Tag Archives: Healings

Hand patterns

To be left-or right -handed has to do with inner mechanisms and brain patterns that come first, before the motions of the hands. Characteristically I operated in certain manners that resulted in the primary use of either hand.

hi676ri

The ego is not the most powerful or the most knowledgeable portion of the self. It is simply a well-specialize part of the personality, fully equipped to operate under certain circumstances. When those conditions no longer exist [after “death”], then other layers of the self take over the dominant position, and the personality realigns its psychological components. The ego does not disappear, however; it merely takes a back seat in some respects, as our own subconscious does during physical existence. The ego is under the control of what may loosely be called “the inner self.” The survival or nonphysical personality has somewhat the same relationship to the ego as the dreaming personality has to it in physical life.

h7u899m

When communication takes place between a survival personality and one who exists within the physical system, this involves a reshuffling on the part of the survival personality, where the ego is momentarily given greater reign. If this was not done, then in most cases communication would not be possible, just because the survival personality would have such difficulty impressing the personality who was still ego-oriented within the physical system.

d3

The nonphysical personality does not think of words, but experiences concepts in a much more direct manner. This sort of thing simply could not be understood by the physically focused individual. The survival personality’s inner self gives this reassembled ego ideas in the same way that, often, the subconscious gives the ego concepts in physical existence. This reassembled ego then attempts to perceive these insights in terms of sense perceptions, which are sent to the physical individual at the other end. Sometimes the communications are made directly, though they must be sifted through the subconscious of the one who is physical. When that person is trained along these lines, he or she helps in this process, and psychological framework, like a bridge, is erected that serves to connect the two personalities.

The locations that appear to us in dreams

It is true that dream locations do not exist within our heads in the same way the physical streets exist within the place of cities. While we are within the context of a dream, however, the location appears to be immediate. In dreams we may walk down avenues which do not exist in physical terms. We receive data we would call sensual if we were awake. We hear, touch, taste, smell, and operate in a manner that we would call physical if we were awake. We walk, talk, act, work, play, while our actual bodies are at rest.

,fhj,fgu,

I can find any Main Street at any time I choose: for all practical purposes it is a permanent feature of any city. But I cannot return to a dream location anytime I choose. Can we say, then that dream locations are different from physical places in that we cannot return to them? Not quite, since in recurring dreams many of us do visit the same streets and houses with which we have become familiar in other dreams. If we cannot find dream locations when we are in the waking state, neither can we find physical locations when we are dreaming. There is good reason to suppose that we can return to various dream locations simply by suggesting we will do so before we go to sleep. So the dream world may possess an organized structure also, just as the physical world does, and one in which we all know our way very well–while we are sleeping.

fwecfqee

Such matters may at first seem far divorced from a discussion of the so-called spirit world. However, perhaps you can now see that we are much more than creatures composed of physical matter. Our intimate direct experience transcends physical reality as we know it. We are a mixture of corporeal substance and something else that we can only approach through subjective experience, a something that makes us what we are, and without which consciousness would be meaningless.

g764j

It makes no difference what we call this portion of our personalities, spirit, or soul, or mind. The point is that the most vital aspects of the self are not physically materialized.

jeduf

It is true, however, that clues to the existence of this portion of the human personality can be found in physical matter. Our emotions can be tampered with through the addition or subtraction of chemicals and hormones. To some extent our personalities can be manipulated. Even a subtle alteration in physical make-up will effect a change in our inner selves. But the fact remains that very significant experiences upon which our consciousness and identities depend are not physical in the usual terms.

hdjg

If this reality of ourselves is not contained within matter but only connected to it, then it is quite legitimate to say that we operate and exist in both physical and non-physical dimensions. At times we are more closely allied with the corporeal universe than at other times. In dreams, for example, we are less closely bound to the physical world than we are in the waking state. Our sensual apparatus is turned down low to the idling stage. We are maintained within the physical universe, but we limit our operations within it. It becomes as unreal to us as the dream state becomes when we are awake.

nunen

It is at least conceivable that the I of our dreams is but another aspect of our own identity; an I that continues now to exist as itself despite the ego’s manipulation of the physical universe; and an that will continue to exist after the alliance with physical matter is finished.

pt7rlftl

Consciousness is precisely that part of ourselves which does not exist as an object within the physical universe, and it is composed of those thoughts and emotions and dreams in which we realize ourselves most intimately.

 

Reality seems to have its being in some medium other than flesh and bone.

As a species we are composed of organic tissue, but none of us would deny the reality of our thoughts, for example, yet a thought is not a physical object like a glass that we can hold in our hands. When we try to examine a thought, we instantly change it. The original thought vanishes, to be replaced by a new one. We can only know what a thought is through our own inner experience.

ee3e3rf

Neither would we deny the validity of psychological insights or emotions or dreams. These are in no way concrete objects, yet they form an important part of our own consciousness. Such subjective experiences seem to be connected with physical matter, but they do not seem to be literally contained within it.tnsb

We say dreams exist “in our heads.” but certainly dreams are not in our heads in the same manner that physical tissue and blood vessels and bones are in our heads. A surgeon can probe into the brain tissue with a scalpel, but no physical examination or operation will disclose s dream or a thought or a psychological experience. No scalpel can cut into a dream as it can pierce the visible fibers inside our bony skulls. Then what do we actually mean when we assume that dreams and thoughts are inside our heads?

pyhlyt8o

The idea is based on the assumption that the human personality is limited by physical matter and held in bounds by the physical self. Therefore, anything belonging to the personality would have to exist within the physical organism. If we are purely physical creatures, then, we would still have to admit that we contained some things that were not physical; otherwise these thoughts and dreams inside of us would have to be physical also, and they are not.

r,md

Scientists have theorized that consciousness may be the result of the ways in which the body operates. Even if this were the whole story, and I do not believe it is, then we would still have to admit that part of our reality was not physical, but was born out of physical matter and could not be seen and touched. Nevertheless, because of this attitude we have the idea that reality is determined by physical existence only. (We consider valid only those things which can be judged so by the physical senses.)

ouut

It seems to make no difference that physicists have discovered that the senses themselves distort reality, and that we merely create patterns out of atoms and molecules, perceive these as objects and give them names. In general we still act as of physical reality were the only standard by which to measure experience.

ou6y

We can hardly refer to something which affects us deeply as unreal. We can say that an experience exists in some perspectives and not in others. Many dreams are as vivid as any waking experience, for example, and have as great an effect upon our personalities. The dream may not have a physical reality but it certainly has a psychological reality.

 

The electrical universe is far different from our idea of it.

Electricity as we perceive it within the physical system is merely like an echo emanation, or a sort of shadow image of these infinite varieties of pulsations. These pulsations give reality and actuality to many phenomena with which we are familiar, but which do not appear as tangible objects within our physical system.

miiuy

We have seen that all experiences is retained in electrically coded data within the cells, and the material of the cells forms about this coded experience. The ego as it continues to exist gradually builds up an electrical reality of its own as its experiences form into coded data within the cells.

m55

At any given point the ego is complete within electrical reality, as it is psychologically complete within the physical system. This includes, of course, the retention of its dreams as well as the retention of purely physical data.

mdf

The electrical system possesses many dimensions of reality that cannot be perceived within the physical system. So far our scientists have only been able to study electricity by observing the projections of it that are perceivable within their frames of reference. As their physical instruments become more sophisticated, they will be able to glimpse more of this reality. But since they will not be able to explain it within their known systems of references, many curious and distorted explanations of reported phenomena will be given.

mmhjdsj

It is most difficult to hint at the myriad complexity and dimension of the electrical actuality as it exists, when we consider that each of our own thoughts is composed of a unique intensity of impulse, shared by nothing else, and that this same may be said for every dream that you will have in our lifetime; and that all this experience is gathered together in particular ranges of intensities, again completely unique, codified; and this, the summation of all that you are, exists in one minute range or band of intensities. See how difficult it is to explain?

muy

All human beings are also in the same manner electrically composed and everything else, with few exceptions, within the physical field whether or not it exists within physical matter. Our physical filed is contained within its own unique range of intensities, a tiny band of electrical impulses a million times smaller than any one note picked out at random from the entire mass of musical composition that has been written or ever will be written. Yet as we know this is not not meant to give us a sense of futility, for uniqueness brings its own responsibility.

mmko

All motion is mental psychological motion, and all mental and psychological motion has electrical reality. The inner self moves by changing or moving through intensities from our physical field. Each new psychological experience opens up a new pulsation intensity, and gives greater actuality within the electrical system gives the result of moving through time within the physical system.

“Naive Realism” with out-of-body travel (or “projection”)

I have read nothing about the two together, which surely be some very interesting material on such a possible relationship. Paradoxically, our perceptions while out-of-body can be more tenuously connected to temporal reality than usual, yet more acute at the same time. However, our use if naive realism must often govern what we allow ourselves to experience while consciousness is separated from the body. I also think some out-of-body travels, apparently to “alien” nonphysical realities, may actually be based instead upon interior bodily states or events. But there are times when the projecting consciousness, free of frameworks like naive realism, at least approaches truly different realities, or probabilities.

Evolutionary Thinking is challenged not only by questions of proteins synthesis, and energy/entropy

Equally insistent are the puzzles posed by the missing intermediate forms in the fossil record: Where are all the remnants of those creatures that linked birds, reptiles, cats, monkeys, and human beings? The hypothetical evolutionary tree of life demands that such in-between forms existed; it seems that by now paleontologists should have unearthed enough signs of them to make at least a modest case for their belief systems; the lack of scientific evidence is embarrassing. Since  my mind works that way, I could make minutely detailed drawings of a graduated series of such entities (gradualism being a basic premise in Charles Darwin’s theory), but would the creatures shown have been viable? Could they actually have existed for the necessary millennia while evolving into the species whose fossil remains have been discovered, or that live today? Evolutionists are serving goodly portions or speculation along with inadequate theory–or, really, hypothesis.

o7tk

It is truer to say that heredity operates from the future backward into the past, than it is to say that it operates from the past into the present. Neither statement would be precisely correct in any case, because our present is a poised balance affected as much by the probable future as the probable past.

ewwcf

In our terms–the phrase is necessary–the moment point, the present, is the point of interaction between all existences and reality. All probabilities flow through it, though one of our moment points may be experienced as centuries, or as a breath, in other probable realities of which we are a part.

o4rmrtty

All kinds of time–backward and forward–emerge from the basic unpredictable nature of consciousness, and are due to’series’ of significances.

A true Darwinist would find the statement “survival of the fittest,” to be anathema.

Psychic and religious ideas, then, despite many drawbacks, are far more important in terms of ‘evolution’ than is recognized. And I am telling you that so-called evolution and religion are closely connected. Consciousness always creates form, and not the other way around.

a734

We are biologically connected, chemically connected with the Earth that we know. How is it that as living creatures we’re made up of ingredients–atoms of iron, molecules of water, for instance–from a supposedly dead world? In the scientific view we’re utterly dependent upon that contradictory situation. No one denies the amazing structure or design of our physical universe, from the scale of subatomic particles on “up” (regardless of what cosmological theory is used to explain the universe’s  beginning). The study of design as one of the links between “living” and “nonliving” systems would certainly be a difficult challenge–but a most rewarding one, I think–for science. I have little idea of how the work would be carried out. Evidently it would lead from biology through microbiology to physics with, ultimately, a search that at  least approached electromagnetic energy units and units of consciousness. Both classes of “particles” are in actuality nonphysical; as best words can note, they have their realities on scales so minute that we cannot hope to detect then through our present technology.

ath5

Yet here we run into irony and paradox: Any scientist who considered the existence of electromagnetic energy units and units of consciousness would be called a heretic by his more conventional colleagues, for he would be acknowledging the possibility that all matter, being made up of such conscious entities, was living. From that viewpoint, at least, there would be no link through design to be discovered.

as6

I think it very interesting and revealing that several millennia before Darwin, man himself began playing the role of a designer within the framework of nature, through his selective breeding of animals and his hybridization of plants. These activities certainly represent evolution through conscious intent, guided by the same creature who insists that no sort of consciousness could have been responsible for the origin or development of “life,” let alone the “dead” matter of his/her planet. Not only that: We read that even now in his/her laboratories man or woman is trying hard to create some of that life itself. This is always done, of course, with the idea that the right combination of simple ingredients (water, methane, ammonia, ethanol.) in the test tube, stimulated by the right kind of energy under just the right conditions, will automatically  produce life. It’s confidently predicted that eventually at least one such experiment will succeed. I have yet to see in those accounts anything about the role consciousness will play in this truly miraculous conversion of dead matter into that of living. Perhaps those involved in the experiments fear that the idea of consciousness will impugn the scientific “purity” of their work.

 

Souls in terms of Value Fulfillment to Cellular Growth in Physical Reality.

According to my interpretation of this sentence, it stops short of telling us that in our reality all species–man, animals, and plant life (and viruses and bacteria too, for that matter)–developed from a single primordial living source. Evolutionary theory maintains that such a source spontaneously came into being, riding upon various protein molecules (or certain other kinds of molecules) that had themselves chemically–and miraculously–evolved out of nonliving matter, then demonstrated the ability to duplicate themselves.

pro,

Proteins, for instance, are very complex chains of amino acids, and consist of nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, carbon, and or certain other elements. They exist in great variety in all animal and vegetable matter; in the body each protein supports a very definite function. But the the view that all life had a common origin, that by pure chance it originated on the earth–just once–without the aid of God, or any sort of designer, is today accepted by most scientist in biology and related disciplines. Such thinking stems from the work done in the 19th century by the English naturalist Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace.

p897o

I believe that at most the “facts of evolution” make up a working hypothesis–or unproven proposition–only, for many of evolution’s tenets, especially those involving energy/entropy are open to serious challenge. There’s plenty of evidence around for changes occurring within species, but the “upward” transmission of one species into another has not been scientifically proven from the index fossil record, nor has it been experimentally verified. The arguments about evolution can get very technical.

In science and religion we know little about our world and universe

…Its origins, and its amazing variety of forms, both “living” and “nonliving.” Our own limitations may have something to do with our attitudes. Be careful about believing science or religion when either one tells us it can explain our world, for each of those disciplines ignores too much. No matter what the source of this camouflage reality may be, our conscious lack of knowledge and understanding as we manipulate within it, through naive realism or any other system of belief or perception, ought to make us humble indeed; all arrogance should be transcended as we become more and more aware of the limitless beauty, complexity, and mystery that surrounds us, and of which we are a part. I don’t think it all came through chance. The mind can ask too many questions to be satisfied with mechanistic explanations, and nurturing that characteristic of dissatisfaction alone may be one of the most valuable contributions.

o8854

To me, even “ordinary” linear knowledge as it accumulates through the next century or two, not to mention over longer spans of time, is certain to severely modify or make obsolete many concepts about origins and evolution that today are dispensed by those in authority–and which most people accept unthinkingly.

or4imr

For some years now, organized religion as a whole has been suffering from loss of faith and members, stripped of its mysteries by science, which, with the best of intentions, offer in religion’s place a secular humanism–the belief that one doesn’t need blind faith in a god in order to be morally concerned for the common welfare; paradoxically, however, this concern is most of the time expressed in religious terms, or with religious feeling. Yet science too has experienced many failures in theory and technology, and knows a new humility; at least partly because of these failures, anti-intellectualism has grown noticeably in recent years. How technology and religion have found a way to coexist, helping each other and others to grow and develop. Science frequently tries to explain the gaps that religion has been unable to explain, and religion has done so in kind of science. This tandem has maintained both parts of the spectrum from the smallest atom to the biggest technology companies.

omermrdu5

I certainly am not turned on to realize that a major religion, for instance, teaches the “facts” of man’s basically corrupt and sinful nature; surely a religion in the best sense can offer beliefs superior to those! At the same time, I take note of the latest efforts of biological researchers to explain how, millions of years ago, a primitive DNA molecule could begin to manufacture the protein upon which life “rides,” and thus get around the contradiction: What made the protein that sustains the processes of life, before that life was present to make the protein? The scientist involved hope the new hypothesis will survive further tests and become “fact,” thus giving clues to the riddles of origins and evolution. How does one deal with new facts that undermine old facts, in whatever field of endeavor? Do we say that reality has changed? Upon examination, facts give.

We move into new areas of the self all of the time

The species is now entering such a phase, a period in which it will come more into its own. Mankind will be entering its own new house, then–but the physical changes will be the results of interior ones and alterations in main lines of probabilities.

Christian theology sees the end of the world in certain terms with a grand God coming to reward the good and to punish the wicked. That system of belief allows for no other probability. Some see the end of the world coming as a greater disaster, or envision man finally ruining the planet. Others see periods of peace and advance–and each probability will happen “somewhere.” However, many, or their offspring will be involved in a new dimension of self-hood in which consciousness is fully explored and the potentials of the soul uncovered, at least to some extent.

imaxxmm

Human capabilities will be seen as what they are, and a great new period of development will occur, in which all concepts of self-hood and reality will be literally seen as “primitive superstition.” The species will actually move into a new kind of self-hood.

Theories of probabilities will be seen as practical, workable, psychological facts, giving leeway and freedom to the individual, who will no longer feel at the mercy of external events–but will realize instead that he or she is their initiator.

aweff

Now, we squeeze the great fruit of our self-hood into a tiny uneasy pulp, unaware of the sweetness of its juices or the variety of its seasons. We look at the outsides of ourselves, as if a peach were aware only of its skin. In the reality I foresee, people will become familiar with far greater aspects of themselves, and bring these into actualization. They will be in touch with their own decisions as they make them.

If they become ill, they will do so knowing they choose the condition in order to emphasize certain areas of development, or to minimize mothers. They will be aware of their options, consciously. The great strength and resiliency of the body will be much better understood; not because medical science makes spectacular discoveries–though it will–but because the mind’s alliance with the body will be seen more clearly.

3ttgf3

In this probability of which I speak, the species will begin to encounter the great challenge inherent in fulfilling the vast untouched potential of the human body and mind. In that probable reality, to which each of us belong to some extent, each persona will recognize his or her inherent power of action and decision, and feel an individual sense of belonging with the physical world that springs up in response to individual desire and belief.

 

The open flame, the source of cave heat, is evocative, and represents a closeness with the origins of light and life.

An open fire elicits certain responses from the cells that for instance, a furnace does not. the effect of the light plus the warmth on the skin is extremely healing. People sit by a fireplace in wintertime because it is unconsciously recognized that recuperative and therapeutic results occur. Simply put, the cells respond to fire-light in somewhat the same manner that flowers do to sunlight. The stimulation is much more than skin deep, however, and an open fire is cleansing. It even helps clear the blood.

f7n8h

Cavemen recognized this. I am not suggesting that we use our fireplaces instead of the furnace. I am saying that in wintertime there are definite health-value effects to be felt when we sit in front of an open fire. Two evenings a week would be quite effective.

mmmm8r

The proximity of so many trees also has considerable health value, and to those doing psychic or other creative work the effects are particularly conducive to a peaceful stat of mind. trees are great users and yet conservators of energy, and they automatically provide much vitality to areas in which they are plentiful. This is physically obvious in scientific terms. Besides that, however, the consciousnesses of trees are remarkably kind and enduring.

1wsxw

We think of dogs as friends of man, and we personify gods inhuman terms. We think of them sometimes as guardians. In those terms, now, trees are also guardians. They are attached to the people they know. You cannot put a leash on them and walk them around the block, yet trees form a protective barrier about, say, a home or a neighborhood. They are actively concerned. They have personalities–certainly to the same extent that dogs do, yet of an entirely different nature. They respond to us. The trees in a neighborhood are particularly friendly, strong, and protective, and they will help renew our energies.

cr66h

The air may be drier in a certain way. Ocean air is wet but it is healthy. River air is wet, but it may be healthy or unhealthy, according to the nature of the river, the land, and the attitude of the people. After a flood, the river air is felt to be a threat, and to many it is therefore unhealthy. Why do some people, after being flooded in one location, then move to another equally threatening environment.