ACIM Journal

[Anderz]

Leo said in a video that for there to be life that has to be death. Is that true? Or is Leo caught in a self-deception himself here? I think it's true in what the Law of One calls second and third density. It's NOT however true in fourth and higher densities I believe. And the Bible talks about that. The Bible calls third density the "old order of things". Check out this Bible quote:

Quote

"He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away." - Revelation 21:4

 

Edited December 22, 2019 by Anderz

[Anderz]

If fourth density really means eternal life, and the first heaven, then what about the following quote?

Quote

"Questioner: What is the… can you even state the average lifespan in the fourth density of space/time incarnation?

Ra: I am Ra. The space/time incarnation typical of harmonious fourth density is approximately 90,000 of your years as you measure time." - Law of One, 43.11

My interpretation is that the Law of One is very tricky and often has to semi-hide the truth, just like the Bible. Giving us direct knowledge too early will hamper our own development. So by 90,000 years Ra means I think that it will take 90,000 years to go from fourth to fifth density. So "death" in higher densities is about switching from a lower density to a higher density without actual physical death.

[Anderz]

Why do I take the Law of One seriously? Isn't that just New Age woo woo? The problem with sticking only to our earth view is that it's a too local perspective. To believe that our civilization is the only or most developed one in the entire universe is like centuries ago when people believed that the earth was the center of the entire universe. Steven Greer said that advanced civilizations have spacecraft that can materialize directly out of the vacuum energy in "empty" space. That's a more open-minded and less myopic perspective. And the Law of One seems advanced enough to me to possibly be hinting at actual truths. 

[Anderz]

Notice that what Leo said in his latest video that we are NOT living in a computer simulation also applies to the idea that the world is a dream. Our world is NOT a dream. Just like how it would be stupid for infinite intelligence to construct a world which is a simulation within a simulation and so on, it's equally stupid for that intelligence to create a world that is a dream within a dream and so on.

So the physical world is the real deal. And there is no other place such as a separate heaven or a hell. Heaven simply means fourth and higher density. And hell means being stuck in third density forever, which is a delusion since evolution will inevitably and automatically pull us into fourth density. Then what about astral realms and spiritual dimensions? Even if those exist, THOSE are dreams, our physical universe is the real reality.

[Anderz]

If the world we live in now is the real reality, then what about physical death? First we need to understand what physical reality is. The past is indestructible information in the now and only in the now. There is no past outside the present moment. So for example Elvis Presley exists as a person as information in the now. And Elvis Presley has an eternal, unique and individual soul in the form of a single point within the graph of difference.

Reincarnation is as ACIM says ultimately impossible since there is only the present moment. Resurrection is theoretically possible since the individual soul is eternal and indestructible, And God is not some separate deity with free will. So Buddhism is correct about there not being a literal God as some big boss with free will but is wrong about reincarnation. And Christianity is correct about resurrection and actual miracles but wrong about there being a God able to send people to some actual hell.

 

[Anderz]

I wonder if Leo means the same thing by consciousness as what I mean by it. Consciousness is simply awareness of an automatic process. Leo seems to believe that consciousness can do something, such as imagining things. It can't! Consciousness is just an on/off state of being aware as a self.

And reality is what ACIM calls the Holy Instant. Holy means whole and instant means this present moment. There is only the present moment and it's a wholeness, so it's a Holy Instant. As I mentioned in my previous post there is no past outside the present moment because then there would be a separation, an "unholy instant" and there is no such thing.

So Leo is correct that we were not actually born is some past some years ago separate from our experience right now. We were born now. And there was no consciousness in some past away from the now. There is only consciousness now. So I don't really understand Leo's concept of consciousness. Here is one example of what Leo means by consciousness, and I think his explanation of reality is correct in many ways but then he starts imaging consciousness as being some miracle agent or something like that able to cause and do things, which IMO is totally a redundant idea:

 

 

Edited December 23, 2019 by Anderz

[Anderz]

And actually, think about it, consciousness CANNOT be the whole reality. Because consciousness is aware of the physical world, so reality is a larger whole that unifies both consciousness and the manifested world. Reality is an endless string of information observing itself. So consciousness is a property of reality. Oneness CANNOT observe itself. The oneness which is the foundation of reality is difference. And the endless string observing itself is a path in the graph of differences arising as a consequence from the one difference.

[Anderz]

How to understand death? We can look at it from the Holy Instant. Take for example Napoleon who in calendar time died 5 May, in the year 1821. Calendar time is just information in the now. Here comes a mind-twister: Napoleon ACTUALLY died now and ONLY now.

Edited December 23, 2019 by Anderz

[Anderz]

All the past manifests instantly in the Holy Instant. We remember the past by accessing information that exists in the now and only in the now. Nassim Haramein said something similar about spacememory.

Is that claim actually true? To me it seems like a logical explanation and it can be used as something to experiment with using mindfulness practice. What will happen if our perspective shifts from experiencing the past as something away from the now to experiencing the past always as existing only in the now? I find that a fascinating idea and will practice actualizing it.

Quote

"This course is not beyond immediate learning, unless you believe that what God wills takes time. ... I call to you to make the holy instant yours at once, for the release from littleness in the mind of the host of God depends on willingness, and not on time. ... The holy instant is this instant and every instant. ... The reason this course is simple is that truth is simple. Complexity is of the ego, and is nothing more than the ego's attempt to obscure the obvious." - ACIM, T-15.IV.

 

[Anderz]

Is the Pope infallible? Yes, but so are you. Haha! Because there are no actual mistakes in reality. The difference is that the Pope may have more authority than you. But what is authority? If reality is an automatic process then does the Pope really have authority? Only in a relative sense. Absolute authority is a myth, or as Leo explained, you/we are the authority ourselves.

 

[Anderz]

On a relative level authority is real. Here is a quote from the Bible which Alex Jones has a problem with:

Quote

"Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves." - Romans 13:1-2

I think the Bible is correct here. It's kind of a conspiracy above what even Alex Jones talks about. My theory is that the top authorities in the world are occupied by what the Law of One calls Wanderers and they are already fourth or higher density, so they are capable of making correct decisions.

[Anderz]

Another thing with authorities when it comes to knowledge is that some authorities might be lying to us, not necessary because of their own egoic cravings but for good reasons! So when I learn from experts I usually try to fit it into the bigger picture to vet the information. For example I even question how ACIM always only bashes the ego. The ego is a necessary development in my opinion. Disclaimer: There may be some text in ACIM that clarifies this. 

[Anderz]

Absolute authority is only a myth on the manifested level of reality. The unmanifested is the absolute authority. So for example Donald Trump may decide to declare a 1000% tariff on imported Chines goods, just joking a bit but you get the picture. And let's say that the Congress thinks, that yes, that's a good idea and approves Trump's decision. Then it may so happen that the unmanifested produces some unexpected (yet deterministic) emergent happenings that prevent the new legislation. God's plan cannot be messed with.

Edited December 23, 2019 by Anderz

[Anderz]

Yikes, I saw how people attacked Leo because of his explanation of love. Pretty gutsy definition of love. How to come up with a more lukewarm explanation of love that is less confrontational? Earlier I defined love as wholeness in harmony. With that definition it's possible to say that the Nazis for example, that was evil, not love since it fails the criteria of harmony. And evolution can be seen as a process of increasing love. Also, my definition is compatible with ACIM which makes a clear distinction between fear and love.

[Anderz]

Consciousness connected to infinity is only impossible if we think of consciousness as a part of manifested reality. But it's not! Consciousness observes manifested reality and therefore cannot be a part of manifested reality itself. Here is a tricky result: An endless string is always finite. An endless string observing itself is both finite and infinite. It's the observation part that makes the principle infinite. In order to always be able to observe the string the observation function needs to be outside the content of the string. So consciousness connected to infinity is possible as a part of the unmanifested. Infinity is only impossible in the realm of the manifested.

[Anderz]

ACIM says that being defenseless is true protection. I was thinking about that and then realized that a protective heart is a closed heart! Having a closed heart hardened more and more by the ego's own ideas of protection causes more and more conflict in our lives. So a closed heart actually leads to the opposite of being protected. And an open heart is related to a collective consciousness. The HeartMath institute has shown how a whole group of people can get their hearts in coherence with each other.

And with a collective consciousness there is automatic protection. Because then we are interacting as an actual harmonious whole. So that must be what ACIM means by how being defenseless is true protection. What does a collective consciousness need to protect itself against when it spans the whole planet? The need for protection drops away automatically as a consequence of awakening a global consciousness.

[Anderz]

Leo said that trying to conceptualize absolute infinity too much can be dangerous. And some famous scientists have even gone insane, he said. One way of dealing with that is to have the hypothesis that infinity can never be manifested. So then actual infinity is always only in the unmanifested and never in the manifested world. That helps at least my mind to relax my thinking about infinity. And even helps me to not to get so upset by absurd claims like in string theory where they use the value -1/12 related to the sum 1+2+3+4+5+... to infinity. That's just (dare I say mad) conceptualization of infinity they are doing.

[Anderz]

Also, another thing related to protection, I now got the idea that the fear ACIM talks about related to the ego can only be removed at the root by a collective consciousness. And that's a useful idea when practicing mindfulness because it lets me allow my fears to be there and focus on opening my heart instead which will remove the fear for me. It's then even the case that attempting to remove the fears oneself is itself fearful ego activity.

[Anderz]

In this video, Dr. Rollin McCraty talks about three levels of heart coherence, personal, social and global. I will experiment with going directly to the global heart coherence! It's about getting the electromagnetic field of the heart coherent with earth's magnetic field. Although I think that the magnetic fields are still just a surface manifestation of an even deeper morphic field connected to the vacuum energy that Nassim Haramein says is the foundation of the universe.

 

[Anderz]

In Buddhism there is something called Metta meditation and Eckhart Tolle described it as an expansion of loving-kindness intent: Let me be at peace and happy, let my family be at peace and happy, let my neighborhood be at peace and happy and so on in larger and larger circles. I came to think about that when McCraty talked about a breathing technique for heart coherence, that it might be powerful to combine the two techniques. McCraty said that they can scientifically measure heart coherence, and Metta meditation has also been scientifically tested.

Quote

"Some pilot research studies on the effect of Mettā meditation indicate an increase in positive emotions for practitioners.[9][10]" - Wikipedia