Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

You have no reason to hate yourself.

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

On 11/26/00 at 12:14 PM Wim Borsboom wrote:

You have no reason to hate yourself,

because that hatred comes from someone else who unfairly blamed you for their hatred.

Dear Wim,

 

Can a reason be found for anything at all? Doesn't a perceived cause

but point to the cause of that cause of...? And isn't a feeling a

response to a perception (stimulus)? Whatever is perceived to be

happening, does so on its own accord. Responses are occurring on

their own accord too - the sense of doership is false. So what is

left, but to perceive one's response, instead of perpetuating the

illusion of involvement with both perceptions and responses...?

 

Love,

Jan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

, "Wim Borsboom" <aurasphere@h...>

wrote:

> You have no reason to hate yourself,

> because that hatred comes from someone else

> who unfairly blamed you for their hatred.

 

So true!

 

:-)

 

Oh if only we can awake to free our line.

 

Blessings,

 

Col

Link to comment
Share on other sites

, "jb" <kvy9@l...> wrote:

>

>

>

> On 11/26/00 at 12:14 PM Wim Borsboom wrote:

> You have no reason to hate yourself,

> because that hatred comes from someone else

> who unfairly blamed you for their hatred.

>

> Dear Wim,

>

> Can a reason be found for anything at all? Doesn't a perceived cause

but point to the cause of that cause of...? And isn't a feeling a

response to a perception (stimulus)? Whatever is perceived to be

happening, does so on its own accord. Responses are occurring on their

own accord too - the sense of doership is false. So what is left, but

to perceive one's response, instead of perpetuating the illusion of

involvement with both perceptions and responses...?

 

I disagree. I believe we have creative power through thought. If we

script our experience from conditioned self hatred then that's what we

play as.

 

The free one has choice to observe what is playing & to rescript the

play. This is what Gene Poole is referring to I believe.

 

love,

 

Col

>

> Love,

> Jan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/26/00 at 8:54 PM colette wrote:

 

º , "jb" <kvy9@l...> wrote:

[..]

ºI disagree. I believe we have creative power through thought. If we

ºscript our experience from conditioned self hatred then that's what we

ºplay as.

º

ºThe free one has choice to observe what is playing & to rescript the

ºplay. This is what Gene Poole is referring to I believe.

º

ºlove,

º

ºCol

 

Not only ~I~ do disagree with you, in the meanwhile science does disagree with

you as well - there is no "free will". That was what the article "the greatest

myth" in New Scientist is about - a warmly recommended read.

But OK, whatever you believe is OK :)

º

º>

º> Love,

º> Jan

º

º

º

º//

º

ºAll paths go somewhere. No path goes nowhere. Paths, places, sights,

perceptions, and indeed all experiences arise from and exist in and subside back

into the Space of Awareness. Like waves rising are not different than the ocean,

all things arising from Awareness are of the nature of Awareness. Awareness does

not come and go but is always Present. It is Home. Home is where the Heart Is.

Jnanis know the Heart to be the Finality of Eternal Being. A true devotee

relishes in the Truth of Self-Knowledge, spontaneously arising from within into

It Self. Welcome all to a.

º

ºTo from this list, go to the ONElist web site, at

º www., and select the User Center link from the

menu bar

º on the left. This menu will also let you change your

subscription

º between digest and normal mode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Jan,

 

You wrote:

> Not only ~I~ do disagree with you (Colette), in the meanwhile

> science does disagree with you as well - there is no "free will".

 

I did write something a week or so ago about "free will". Had to do with

"The predilection of the warrior" (Don Juan Mattis). I think I send it to

Amanda. Cannot find it at the moment.

 

You also wrote:

> Doesn't a perceived cause but point to the cause of that cause of...?

 

Yep, but the buck not only stops somewhere, it also started somewhere.

 

There was a *first* murder and to make it look good the murderer turned it

into a *sacrifice*.

I am getting Akashic information about that in over the last few days. Comes

in in dribs and drabs, this is hard work. Don't know yet how to tie it

together.

>>>And isn't a feeling a response to a perception (stimulus)? Whatever is

perceived to be happening, does so on its own accord. Responses are

occurring on their own accord too - the sense of doership is false. So what

is left, but to perceive one's response, instead of perpetuating the

illusion of involvement with both perceptions and responses...? >>>

 

Well let me just wait till I have read that "New Scientist" article.

 

Love,

Wim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jb wrote:

>

> On 11/26/00 at 8:54 PM colette wrote:

>

> º , "jb" <kvy9@l...> wrote:

> [..]

> ºI disagree. I believe we have creative power through thought. If we

> ºscript our experience from conditioned self hatred then that's what we

> ºplay as.

> º

> ºThe free one has choice to observe what is playing & to rescript the

> ºplay. This is what Gene Poole is referring to I believe.

> º

> ºlove,

> º

> ºCol

>

> Not only ~I~ do disagree with you, in the meanwhile science does disagree with

you as well - there is no "free will". That was what the article "the greatest

myth" in New Scientist is about - a warmly recommended read.

> But OK, whatever you believe is OK :)

> º

> º>

> º> Love,

> º> Jan

 

When things and events are seen as spontaneous the question is meaningless.

There is

neither free will nor is there not free will, there is only this.

 

love,

andrew

Link to comment
Share on other sites

andrew macnab wrote:

> When things and events are seen as spontaneous the question is

meaningless. There is neither free will nor is there not free will,

there is only this.

>

> love,

> andrew

 

Yes! Only this.

So much appears

And then disappears

Only this remains.

 

Love - Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

, andrew macnab <a.macnab@n...>

wrote:

> jb wrote:

> >

> > On 11/26/00 at 8:54 PM colette@b... wrote:

> >

> > º , "jb" <kvy9@l...> wrote:

> > [..]

> > ºI disagree. I believe we have creative power through thought. If

we

> > ºscript our experience from conditioned self hatred then that's

what we

> > ºplay as.

> > º

> > ºThe free one has choice to observe what is playing & to rescript

the

> > ºplay. This is what Gene Poole is referring to I believe.

> > º

> > ºlove,

> > º

> > ºCol

> >

> > Not only ~I~ do disagree with you, in the meanwhile science does

disagree with you as well - there is no "free will". That was what the

article "the greatest myth" in New Scientist is about - a warmly

recommended read.

> > But OK, whatever you believe is OK :)

> > º

> > º>

> > º> Love,

> > º> Jan

>

> When things and events are seen as spontaneous the question is

meaningless. There is

> neither free will nor is there not free will, there is only this.

>

> love,

> andrew

 

Nice answer. I like that.

 

love,

 

Col

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...