ACIM Journal

[Anderz]

Service to others as described in the Law of One sounds pretty tedious. And adding choiceless action to that it seems really boring. My take however is that "service to others" means moving from "service to self" which I interpret as ego action, which ACIM shows is a false state of being. And choiceless action is then service to others because it's not serving the ego, and yet it's still self-interest! And choiceless action is a state of flow in everyday life, not just in sports or in creative tasks. The Self is One, and the Holy Spirit is doing the service so it's actually not the self-sacrificing kind of service to others that the ego imagines it to be.

[Anderz]

I have found the practice of dissolving the body armor extremely challenging. Sometime it even feels horrible. The good thing is that I have started to experience some feeling of pleasant peace flowing when parts of my body armor dissolve. The reason for why the body armor is so immensely tough is I believe because it is connected to the whole global ego. There is a massive energy tension being trapped in the body and mind.

[Anderz]

In this video Dr. Ron Siegel has a great explanation for how we humans have evolved to cling to potential dangers.

I haven't listened to the whole video yet. It will be interesting to hear what he has to say about mindfulness and then compare it to how ACIM says that being defenseless is true protection. That's the opposite of the ego survival strategy! So can it really be true? Yes, logically the Holy Spirit is moving the whole universe including ourselves and our egos and other people. So the attack-defense situation is actually a developmental cosmic trick of illusion. We need as a civilization and as a planet evolve, learn and develop through the ego mechanism, even nature. And now Eckhart Tolle says that it's urgent that we evolve out of the ego. That's actually similar to the moving into fourth density and I believe, the emergence of a collective planetary consciousness.

[Anderz]

No, Ron Siegel didn't mention anything as radical as ACIM describes. Still a good presentation I think, although my conspiracy theory radar got activated  when he said that mainstream science has started doing a lot of research into mindfulness. Who fund that research? Maybe sponsors outside of the usual pharma industry but I got suspicious when Siegel said that mindfulness shifted brain activity from the left side of the brain to the right side. That's a lopsided situation! So maybe the pharma industry promotes mindfulness research into a certain deliberate direction that will make people's psychological condition worse and so will need more drugs such as psychopharmaca.

I'm pretty sure mindfulness practice done right is very beneficial. But another suspicious thing with what Siegel said was that the research was totally focused on brain activity it seemed. What about heart coherence? He didn't mention anything other than brain activity. And what about body armor? Why was Wilhelm Reich so forcefully suppressed by the mainstream establishment? I will continue to focus on dissolving my body armor and on developing heart coherence. That brain crap sounds dubious. Heck some people even have water instead of a brain in the head and can function normally. Seriously!

[Anderz]

I posted this comment on Aaron Doughty's new video: From a nonduality perspective no control = total control. That's why ACIM says that only God's will is real and separate control is an illusion. Of course, from a nonduality view God as a separate "lord" is also an ego illusion. Nobody has free will, not even God.

Aaron says basically the same thing in the end but I wanted to sum it up and connect it with ACIM.

[Anderz]

Adyashanti has a new short video about how to start practice with small everyday events. I like that idea and he said that the inside needs to be connected with the outside world.

 

[Anderz]

Being truly defenseless means that even the body armor has dissolved. Doesn't that mean risk of being attacked by egos? No, because egos don't have free will. It's the Holy Spirit who is the only "doer" and for it to attack itself would be insanity.

[Anderz]

Is it possible to prove infinite intelligence? I like to investigate that. First a definition of intelligence is needed:

Definition: Intelligence is the ability to combine complexity into larger complexity.

Does that definition work for an IQ test for example? Yes, because the score a person gets on the IQ test is a result of combining knowledge (complexity) in the mind of that person with the questions (complexity) in the IQ test. But what is complexity? Here is a definition:

Definition: Complexity is interconnected information.

The IQ test in the example is complexity since the questions in the test are interconnected with meaning. Of course ultimately all information is totally interconnected. Is therefore all of our reality complexity? The answer is yes. Then what about randomness and entropy? The premise here is that there is no real randomness in reality and entropy is just hidden information. When the information becomes known, it's no longer entropy.

That's a start. I will ponder over it a bit more to see if I can find a way to use those definitions in a proof of infinite intelligence.

[Anderz]

What is infinite intelligence? Here I have a definition:

Definition: Infinite intelligence is the ability to endlessly combine complexity into larger complexity.

Hmm... Okay, it may not be possible to prove that about our universe but at least it can be used as a hypothesis for how our reality works. In previous posts I have explained how the future is infinite (all finite constructs will fail to produce the movement of time). And I mentioned earlier Ray Kurzweil's Law of Accelerating Returns, how that applies even to biological evolution. That's however not a real scientifically validated law yet as far as I know. So, yeah, infinite intelligence is maybe not provable, but it's a useful hypothesis I think. And actually science is generally not about proving theories in an absolute sense but about verifying hypotheses with empirical experiments.

[Anderz]

Just to experiment with the infinite intelligence hypothesis. Objects created by humans require intelligence to invent and manufacture. Is for example a mechanical watch an example of complexity combined into larger complexity?

Yes, because first the watch has to be designed with schematics and such and that's complexity. And then the design needs to be converted into a physical product through a manufacturing process and that's complexity. The resulting product, in this case an automatic watch, is a result of combining complexity into larger complexity.

[Anderz]

Another idea I came to think of is about art. Is there any difference between what is considered good art and mediocre art? Maybe there is! The idea I got is that a masterpiece is a combination of much more complexity than what is considered simpler art. This painting, L'Étoile (The Star) by Edgar Degas is probably very expensive and there may be a quantifiable (in theory) reason for this.

[Anderz]

I think of deadly orgone as low complexity. And if the ego tensions in the body and mind are made of deadly orgone it means they have low intelligence. Fourth density to me means more complexity and therefore more intelligence. And the ego tensions, such as the body armor and the pain body, will dissolve by being integrated into fourth density. Abstract and speculative concepts, but I wanted to document it here while it came to me.

[Anderz]

Reality is difference observing itself. But difference gives rise to the whole Indra's net as I illustrated in previous posts. And our reality as I suggested is only one infinite string of information in Indra's net. And with that string being complexity, reality is infinite complexity observing itself. It's the same model, just a bit more specific.

In religious terms, the string of infinite complexity is the same as the Word of God:

Quote

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made." - John 1:1-3

 

[Anderz]

Here is a new video by Deepak Chopra where he says that he totally endorses A Course in Miracles (ACIM), and that it's a great course, and in this video he will even go beyond that in explaining miracles:

 

[Anderz]

What if thinking is ALWAYS redundant? That the whole of humanity, except for a few enlightened gurus, is in a deluded state. I will experiment with that idea for a while, not have a firm belief but a questioning of whether even what Ramesh Balsekar called the working mind is necessary. Roger Castillo follows Ramesh's teaching and also makes a distinction between working mind and thinking mind. What if even that distinction is an illusion? Roger said in another video that there are several levels of spiritual teaching, so he maybe uses the distinction between thinking and working mind as a concept to help undoing the old concept of only being the thinking mind. I will take a look at one of his latest video:

 

[Anderz]

But surely, isn't thinking necessary? My view is that everything that exists is necessary. And thinking produces high complexity, high level concepts, which means high intelligence. Still, thinking may be only a temporary development, similar to what Eckhart Tolle has said. Sadhguru also said that much of the time he doesn't need to think at all.

So, is it possible to transcend ALL thinking? Maybe! Imagine a state of mind which has an even greater capacity for creating abstraction concepts than thinking. That in such state, thinking is transcended and included. So the intelligence of the thinking is then preserved and also surpassed. A direct kind of knowing without the need for a stream of thoughts in the ordinary sense of thinking.

Basic mindfulness practice can be very useful for experimenting with the idea of transcending thinking. In mindfulness practice the thoughts are nonjudgmentally observed. That kind of mindful observation of one's own thoughts and feelings is a meta perspective. Or one might even call it epiperspective since the prefix epi- means above. One idea is that such epiperspective is what ACIM calls vision:

Quote

"Today’s idea holds the key to what your real thoughts are. They are nothing that you think you think, just as nothing that you think you see is related to vision in any way. There is no relationship between what is real and what you think is real. Nothing that you think are your real thoughts resemble your real thoughts in any respect. Nothing that you think you see bears any resemblance to what vision will show you." - ACIM Lesson 45

 

[Anderz]

I got an idea for a new practice! What ACIM calls vision is different than thinking. So what I came up with is a practice of mindful relaxation. Instead of just nonjudgmentally observing the thoughts a proactive technique is added which is to relax the thoughts. The practice then is to observe one's own stream of thinking and then relax that whole process of thinking so that the thoughts dissolve. I haven't tested the practice yet but it seems like a useful method so I wanted to document here.

[Anderz]

The idea that ACIM's vision is a higher and different level of consciousness than thinking is useful as an incentive for why to do the mindful relaxation practice. I started practicing it a little bit and found that mindfully relaxing both body and mind at the same time is effective, similar to what Leo said about body relaxation. The difference with the new practice is to add the intent to dissolve the thinking.

[Anderz]

Why did I use the term epiperspective instead of the term metaperspective? The answer is that metaperspective is still on the level of thinking. For example in psychology metaperspective means: "The perspective that one believes another person to attribute to him or her."

An epiperspective transcends thinking altogether. BAM! It's a leap into a higher level of consciousness where thinking is dissolved into what ACIM calls vision.

Quote

"Christ's eyes are open, and He will look upon whatever you see with love if you accept His vision as yours. The Holy Spirit keeps the vision of Christ for every Son of God who sleeps. In His sight the Son of God is perfect, and He longs to share His vision with you." - ACIM T-12.VI.4:4-6

 

[Anderz]

ACIM says that we are all Sons of God. Of course "son" means both men and women here. Is that blasphemy from a Christian perspective? Actually, no. Because Christ is the HIGHEST Son of God. And we as lower sons of God can never reach and become Christ but Christ is the way, so we are always moving towards Christ (nobody comes to the Father but through me, Jesus said). And the good thing is that since we are lower sons of God we can become higher and higher sons of God. And that's I believe what the Law of One describes as different densities.