God interacting with humans.

[BigSkyDiamond]

i love how one teacher describes it.*  When the game of chess was invented with its rules, instantly every possible chess game was also created and "exists" based on the rules of chess.  So when someone is playing a chess game, no matter what moves they make, no matter how brilliant they are, that chess game already exists. 

 

Same thing for the universe and everything in it.  When the universe and everything in it was created, instantly every possible scenario simultaneously also came into existence.  So no matter what lifetime or life form or timeline we visit, it already exists.  It is very alluring and yes we have free will to stay as long as we want and play out as many of those scenarios that entice us.

 

we also have free will to leave.  because no matter how much someone loves playing chess or is entieced by the adventures of the universe we have free will to say enough is enough and exit. They get tired of chess and say get me out of here.

 

* [The teacher is Joachim Wolffram, five very slim paperback books in the series Althar the Crystal Dragon]

Edited Thursday at 03:26 AM by BigSkyDiamond

[BigSkyDiamond]

21 hours ago, Lairg said:

That is more or less my experience - except that Beingness must change otherwise there would be no point in causing Existence

 

 

see now this trips me up.  Because change is a function of time, and there is no-time at the level of Beingness.  Also if Beingness is  whole perfect and complete, then change indicates alteration, something has been added or removed.  Which means it was not whole perfect and complete.

 

it gets tricky because for me the characteristics have to not contradict each other. How do you reconcile "no time" with "change" at the level of Beingness?  Not sure if in in your frame of reference it contains "whole perfect and complete" as a characteristic.  

 

and there is still too the discussion of what is the point in causing Existence.  what do you see for that?  this ties in to characteristics of Beingness also.  I am always interested to hear how people see that in different frameworks. 

 

thanks Lairg for the good conversation

[Surya]

Bg. 3.22

न मे पार्थास्ति कर्तव्यं त्रिषु लोकेषु किञ्चन ।
नानवाप्त‍मवाप्त‍व्यं वर्त एव च कर्मणि ॥ २२ ॥

na me pārthāsti kartavyaṁ
triṣu lokeṣu kiñcana
nānavāptam avāptavyaṁ
varta eva ca karmaṇi

Synonyms

na — not; me — Mine; pārtha — O son of Pṛthā; asti — there is; kartavyam — prescribed duty; triṣu — in the three; lokeṣu — planetary systems; kiñcana — any; na — nothing; anavāptam — wanted; avāptavyam — to be gained; varte — I am engaged; eva — certainly; ca — also; karmaṇi — in prescribed duty.

Translation

O son of Pṛthā, there is no work prescribed for Me within all the three planetary systems. Nor am I in want of anything, nor have I a need to obtain anything – and yet I am engaged in prescribed duties.

Purport

The Supreme Personality of Godhead is described in the Vedic literatures as follows:

tam īśvarāṇāṁ paramaṁ maheśvaraṁ
taṁ devatānāṁ paramaṁ ca daivatam
patiṁ patīnāṁ paramaṁ parastād
vidāma devaṁ bhuvaneśam īḍyam

na tasya kāryaṁ karaṇaṁ ca vidyate
na tat-samaś cābhyadhikaś ca dṛśyate
parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate
svābhāvikī jñāna-bala-kriyā ca

“The Supreme Lord is the controller of all other controllers, and He is the greatest of all the diverse planetary leaders. Everyone is under His control. All entities are delegated with particular power only by the Supreme Lord; they are not supreme themselves. He is also worshipable by all demigods and is the supreme director of all directors. Therefore, He is transcendental to all kinds of material leaders and controllers and is worshipable by all. There is no one greater than Him, and He is the supreme cause of all causes.

“He does not possess a bodily form like that of an ordinary living entity. There is no difference between His body and His soul. He is absolute. All His senses are transcendental. Any one of His senses can perform the action of any other sense. Therefore, no one is greater than Him or equal to Him. His potencies are multifarious, and thus His deeds are automatically performed as a natural sequence.” (Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad 6.7–8)

Since everything is in full opulence in the Personality of Godhead and is existing in full truth, there is no duty for the Supreme Personality of Godhead to perform. One who must receive the results of work has some designated duty, but one who has nothing to achieve within the three planetary systems certainly has no duty. And yet Lord Kṛṣṇa is engaged on the Battlefield of Kurukṣetra as the leader of the kṣatriyasbecause the kṣatriyas are duty-bound to give protection to the distressed. Although He is above all the regulations of the revealed scriptures, He does not do anything that violates the revealed scriptures.
 

Bg. 3.23

यदि ह्यहं न वर्तेयं जातु कर्मण्यतन्द्रितः ।
मम वर्त्मानुवर्तन्ते मनुष्याः पार्थ सर्वशः ॥ २३ ॥

yadi hy ahaṁ na varteyaṁ
jātu karmaṇy atandritaḥ
mama vartmānuvartante
manuṣyāḥ pārtha sarvaśaḥ

Synonyms

yadi — if; hi — certainly; aham — I; na — do not; varteyam — thus engage; jātu — ever; karmaṇi — in the performance of prescribed duties; atandritaḥ — with great care; mama — My; vartma — path; anuvartante — would follow; manuṣyāḥ— all men; pārtha — O son of Pṛthā; sarvaśaḥ — in all respects.

Translation

For if I ever failed to engage in carefully performing prescribed duties, O Pārtha, certainly all men would follow My path.

Purport

In order to keep the balance of social tranquillity for progress in spiritual life, there are traditional family usages meant for every civilized man. Although such rules and regulations are for the conditioned souls and not Lord Kṛṣṇa, because He descended to establish the principles of religion He followed the prescribed rules. Otherwise, common men would follow in His footsteps, because He is the greatest authority. From the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is understood that Lord Kṛṣṇa was performing all the religious duties at home and out of home, as required of a householder.
 

 

 

 

My question to you is, why would God (in the highest sense of that word), who is complete, feel the want to restore dharma?

[Lairg]

45 minutes ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

for me the characteristics have to not contradict each other. How do you reconcile "no time" with "change" at the level of Beingness? 

 

It may be better to consider all time moments as occurring in parallel.  Thus its full life span is visible to the non-time entity and therefore it can adjust its youthful actions while experiencing its mature actions.   

 

When humans move their consciousness up and down this 3D timeline they can do something similar - at least at the level of relationships. 

 

It may be that technology is required for physical movement in time  - for example the Montauk Chair.

 

In the case of Beingness it seems that It finds a variety of Existential experiences useful.  Hence it generates universes and intelligences apparently without judgements such as good and evil.   The intent behind Existence seems to be Beingness experiencing Itself more fully.

 

That of course is a primitive account.  It may be that human logic works best with the densest levels of Existence and quite fails in dealing with Beingness

 

I was taught geometry long ago:   Specify the postulates (assumptions) and apply logic.   It seems that most discussion occurs without specifying the assumptions

 

https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Geometry/Five_Postulates_of_Euclidean_Geometry 

 

 

 

[BigSkyDiamond]

1 hour ago, Lairg said:

  It may be that human logic works best with the densest levels of Existence and quite fails in dealing with Beingness.     

 

yes that's for sure.  excellent point, i agree.

"For My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways My ways," says the Lord.   Or says the Beingness.

 

 

1 hour ago, Lairg said:

It may be better to consider all time moments as occurring in parallel.  Thus its full life span is visible to the non-time entity and therefore it can adjust its youthful actions while experiencing its mature actions.   When humans move their consciousness up and down this 3D timeline they can do something similar - at least at the level of relationships. 

 

bold above, yes i totally agree.  our "future" self can visit our "past" self and provide advice, guidance, input, suggestions.  i remember in one of the classes i took we did a group exercise where we took the form of dragons and flew as a group of dragons to take a look at our younger self.  Then the teacher described how when he was in his 30s I think it was, he was out jogging, a regular guy with a regular business, he practiced Zen and was interested in that but nothing bizarre or crazy or out of the ordinary.  When he saw a swarm of dragons.  He thought it was strange.   He set it aside (put it in quarantine he calls it) but did not discount it or deny it.  (Eventually dragon made more appearances, he started having conversations with a particular dragon, and wrote down what the dragon was telling  him, for his own personal use and so he could remember,  which turned into the first book, then the books led to the workshops etc.  The dragon helps teach the class, and it was the dragon narrating and leading us through the exercise. The material in the books and workshops is from the dragon and other beings that present as guests from time to time.)

 

Back to the class we were taking.  The point of the exercise was that the swarm of dragons where we were visiting our younger self  could be the swarm of dragons the teacher saw that time 10 years earlier when he first saw dragons at all.  That time is not fixed or linear.  That we can be in more than place and more than one time and drop in freely.  I was still sitting physically in my chair at the workshop (with my eyes closed) while also flying as a dragon in a swarm which the teacher saw when he was jogging.  And since it was a remote workshop, we were spread across eight or nine different countries around the world (the teacher is in Germany, I am in USA)

 

Edited Thursday at 06:10 AM by BigSkyDiamond

[Nungali]

2 hours ago, Surya said:

Bg. 3.22

न मे पार्थास्ति कर्तव्यं त्रिषु लोकेषु किञ्चन ।
नानवाप्त‍मवाप्त‍व्यं वर्त एव च कर्मणि ॥ २२ ॥

na me pārthāsti kartavyaṁ
triṣu lokeṣu kiñcana
nānavāptam avāptavyaṁ
varta eva ca karmaṇi

Synonyms

na — not; me — Mine; pārtha — O son of Pṛthā; asti — there is; kartavyam — prescribed duty; triṣu — in the three; lokeṣu — planetary systems; kiñcana — any; na — nothing; anavāptam — wanted; avāptavyam — to be gained; varte — I am engaged; eva — certainly; ca — also; karmaṇi — in prescribed duty.

Translation

O son of Pṛthā, there is no work prescribed for Me within all the three planetary systems. Nor am I in want of anything, nor have I a need to obtain anything – and yet I am engaged in prescribed duties.

Purport

The Supreme Personality of Godhead is described in the Vedic literatures as follows:

tam īśvarāṇāṁ paramaṁ maheśvaraṁ
taṁ devatānāṁ paramaṁ ca daivatam
patiṁ patīnāṁ paramaṁ parastād
vidāma devaṁ bhuvaneśam īḍyam

na tasya kāryaṁ karaṇaṁ ca vidyate
na tat-samaś cābhyadhikaś ca dṛśyate
parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate
svābhāvikī jñāna-bala-kriyā ca

“The Supreme Lord is the controller of all other controllers, and He is the greatest of all the diverse planetary leaders. Everyone is under His control. All entities are delegated with particular power only by the Supreme Lord; they are not supreme themselves. He is also worshipable by all demigods and is the supreme director of all directors. Therefore, He is transcendental to all kinds of material leaders and controllers and is worshipable by all. There is no one greater than Him, and He is the supreme cause of all causes.

“He does not possess a bodily form like that of an ordinary living entity. There is no difference between His body and His soul. He is absolute. All His senses are transcendental. Any one of His senses can perform the action of any other sense. Therefore, no one is greater than Him or equal to Him. His potencies are multifarious, and thus His deeds are automatically performed as a natural sequence.” (Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad 6.7–8)

Since everything is in full opulence in the Personality of Godhead and is existing in full truth, there is no duty for the Supreme Personality of Godhead to perform. One who must receive the results of work has some designated duty, but one who has nothing to achieve within the three planetary systems certainly has no duty. And yet Lord Kṛṣṇa is engaged on the Battlefield of Kurukṣetra as the leader of the kṣatriyasbecause the kṣatriyas are duty-bound to give protection to the distressed. Although He is above all the regulations of the revealed scriptures, He does not do anything that violates the revealed scriptures.
 

Bg. 3.23

यदि ह्यहं न वर्तेयं जातु कर्मण्यतन्द्रितः ।
मम वर्त्मानुवर्तन्ते मनुष्याः पार्थ सर्वशः ॥ २३ ॥

yadi hy ahaṁ na varteyaṁ
jātu karmaṇy atandritaḥ
mama vartmānuvartante
manuṣyāḥ pārtha sarvaśaḥ

Synonyms

yadi — if; hi — certainly; aham — I; na — do not; varteyam — thus engage; jātu — ever; karmaṇi — in the performance of prescribed duties; atandritaḥ — with great care; mama — My; vartma — path; anuvartante — would follow; manuṣyāḥ— all men; pārtha — O son of Pṛthā; sarvaśaḥ — in all respects.

Translation

For if I ever failed to engage in carefully performing prescribed duties, O Pārtha, certainly all men would follow My path.

Purport

In order to keep the balance of social tranquillity for progress in spiritual life, there are traditional family usages meant for every civilized man. Although such rules and regulations are for the conditioned souls and not Lord Kṛṣṇa, because He descended to establish the principles of religion He followed the prescribed rules. Otherwise, common men would follow in His footsteps, because He is the greatest authority. From the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is understood that Lord Kṛṣṇa was performing all the religious duties at home and out of home, as required of a householder.
 

 

 

 

My question to you is, why would God (in the highest sense of that word), who is complete, feel the want to restore dharma?

 

 

I think you can 'handle' the answer to this      

 

First 'dharma'  definition  -   and due to the   above  references ;  "  (in Indian religion) the eternal and inherent nature of reality, regarded in Hinduism as a cosmic law underlying right behaviour and social order. " 

 

yeah ?  

 

The simple answer is ....   are you SURE they are directives from  'God in the highest sense of the word  '  ? 

 

As a student of religions and divinity , it reads pretty clearly  to me. Try   focusing  on the last  6 words of the  definition . 

 

Now, we know 'right behavior and social order '  are different in  different cultures and different religions .  It has even been postulated by one of the greatest and longest running civilizations  that  right behavior and social order 'down here ' are the same as 'cosmic law'   ( Maat - Ancient Egypt ) .  Let's not forget the King back then was considered an incarnation of 'God ' , so  ...

 

Its about the importance of following a human social law system ... remembering  that back then when these religions were formed ,  the understanding  of physical cosmology   was somewhat limited    and its also based on a cosmological geocentric model . 

 

You are smart enough to figure out the rest  .   That's all I will say , as some seem to be getting offended regarding my observations that have come from a lifetime of eclectic study  in the field . 

 

 But great and valid question ....  I am sure a teacher in the Upanishads tradition will give you a different answer though . 

[BigSkyDiamond]

 

1 hour ago, Lairg said:

The intent behind Existence seems to be Beingness experiencing Itself more fully.

 

that certainly makes sense.  it reminds me in art, of "process not product."  The process of creating art that drives the artist not the final product.  I remember reading that our creativitiy IS our Divinitiy.

 

1 hour ago, Lairg said:

I was taught geometry long ago:   Specify the postulates (assumptions) and apply logic.   It seems that most discussion occurs without specifying the assumptions

 

geometry is the best. in my favorite book on making quilts the author describes herself as the kid in school who could not draw horses but when she got to geometry and they passed out the graph paper, she fell in love with it and never stopped (me too).  her techniques are brilliant and one of the best parts about designing and making quilts is the fun of playing with graph paper and colored pencils.  (Fabric is fun too but there is always that nagging worry about spending too much money buying too much fabric.)

Edited Thursday at 06:33 AM by BigSkyDiamond

[Lairg]

4 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

geometry is the best.

 

Many years ago on the west coast of Scotland after 9pm - watching the sun set - I saw that the sun had flat sides.   After some minutes I saw the sun as a dodecahedron.

 

The next year on the east coast I saw the same

 

The dodecahedron is the simplest regular solid that can be made by 12 intersecting planes,   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regular_dodecahedron

 

I suppose you could call the sun a big sky diamond

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Surya]

13 hours ago, Nungali said:

I think you can 'handle' the answer to this      

I belive so, yes.

 

Quote

First 'dharma'  definition  -   and due to the   above  references ;  "  (in Indian religion) the eternal and inherent nature of reality, regarded in Hinduism as cosmic law underlying right behaviour and social order. " 

Hmmm… I do belive there is such a thing as cosmic law. And that law is love. It is a way to combat entropy, in a way. When it comes to the societal nature of it, there is more variance, obviously. Divinely inspired? Perhaps. I think they are of tremendous importance, and that a lot of suffering in the modern day is due to the collapse of these structures. So is it conceivable that some higher power tries to restore balance to his creation? I don’t know. And yeah, then there are also the «societal laws» that has been twisted to benefit the group that twisted them. Disturbing.

 

but yes, I agree for the most part. I am thinking about making a thread in the Hindu textual subforum on BG 3.16-29, there about, as I did like it a lot.

[BigSkyDiamond]

21 hours ago, Lairg said:

 

It may be better to consider all time moments as occurring in parallel.  Thus its full life span is visible to the non-time entity and therefore it can adjust its youthful actions while experiencing its mature actions.   

 

When humans move their consciousness up and down this 3D timeline they can do something similar - at least at the level of relationships. 

 

 

i keep coming back to this.  so then not only are all my different lifetimes occurring simultaneously.  But then also all moments in my current lifetime are in parallel too.  I had not looked at it that way. i saw them as separate parts of a timeline (but still linear) that i could jump backwards to or forwards to. Like beads on a string.  But if they are all simultaneous (parallel) then that is a different perspective. Then it's more like thin disks of film with images (moments) all stacked on top of each other.  Like negatives when we took photographs with actual film in the camera.

 

So when you opened your eyes and found yourself in a different room, was it like your consciousness was looking through the eyes of another you that was in the other room (you popped into that other you body); or was it more like your same body popped over into the other room and you physically landed there.

 

I have always been wary of inserting myself into other timelines because of not being able to come back.  (physical relocation has not interested me for that reason.) but it's felt fine "rescripting" my past for instance helping my younger me.  And it's felt fine contacting my older me for wisdom and guidance, that has felt fine.  Because it feels more like communicating without the concern of getting stuck or putting my current me at risk.  I appreciate hearing your perspective.

 

[BigSkyDiamond]

22 hours ago, Lairg said:

In the case of Beingness it seems that It finds a variety of Existential experiences useful.  Hence it generates universes and intelligences apparently without judgements such as good and evil.   The intent behind Existence seems to be Beingness experiencing Itself more fully.

 

That of course is a primitive account.  It may be that human logic works best with the densest levels of Existence and quite fails in dealing with Beingness

 

I was taught geometry long ago:   Specify the postulates (assumptions) and apply logic.   It seems that most discussion occurs without specifying the assumptions.

 

 

i think part of it too, is that for Beingness, the "universe and everything in it" (Existence as we are calling it) is not the only game in town.  Beingness is far more vast than that.  When i am in physical reality, my perspective and understanding are limited in scope.  As fascinating and intriguing as it all is in Existence (life forms, physical and non physical beings, taking on the different roles, having the different experiences) it is still limiting because humans are limited.  Whereas dwelling instead from the vantage point of Beingness offers a far more sweeping vista.  

 

if has humans we can't understand the ways of Beingness, then it seems logical to experience as Beingness instead.  That is our birthright.  Since Beingness is the core of me then that is the vantage point i need to be claiming and inhabiting.  

 

circling back to Beingness making the decision to build this universe and then live in it and experience it, yes that is logical.  But as Beingness i can also say OK i built this house and lived in it.  Now i want to do something else without the limitations of this house.  it's feeling cramped. time to experience something else.  Even at the mundane secular level we get to do that.  Humans have free will.  Then it logically follows, how much more so do we then have free will as Beingness.

 

you've got me thinking more logically Lairg.  Good on you!  I like that.

Edited Friday at 03:10 AM by BigSkyDiamond

[Lairg]

7 minutes ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

(Existence as we are calling it) is not the only game in town.  Beingness is far more vast than that. 

 

When I read that, my head tingled.   So now I must pursue that vastness

 

When I was first shown Beingness, in a dream, I woke and found the naming "the sphere of Beingness" was acceptable to it, but now I see that naming is partial

 

It looks now like a vast number of spheres in a network - each sphere connected to perhaps 12 other spheres.   There is some sort of harmonic operating the network.    (I am in a choir and have recently seen how harmonics on various planes permit resonance with much greater entities)

 

I am inclined to wait a little to see if the Beingness Harmonic is interested in making use of me

 

 

 

[BigSkyDiamond]

Somehow it does not surprise me that you are part of the celestial choir.

[Lairg]

32 minutes ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

So when you opened your eyes and found yourself in a different room, was it like your consciousness was looking through the eyes of another you that was in the other room

 

Exactly.   I was sitting in another room - when I go back into it, it seems to be in another universe.  As I type this I get an image of someone waving at me.   I will make contact later

 

34 minutes ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

wary of inserting myself into other timelines because of not being able to come back. 

 

I am always careful when a portal opens near me.   For whatever use it may be, I test the portal for smell and intent.   

 

So far the only problem I had was being projected into a flexible envelope that I could not escape from.  So I raised my consciousness to a higher plane and was beyond the problem

 

 

[BigSkyDiamond]

11 minutes ago, Lairg said:

 

When I read that, my head tingled.   So now I must pursue that vastness

 

it's a haiku.

 

when i read that, my

head tingled. So now i must

pursue that vastness.

 

      --- Lairg

Edited Friday at 03:24 AM by BigSkyDiamond

[Lairg]

I sent you a message couple of days ago.  Hopefully it is useful

 

[BigSkyDiamond]

14 minutes ago, Lairg said:

So far the only problem I had was being projected into a flexible envelope that I could not escape from.  So I raised my consciousness to a higher plane and was beyond the problem.

 

This is so wonderful.  Free will on steroids, i love it.

bold above i want that on a t-shirt, or better yet in an elixir.

i can't stop grinning.

 

 

 

Edited Friday at 03:33 AM by BigSkyDiamond

[Lairg]

6 minutes ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

i can't stop grinning.

 

 

Go back about an hour along this timeline and project out of your light body.  Look at its light.

 

Then come to the present and repeat.

 

What differences  do you see/feel?

 

 

[Lairg]

On 6/12/2025 at 2:45 PM, Lairg said:

Thus its full life span is visible to the non-time entity and therefore it can adjust its youthful actions while experiencing its mature actions.   

 

I had an example of this the other day.   A friend said that she was feeling unhappy and I rather thought that to do with difficulties with her parents

 

So she went back along this timeline to when she was 5 years old.  She saw that her 5 year old self was feeling unloved.  She gave the child some heart light (spiritual love) and the child cheered up.

 

At the same moment the adult cheered up.

 

 

[BigSkyDiamond]

3 hours ago, Lairg said:

Go back about an hour along this timeline and project out of your light body.  Look at its light.

Then come to the present and repeat.

What differences  do you see/feel?

 

I can check in how i'm feeling in the present moment.  But that can be my only point to evaluate.  

 

Interesting, when I read this exercise, it occurred to me that if i am to put into action my belief that time does not exist, then that prevents me from going back an hour.  I can only ever tune in and check in at the now present moment because that is all there is.  And it means there is no me to observe from an hour ago. Because there has only ever been me in the present moment.   There is only ever me in the now.    

 

That is a new development.  That must mean there are no timelines?  I'll have to see what else this affects.  Tweak one belief and see what dominoes fall as a result.  

 

what is your take on this?  what is the impact or effect if there are no timelines?  how would that affect you?  curious to hear.

 

 

Edited Friday at 06:59 AM by BigSkyDiamond

[Lairg]

3 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

I can check in how i'm feeling in the present moment.  But that can be my only point to evaluate.  

 

Or you can use intent to perform the experiment

 

My own experience over at least a decade is that there are many timelines.  At a macro level they are propagated and managed by a great being in each of the arms of this galaxy.

 

At a  lesser level there are many entities that manipulate timelines and there is a fair amount of historical literature to that effect

 

https://exopolitics.org/?s=time+lines

 

https://allthatsinteresting.com/montauk-project

 

https://allthatsinteresting.com/philadelphia-experiment

 

https://www.ladbible.com/news/science/does-time-travel-exist-einstein-dilation-223627-20250330

 

http://chronos.ws/timegates.html

 

 

[BigSkyDiamond]

i am trying it on for size as an exercise for myself, in what would it be like for me to  implement the belief "time does not exist" in terms of how it affects other beliefs i hold and i how i do  my daily life.  It is a byproduct of me logically trying to reconcile different beliefs i hold so they don't contradict within my own belief system. 

 

It reminds me of when i first picked up the belief "time does not exist" and i then had to reconcile "well then what about all my past lives."  I was certainly not going to let go of my belief in past lives.  They are too real for me.  The solution was to have the past lives all simultaneous and happening concurrently.  They become aspects of myself that I can be in contact with, the same way i do my "inner child" for instance to tap into that part of myself.  The past lives are not separate from me they are still just me with a distinct  set of wisdom and experience and lessons that are available as a resource.  In the same way i learn valuable lessons such as "don't cuss out the boss at work" in this lifetime from my younger self, i can also learn from other experiences i've had (other lifetimes which are still me). 

 

my beliefs only affect my world, they do not alter any one else's universe.  along the lines of "our beliefs create our realitiy."  Tying that into the thread topic of "God interacting with humans" our interactions with God are determined by the beliefs we hold about God (Divinity; Beingness; the infinite part of our self that is the core of our being).  It is not one size fits all.  And it does not discount anyone else's lived experiences which are rich and varied and absolutely valid.

It is not that we are "God running the world" running around being megalomaniacs claiming to be God.  But we are building our own world and our own daily life.  And our own universe.  Just as we have different belief systems and experience life very differently, it well may be that we live in and navigate different universes. 

 

Beingness is within us so it is our birthright to connect with that part of ourself and live from there. Ii am trying to figure out what would that look like in daily life.  An aspect of Beingness is to build universes and experience them.  i am a practical person so i am trying this on for size in my own daily life. i always like seeing the posts with 'test it out, try it out, experiment with it.'  yes.

 

Edited Friday at 03:56 PM by BigSkyDiamond

[BigSkyDiamond]

in a nutshell, it would mean that there is no "consensus reality" there is no "consensus universe" which we all inhabit.  It would mean we each have our own universe.  just like we each have our own distinct individual daily life and our own distinct individual beliefs and experiences.  We each have our own universe.  

 

where are people on the concept of "there is no consensus reality" ?  how do you feel about that?  Tying this into the thread topic of God interacting with humans. well currently as humans it is evident that there is no consensus reality or agreed upon definition or experience of Divnity (God, Beingness).  My observation is we each kinda sorta cobble together our own best fit.  Which can change at different ages or stages even over the course of our own life.  

 

I don't have to look any further than my own childhood.  My brother and I grew up in the same house, same parents, same family.  And our descriptions and lived experience of what it was like growing up are worlds apart.  

 

 

Edited Friday at 05:39 PM by BigSkyDiamond

[Lairg]

5 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

trying to reconcile different beliefs i hold so they don't contradict within my own belief system. 

 

This is a critical aspect.  The personal will of the human hates to be wrong.  In many humans it will discard physical health and emotional relationships rather than admit that it has had wrong beliefs for decades.

 

Better perhaps to believe several contradictory things rather than make incorrect choices

 

 

[Lairg]

5 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

The solution was to have the past lives all simultaneous and happening concurrently.

 

In the experience of myself and various friends, both are true.    There are past lives and parallel lives

 

This is particularly important when dealing with trauma carried over from past lives.

 

For example, I hated waking up in coffins.   It  seems that in past centuries it was hard to determine death in some cases - hence the practice of a Wake.   The friends and relatives would stand around the body, drinking his liquor and having a good time.  If that did not wake the deceased it was ok to bury him/her.