Let's begin with the op being in the form of the inquiring mind resultant of notice, view or interpretation of world events, social tendencies and individual adaptations to social environs. Tantamount to the cause is the effect, the reality, the world in which we exist. To recognize is not to dwell but serves as the impetus towards remuneration and reconciliation that modifies the reality, not a fixed element. The paradoxical examples do not establish a paradigm from which to construct a universal truth. Again, this is a personal truth on your part, a sustained belief presented as a uniform consequence of what is apparently a phenomenon without any substantiated evidence of consistency. The reconciliation process does start with the individual and extends into society as a ramification of an ideal. Several of inquiries elicit verification of the recognition and interpretation of the whole of society and within the individual microcosms. A simple look at court shows such as Judge Judy and several others, demonstrates how petty arguments bi-pass amiable settlement in exchange for legal retribution as I pointed out in the op. "We" on the other hand do spend much time sorting out issues in an attempt to reach an accord without the use of heavy handed moderation. In here it isn't my way or the highway.
On Jul 30, 9:44 am, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > We have previously discussed the Paradox of the Pharisee, (you become > what you resist) or the phenomenon that by concentrating on a problem, > you bring it into your experience. I previously used the example of > Dr. Elisabeth Targ, who researched a cure for a particular brain > cancer, and then died of that cancer. Her father was the renown Dr. > Russell Targ, who researched remote viewing for many years. > > Now I ;ole to use the example of Dr. Gregg Braden who, for about five > years, showed an MRI of a woman with an inoperable bladder tumor who > had been given no hope by the medical doctors, and the MRI shows the > visible disappearance of the tumor while "practitioners" pray and > practice "energy healing." Here is the video of his presentation (two > parts)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-c_omerLJYQ > > Recently, Gregg Braden was also diagnosed with the very same tumor, > and shown his MRI with the tumor. I listened to him in a recent > interview, in all humility, come to grips with this paradox, and his > fear and mortality, and, by his own belief, create a subsequent > diagnosis and MRI that was clear of any tumor to the amazement of his > doctors. The interview that I listen to had time limited access, but > you may be able to find it elsewhere on the net. It is also > interesting to note that his modality of self healing way based on his > book "The Lost Mode of Prayer," mentioned in his paper that covers > many of your points in this thread "Humanity at > Crossroads,"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-c_omerLJYQ > > The point is, I don't sweep anything under the rug or look away from > any aspect of my experience. Nor do I obsess on the "good" or the > "bad" of it. I don't, because I have had enough examples of where > this might lead, that to this paradox (two poignant examples above.) > > I do understand that some people value the emotional charge that they > get by examining the worlds injustices and evils over and over. > Overcoming the need to condemn our experience can be very difficult if > it is deeply ingrained in our natures. There are those who think that > feeling injured or angered or outraged is better than feeling nothing > at all. But there is a price to pay for dwelling on the problems of > the world, and the price is, these problems will become a greater part > of your experience. > > Gregg Braden was not, in his mind, focusing on the bad or the tumor, > but the good or the healing. What it brought him was the opportunity > for the healing in his experience. This is the gift of the knowledge > of good and evil. The paradox, apparently, returns both to you if you > resist or value them. > > On Jul 30, 9:38 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > For clarification what I mean by "view" is "interpretation" so it is > > not an interpretation but a reality. > > I agree that I have excluded many other elements that present a more > > positive perspective but my intent is to examine the increased > > prevalence of indifference within society, the global society. Sure > > we could talk about all the good stuff but that would conversely > > exclude the negative aspect I'm trying to delve into. > > > I notice there is a resistance to exploring the negative aspects of > > the planet. I know it's a real bummer but it is there, it's not going > > away and if we don't decipher the underlying mystery of this > > increasing behavior the ramifications may be devastating. > > > We can avoid the reality that (any industry) is rife with malpractice > > by pointing out all the good things they do. It doesn't change the > > "reality". > > > As Orn points out, the schizophrenic tendency of society allows for > > the dirt to get swept under the carpet. Obama as President does not > > preclude the existence of the ongoing incidences of prejudice. Of > > course we could choose to ignore and bask in the beautiful scenery > > that we conjure up for ourselves. > > > On Jul 30, 8:01 am, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On one hand: "The view is not cynical or pessimistic but a view of the > > > "reality of > > > the world" > > > > On the other: The thread basis is that people are "not" interested in > > > reconciliation, "each of us" is not relevant. <<slip > > > > Seems contradictory to me, perhaps because I do not agree with your > > > tread basis as a view of what people in general are not interested in > > > and I certainly do not agree that each of us is not relevant. But I > > > can understand how these premises lead to the viewpoint presented. > > > > "My post is not a view, it's real time reality." Each of us, in our > > > view, chooses those parts of our experience on which to focus our > > > attention. In my opinion, your version of reality is incomplete, and > > > is missing many of the better aspects of life, a few that are noted in > > > my previous post. > > > > Just to clarify - as I see it, the non dual viewpoint includes but is > > > not limited to duality. That is to say, good and evil, or if your > > > prefer, the good stuff and bad stuff in life are surely there. > > > However, a non dual perspective does not include the emotional charge > > > of good and evil - has a different value system and often assigns > > > different meaning to the same events, based on a different set of > > > beliefs. I know that to you, what you see in your viewpoint is your > > > reality. The world, from my view, is very different, and I know that > > > we have already agreed to disagree on this, my friend. > > > > On Jul 30, 7:42 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 29, 7:39 am, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Reconciling the world. This is a very broad topic. Within it, you > > > > > bring up myriad other topics to support a cynical and pessimistic > > > > > view. I too have moments of feeling like this but, lucky for me, they > > > > > are brief and a broadening of view is where I find relief. > > > > > The view is not cynical or pessimistic but a view of the "reality of > > > > the world". Nothing was mentioned that doesn't exist and all is > > > > available in one form of news or another. >>Slip > > > > > > I think that for each of us, reconciling the world is the life long > > > > > learning of reconciling the tree of the knowledge of good and evil > > > > > (duality) with the tree of life (non dual). This one, age old, > > > > > change in perspective makes all the difference in reconciling the > > > > > world. It can also take a lifetime to understand and accomplish. > > > > > Sounds like personal experience being generalized for the global > > > > community. The thread basis is that people are "not" interested in > > > > reconciliation, "each of us" is not relevant. <<slip > > > > > The > > > > > > gift of duality< > > > > > Duality, good and evil is a "gift"? A gift from whom? > > > > How is evil a gift? So we must have pain to understand joy?<<slip > > > > > You use "we" and "us" quite often but I don't see the rest of the > > > > world thinking on the same lines. Everyone does not understand what > > > > you and I do. <<slip > > > > > I sure there are those who are exerting a great deal of effort but > > > > that is nothing new, the religious community has been for thousands of > > > > years attempting to get people to reconcile, love one another, "do > > > > unto others as....etc" , it's not working, it's dreamland fantasy > > > > world. Fact is, it's getting worse because most see the viability of > > > > the alternative. My post is not a view, it's real time reality. > > > > <<Slip > > > > > > On Jul 26, 6:22 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Are we losing the ability to reconcile in the world? Have we > > > > > > slipped > > > > > > so far from the understanding of brotherhood, of forgiveness that we > > > > > > have simply become a world of hatred and revenge. We are literally > > > > > > mortified by the specter of terrorism that is plaguing the world. > > > > > > The > > > > > > mindset of terrorism is anchored in the inability to allow > > > > > > forgiveness > > > > > > to override anger and instead caters to hatred, anger and violence > > > > > > towards those deemed the wrongdoers without regard for the harm > > > > > > imposed upon the innocent bystanders. > > > > > > Aside from that our culture seems entrenched in the business of > > > > > > revenge, we rather employ legal means to inflict suffering upon > > > > > > those > > > > > > who we think have done us wrong before we would sit down directly > > > > > > and > > > > > > discuss the problems. Politics seems to be leaning more toward > > > > > > instilling anger and fears among us which leads to a polarization of > > > > > > society while most media seem devoted to divisive and anger driven > > > > > > reporting with a general attitude of who is to blame. > > > > > > Can we ever stop sending messages attached to missiles, bombs and > > > > > > bullets? Our attempts to establish peaceful means of resolution > > > > > > have > > > > > > failed miserably because there is never a general consensus on any > > > > > > issue. We sanction and punish to no end in order to force change > > > > > > but > > > > > > to no avail. People are at war in every quadrant of the planet > > > > > > while > > > > > > new agitations are festering in the background waiting to emerge as > > > > > > full scale skirmishes. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
