > > >
