The Best of Intentions

[Michael Bergman]

Hey One and All,

I just picked up "The Best Year of Your Life" today at the mall and I am
just loving it and so here is a little something I felt inspired to
write...I intend that is will be of some service :)

What is the intention of the Creator to create the creation? Think about
it, there must be an intention behind every single thing that is created.
What do you feel is the Creator?s intention of creating the opportunity for
knowledge to be created? Why would the Creator give the gift of
consciousness, the freedom of will of awareness to experience whatever any
portion of consciousness desired?

Is the intention of the Creator to know itself by creating a creation of
many individualized, self-aware portions of consciousness that seek to
become one whole? Is the intention of the Creator to have each portion of
consciousness serve every other portion of consciousness as itself? If you
were the Creator of that which we call NOW, what would be your intention of
creating an eternal present moment where desires can be experienced, where
feelings can be felt, where thoughts can be manifested, where dreams can be
lived, and where creations can be created?

The Creator desires our purified emotions for without feelings nothing is
real. Reality is a feeling of innocence; it is the fresh feeling and
pulsation of being alive. Reality is the feeling of consciousness, the
undistorted vibration of silent pure awareness of infinity itself. Creation
is a distillery where love and light are refined from every experience that
any portion of consciousness experiences. Can you tap into the original
intention of the Creator and make it your own?

Whether you are aware of it or not, there is an intention behind every
thought, word or deed that you choose to experience as a result of your
desires. The intention behind everything that you do is to feel a certain
way. That begs the question, ?How is it that you desire to feel?? The
desire to feel joy and to pursue happiness cannot be denied, we were created
as active portions of consciousness to distill the light of laughter and
bliss from every experience we have.

Let?s say that you intend and desire to have a family that lives happily
ever after in the future. The thought itself of having a family to call
your own makes you feel good. It is not really the family that you are
hoping for; however, but the feeling you intend a family to bring to you.
It is important to understand that it is never the sense of attainment of a
certain object of your desire that will bring you joy. It is always the
absence of the desire itself that clears a way for the presence of bliss to
shine forth.

Family is a feeling, it is the feeling of kinship and bonding and connection
and belonging. The feeling of family however can be experienced right here
and now whether or not you actually have one to call your own. Right now
you can feel connected to all that is, you can feel how you belong in this
universe on this earth at this time.

Imagine waking up to every moment with the intention for this very moment to
be the best moment of your life. That is what you want to feel and
experience isn?t it? Don?t you want this moment to be the best experience
you have ever had? Don?t you want to feel as close as you possibly can to
the undistorted feeling of unconditional love? Keep the intention going my
friends, keep thinking about what makes you feel good, and just imagine your
dream coming to life for in reality the best of intentions are for real.

in the feeling of family,
Mikey

[Ron Erickson]

Hi Michael,

Have you ever of term "successive approximation"? Essentially, it's a way to
find an item in an ordered set - for example, a set of integers. Suppose I am
trying to guess a number from 0 to 100. The integer is known to a computer
program but unknown to me - but I can ask the computer about a specific integer.
The computer can respond with 3 possible answers: correct, low or hi. So, if
guess 50, it might say 'low', meaning that the correct number is in the range
51..100, so I guess 75 and it says 'hi', then I guess 63, etc. I could finish
this, but I think you get the idea. Now suppose that the computer didn't really
know the "correct" number but just arbitrarily picked one that I assume is
correct. I can locate this
arbitrary number, but I won't know if it is correct. Now suppose that there is,
in fact, a "correct number" that could only be discovered by going through the
exercise of successive approximation many times over. In other words, the true
answer would only be known to a few wise gurus after years of exercise and
patient meditation.

So, what does this have to do with your message? If we assume that we know
truth "a priori", then chances are that we will never be able to find it.
Suppose the true integer in my example above is 49, but I trusted the computer,
which thought the true number was 51. So when I ask if it's 50, then the
computer will say 'low', and from then on I will only consider integers from 51
to 100 and I'll never reach 49. So, suppose our questions are not about number,
but rather about the nature of creation. If before we've even posed our first
question (to ourselves, to others, to "God"), we've already assumed that there
is a Creator, and that an event of creation
was necessary, that time exists and events occur canonically, we will not pose
the most fundamental and essential questions. I think it is very important to
examine our prejudices and be imaginative, for if we are making invalid
assumptions from the start, we have already excluded ourself from ever being
able to form questions that lead to truth.

Ron

[c bean]

Hi Ron,
An excellent point you make for people to ponder.
Allowing a source outside our relative self to sell us
the "truth" leads to entrapment. Each individualized
portion of the Unknowable Intelligent Infinity must
develop their own means of discernment.

Ron wrote:
> If we assume that we know truth "a priori", then
> chances are that we will never be able to find it.

Chill: There is much progress by gaining the ability
to admit to ourself and other selves that "I don't
know" even when our ego thinks it knows. In fact, the
normal process of "thinking" is flawed and requires a
significant reorientation to escape the limits of
"mechanical thought".

> So, suppose our questions are not about
> number, but rather about the nature of creation. If
> before we've even posed our first question (to
> ourselves, to others, to "God"), we've already
> assumed that there is a Creator, and that an event
> of creation
> was necessary, that time exists and events occur
> canonically, we will not pose the most fundamental
> and essential questions.

Chill: You could create a whole forum on this
statement alone, but this is that forum. The Grand
Scheme of Things from the Law of One study guide
provides an expansion of the concept of the "Creator".
Many fundamental and essential quest-ions fall away
with the explanations presented by Ra and key-words
emerge.

> I think it is very
> important to examine our prejudices and be
> imaginative, for if we are making invalid
> assumptions from the start, we have already excluded
> ourself from ever being able to form questions that
> lead to truth.

Chill: Oh so true. Everything needs to be reexamined
with a different set of tools. The word Truth is one
the first concepts that need redefining. If a
quest-ion has a true/false answer within 3D, then it
may waste energy, upset balance, reduce awareness,
etc. trying to seek an answer on this relative
density. Maybe thats why the gurus sit and smile at
all of our ramblings. A higher definition of Truth is
that which leads to awareness. With awareness, the
questions within 3D answer themselves without
"thinking".

Transitioning thinking from mechanical thought to
vertical thought (Vernon Howard) changes the whole
landscape of our experience. Questions long forgotten
get answered through unusual experiences,
synchronicities etc. Advocates of "No Thought" need to
be examined for the agendas(STS) behind promoting the
relinquishment of such a powerful tool of creation as
the balanced mind. Being a mind controlled slave is
not appealing in light of the potential for individual
creation in the Intelligent Infinity.

Chill





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates.
http://personals.yahoo.com

[Ron Erickson]

Hi Chill,

Chill: "Being a mind controlled slave is not appealing in light of the potential
for individual creation in the Intelligent Infinity."

Ron: It sounds like you share my perspective on the value of keeping an open
mind. I find that it helps me personally to read a broad range of books - about
science, philosophy, spirituality, art, cultural theory, etc. It is interesting
how we can study something like quantum theory and find something relevant to
spirituality. When I read about the "double-slit experiment", for example, how
light seems to start out as a probability wave that explores all possible paths
before forming a single photon which then goes through only a single slit. This
seems like a creative act, even though it concerns a single tiny particle. When
I say "creative", I just mean that a photon apparently comes about after
"intelligent consideration", and being transformed from something virtual into
something actual. My point is that we don't need to resort to blind faith when
there is so much in the world from which to base informed insight. I think this
is what you were also saying.

Ron


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[srachele2004]

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=-IPxpoNb1H7UR4XOch-kryvAoDcJZE9pwqYTQTb0PzHQDyyxU8xzOrZRg0gE9u_WSMiMn 9-d-iqsF603), "Ron Erickson" <ronerick@i...> wrote:
>
When I read about the "double-slit experiment", for example, how light
seems to start out as a probability wave that explores all possible
paths before forming a single photon which then goes through only a
single slit. This seems like a creative act, even though it concerns
a single tiny particle.

Sal: I think this cornerstone of quantum theory suggests that there is
no separation between consciousness and reality - and we can take this
one step further and say that "outer reality" is an extension of
consciousness. This seems to reflect the most basic premise of the Law
of One.

"Creation is an extension of the Mind of God."
--- from A Course In Miracles