Anderz

Are there inconsistencies between ACIM and the Law of One? Maybe not. One seeming inconsistency is that the Law of One talks about reincarnation while ACIM says that even resurrection is a rebirth of the mind, not the body; from ACIM: "Very simply, the resurrection is the overcoming or surmounting of death. It is a reawakening or a rebirth; a change of mind about the meaning of the world." And about reincarnation ACIM says: "M-24.1. In the ultimate sense, reincarnation is impossible. 2 There is no past or future, and the idea of birth into a body has no meaning either once or many times. 3 Reincarnation cannot, then, be true in any real sense. 4 Our only question should be, "Is the concept helpful?" 5 And that depends, of course, on what it is used for. 6 If it is used to strengthen the recognition of the eternal nature of life, it is helpful indeed." So even if ACIM says that reincarnation is impossible it also says that it can be a very useful concept, and that could be how the Law of One uses it. In this way, then, ACIM and the Law of One are consistent even though seemingly inconsistent.

One disagreement I have with Aaron's take on the Law of One is about how he explained evolution. The Law of One says: "Ra: I am Ra. Consider the workings of free will as applied to evolution. There are paths that the mind/body complex follows in an attempt to survive, to reproduce, and to seek in its fashion that which is unconsciously felt as the potential for growth; these two arenas or paths of development being two among many." And actually, free will is the Law of Confusion which I take as meaning an ego delusion. And to me, what Ra is saying is that what we call evolution is a part of the Law of Confusion. All the struggle for survival in my opinion, and I think ACIM says the same thing, is that it is an ego delusion, including our current state of nature such as the evolution of animals and plants.

Aaron Abke has a new video about the Law of One: Their explanation in this video is a bit different than mine, but it could be the same fundamentally. And even if it is a different take on the Law of One it's good to have some different perspectives. The truth is unshakeable so it's basically just a matter of sorting out what is the truth.

Another incredible consequence of saying that infinity does not exist is that in my model God is a concept. In a sense that's even worse than atheism! Haha. Because atheism is about a disbelief about God without proof while my model has a God but only as a concept. Just as there is no actual infinity, there is no actual creator of our universe. This model might seem nihilistic but it actually allows for infinite potential of creation and for infinite intelligence. If there is no actual infinity how can there be infinite intelligence. Again, infinite intelligence, just like God is just a concept, useful as a description of reality. Concepts are just pointers or labels. The menu is not the dinner, the map is not the territory.

If there is no actual infinity, then the idea that for example Russell's paradox can be resolved on an infinite meta level as I proposed earlier is false. I was wrong! Damn. Embarrassing. Instead Russell's paradox is simply an inconsistency, like saying about a cat that the cat is only black and the cat is only white.

In my model Indra's net as an infinite structure is a concept within the actual Indra's net which is always FINITE! So what hit me now is that actual infinity does NOT exist!!! Incredible discovery. I haven't compared that to ACIM or the Law of One yet.

We cannot pull ourselves out of our own egos, BUT we can develop a meta perspective. We can use mindfulness to observe our own thoughts, feelings and other sensations. That's a meta perspective. And texts such as ACIM and the Law of One are useful for developing such meta perspective. And our own consciousness is already the highest meta perspective by being connected to the infinite. So our consciousness will pull ourselves out of our egos when we cultivate the meta perspective that is above the ego, even when that perspective is still a part of the ego.

Yay! I bought a new synth (Massive X software plugin). I only used it for two instruments in this remix but it's a start.

Ah! Now I got an insight about what prayer is. A prayer goes beyond ordinary cause and effect, A prayer is an intent for an emergent phenomenon, and that's what miracles are. Does that mean that we need to pray in order for miracles to occur? Only in the sense of having the intent of emergent phenomenon to happen, it doesn't have to be prayer in the narrow sense of asking God or anything like that, although all forms of prayers are valid intents for accessing the metaphysical, or time/space as it's called in the Law of One.

This was a tricky one for me. Exchange? WTF? What exchange? Then I came across something in the Law of One called the harvest. So the exchange is then that we are moving into fourth density by miracles and also the miracles harvest what is valuable in the third density creation. A belief is not the same as actualization. The Law of One says: "Unity, at this approximation of understanding, cannot be specified by any physics but only be activated or potentiated intelligent infinity due to the catalyst of free will." Our beliefs are grounded in the physics of third density, and mere beliefs will not take us into fourth density. I myself don't know much about prayers, but the Law of One says: "We are pleased that this instrument was more conscientious in preparing itself for contact by means of the careful mental vibrations which you call prayer. This enabled the channel to be free from the distortions which the contact fell prey to during the last working." The Law of One says: "The Confederation of Planets in the Service of the Infinite Creator has only one important statement. That statement, my friends, as you know, is “All things, all of life, all of the creation is part of one original thought.”"

We cannot generally voluntarily cause miracles from third density. Miracles are a tool used by the One to pull us from third to fourth density, Here I take "wrong" as meaning sin in the sense of missing the mark, the ego's belief in total separation. Sin is the state of third density, a state of confusion and disharmony. Fourth density is as described in the Law of One: "Approximations of positive statements: it [fourth density] is a plane of a type of bipedal vehicle which is much denser and more full of life; it is a plane wherein one is aware of the thoughts of other-selves; it is a plane where one is aware of the vibrations of other-selves; it is a plane of compassion and understanding of the sorrows of third density; it is a plane striving towards wisdom or light; it is a plane wherein individual differences are pronounced although automatically harmonized by group consensus." We need to first develop enough in third density before miracles are granted to us. Miracles heal the confusion in third density by expanding possibilities. The Law of One says: "During the fourth-density experience, due to the lack of development of fourth-density entities, the third-density planetary sphere is not useful for habitation since the early fourth-density entity will not know precisely how to maintain the illusion that fourth density cannot be seen or determined from any instrumentation available to any third density."

To prove my case I will compare what ACIM says about miracles to third and fourth density in the Law of One. In third density, reality is limited to certain physical laws and in fourth density more possibilities become available in how reality works. The Source in ACIM is the One in the Law of One. Third density is ruled by fear and fourth density is governed by love. Third density is the domain of death while fourth density and higher mean life.

I now came to realize that something that directly connects ACIM with the Law of One (and even the Bible and siddhis in eastern religions) are miracles! Because miracles are exactly what to expect when going from third to fourth density. And it also explains why scriptures like that are necessary in addition to science, because science is limited to the past.

I don't know yet what the Law of One or ACIM say about reincarnation and resurrection, but I frankly don't care so much about what those texts say because it seems to me that fourth density and higher means that death has been transcended. The higher densities are like the different heavens in Christianity. And do people die in heaven? No, they don't. And the Pope was correct when he said something like how hell is not a place. I think it's obvious that what the Bible describes is a state of being stuck in third density forever, such as: Revelation 21:8 is about being stuck in sin forever, which can't happen since the One cannot fool itself forever (sin means missing the mark). And compare that Bible verse to the ones preceding it: Revelation 21:6-7 is about the first, second and third heaven and so on, meaning fourth, fifth and sixth density and so forth.

In fourth density, will there still be human laws from an integral perspective? The answer is of course as usual that there will be both/and, in the sense of transcend and include a la Ken Wilber. So, yes there will be human laws in fourth density, but we will not need legal systems. Such situation and society seems impossible to the ego because the ego believes separations are real. Total separations are illusions, and legal systems are only needed for confused people. The reason for why there still will be human laws in fourth density is because the useful need for the laws are integrated such as traffic regulations etc.

The ego needs to put on a facade, a persona, a front hiding the inner self. That's fine because if we pretend to be genuine and open, while still in ego consciousness, that's just a double facade! So that's even worse. The genuine self needs a coherent heart connection with earth including its inhabitants.

Yes, by self-love Leo means Self. Actually, that kind of self-love is the same as the Holy Relationship in ACIM I think. The special relationships the ego has are always limited to the narrow self, not the Self.

Leo has a new video about self-love. That sounds what I have in mind by meaning that the Self is ALL. I haven't watched the video yet. We will see if I was correct. Self-Love - The Highest Teaching In The Universe - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OmMpYa7R_U

Ego desires become destructive because of lack of coherence on a collective level. It's therefore useful to think in terms of what do WE want to do instead of only what I want to do and the individual wants then are integrated into the global will in a both/and way. The desires of the collective consciousness are harmonious, similar to how the cells in a healthy human body act in harmony. And then instead of thinking of serving it's more useful to think in terms of desire and wants, because service is servitude and is for robots, slaves and saviors. The need for individual saviors is transcended on the global level.

The HeartMath Institute has done research that shows that the human heart can communicates via earth's magnetic field. And the connection is related to coherence of the heart's magnetic field. That made me think that it's safe to connect our hearts with earth's magnetic field since only when there is harmony in that connection is it strong. The heart connection in separate ego consciousness is very weak so the heart connection thereby shields the collective suffering in the global ego. The ego heart resonance is too weak to affect us significantly on a global collective level.

Carl Jung described the collective unconscious. My take is that the collective unconscious is the unawakened third density state of humanity. Third density is dominated by the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil" resulting in the ego-belief in total separation. The "tree of life" only exists as an unconscious archetype in third density and becomes actualized in fourth density. In my estimation, in fourth density the collective unconscious awakens into a global consciousness. And the interface between local and nonlocal collective conscious connection is between our own hearts and earth when our hearts' magnetic fields join with earth's magnetic field.

A simple statement such as: "Santa Claus does not exist" is actually a paradox. Because how can something that doesn't exist even be described? And it gets even trickier than that. As Leo pointed out in a recent video, to actually make sure something doesn't exist we have to first do an exhaustive search in the entire universe and beyond, and through all times past and future. It's actually easier to deal with seemingly more complicated paradoxes, such as Zeno's paradoxes. Here is one: This means that if we want to travel one mile, we must first travel half a mile, and before that half of half a mile and so on, so we would never be able to even start! Paradoxes like that are easy to resolve by saying that manifested reality is always finite. This means that things can only be divided to a certain limit. For example a computer screen has a certain number of pixels; it's impossible to have an infinite number of pixels.

If I remember correctly, Leo said in a video that truth is what is, what exists now. And interestingly, the Russell set R does exist as a description. So from a higher meta perspective the Russell paradox is resolved or we wouldn't even be able to describe it! The meta perspective in this case is the perspective of infinity. We cannot see infinity, nor count infinity but it exists as a part of reality. And on the level of infinity things like Russell's paradox are resolved. ACIM describes this paradox: This paradox is resolved on the meta level of infinity. Everything finite only exists as a part of infinity, while infinity in turn is not a part of the finite. And my model says that the manifested reality (making of the world as ACIM describes it) is always finite and is nothing in itself and only something in relation within infinity. Tricky and abstract concept, I will try to come up with a more practical example.

The Law of One says that in unity all paradoxes are resolved. "Ra: I am Ra. We came to your peoples to enunciate the Law of One. We wished to impress upon those who wished to learn of unity that in unity all paradoxes are resolved; all that is broken is healed; all that is forgotten is brought to light." - https://www.lawofone.info/results.php?s=90&v=e#29 And the Law of One also says that infinity is not a number. "That which is infinite cannot be many, for many-ness is a finite concept. To have infinity you must identify or define that infinity as unity; otherwise, the term does not have any referent or meaning. In an Infinite Creator there is only unity." - https://www.lawofone.info/results.php?s=1 Does that make any logical sense? Yes, it does! I realized that for example Russell's paradox can be resolved by realizing that infinity is not a number. Russell's paradox is about how a certain set R cannot both contain and not contain itself. "... the paradox arises within naïve set theory by considering the set of all sets that are not members of themselves. Such a set appears to be a member of itself if and only if it is not a member of itself. Hence the paradox." - https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/russell-paradox/ Unity to me means the inclusion of both the finite and the infinite. So then the simple solution to Russell's paradox is that R is not a member of itself in a finite sense and R IS a member of itself in an infinite sense.

Marianne Williamson is an expert on ACIM. At the moment she seems to have zero change of becoming the nominee for 2020. I think it would be amazing if she becomes President. She needs a miracle (pun intended) and also, I think she needs to describe ACIM in a way that most Christians like. Christians usually despise New Age teachings, and so it's important to explain that A Course in Miracles is NOT New Age and instead is information from Jesus Christ. Even Christians themselves talk about the importance to be in communication with Christ, so ACIM, as long as it is consistent with the Bible should be acceptable and even welcomed by Christians. ACIM talks about how we all are the Son of God. Is that compatible with Christianity? Yes, I think it fits Christianity by saying that "Son of God" in ACIM is the same as "Body of Christ" in Christianity on a global scale and not just meaning people belonging to the Christian Church.