Bring4th

Truth is not known in abstraction. It is known within the self.

Intuition is the same as rationality. Rationality only veils intuition when the intuition becomes overencumbered by a dense illusion. Religion only exists when the intuition is veiled. In truth, there is only intuition.

I've been begging for proof for so long. I receive evidence and I am still hungry. I've realized that I could receive all of the proof in the world and I would think it's all an hallucination. In the end, the truth is only known when you truly feel it within yourself. This feeling is not automatically given, it is honed with trust and letting go of what you have been indoctrinated with. The key to knowing is not indoctrinating yourself in beliefs but truly knowing within yourself what is true. You're connected to everything, everything is known. You simply have to find it.

This sounds foolish but let me assure you of this: Most of your truths are intuitively known unless you were really good at indoctrinating yourself from a early age (guilty as charged).

Why do you believe there is an afterlife? Why do you believe people and you exist? Is it just fact? Or is there something else? You'll soon find it isn't text-based facts that give these things truth but your connection to the actual truth within yourself. Unless you rely on people to tell you what is true, you'll find you "just know" things.

Feel free to consider this new-age BS but I assure you: Truth is not only external. Although there is no external.

I don't encourage blindly believing in things. No, I only encourage finding the "knowing" within yourself which is actually difficult to do in this realm. Finding past lives through this "knowing" is a hard act to practice. The key is letting go in the end but not letting go of the act. It's like feeling through a dark hallway and finding the other end.

Technicality: Look to the energy centers of the upper solar plexus and lower green-ray. This is where the "gut" is. This is where intuition is.

P.S. If a car is about to hit you, get out of the way. Rationality will always be needed but will inevitably fall away.

Intuition is a faculty of intelligence just as rationality is. They exist on the same ontological level. What you are confusing is "spirit" with the psychological faculty that may access it.

yeah look, everyone has their own system or methodology for determining what is 'true' or valid for them.

the value in communication is being offer something to the other-self that they are able to apply to their own thought system to yield further understanding.

(02-28-2014, 02:31 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]Intuition is a faculty of intelligence just as rationality is. They exist on the same ontological level. What you are confusing is "spirit" with the psychological faculty that may access it.

I agree. However, rationality works on abstraction. In a world of abstraction, it is always needed.

Psychology and mammalian/primal theory works all the way up to the question "Do I exist?" and other questions a primate couldn't answer.

---

(02-28-2014, 02:32 PM)Bring4th_Plenum Wrote: [ -> ]yeah look, everyone has their own system or methodology for determining what is 'true' or valid for them.

the value in communication is being offer something to the other-self that they are able to apply to their own thought system to yield further understanding.

Indoctrination and strict following of others is a valid path. However, complete reliance on others leads to a great disservice and eventual elimination of the self. Completely valid; however, I think some form of autonomy will eventually be wanted for most.

(02-28-2014, 02:38 PM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]Indoctrination and strict following of others is a valid path. However, complete reliance on others leads to a great disservice and eventual elimination of the self. Completely valid; however, I think some form of autonomy will eventually be wanted for most.

these things aren't absolute Adonai.

think of the co-existence of the orange chakra and the yellow ray chakra.

one is the personal identity, and the other the social identity.

these can co-exist and support each other in the process of learning.

So do you have to cut yourself off from everything or else be indoctrinated? are those the only two options?

Teachings from any source whether it be people or other things are always acting as guideposts. Whether guideposts are accepted as truth or used to find truth indirectly, learning occurs within.

You are free to accept every placard, news article and teacher as bringers of truth. In the end, it is you that accepts and verifies the truth. In the end, there is no teaching only learning.

Delegating your learning to others is indoctrination of the self. Learning for others is indoctrinating others.

---

(02-28-2014, 02:55 PM)Bring4th_Plenum Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-28-2014, 02:38 PM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]Indoctrination and strict following of others is a valid path. However, complete reliance on others leads to a great disservice and eventual elimination of the self. Completely valid; however, I think some form of autonomy will eventually be wanted for most.

these things aren't absolute Adonai.

think of the co-existence of the orange chakra and the yellow ray chakra.

one is the personal identity, and the other the social identity.

these can co-exist and support each other in the process of learning.

The orange-ray is not always a direct reflection of the yellow-ray. The orange-ray can have a different set of values than what is accepted in the yellow. Coexistence is not equal to submission.

I agree with what you say, but signposts have value.

Imagine trying to navigate your way through a dark wood with many twisting paths, certainly it would make your journey more fruitful and less trying if you accepted some form of guidance left by those who have trod the same paths previously. This does not mean that you aren't free to explore at your own pace or take any side tracks that seem appealing to you, but it does mean that if there is a big patch of quicksand or something that you will have fair warning before confronting it (this is a loose analogy I realize it's not perfect).

The issue here seems to me to be one of trust. you don't trust people to discern things for themselves. You also don't seem to trust that people know what they are talking about. This may be me overstepping my reach, but there seems to me to also be a latent distrust of your own discernment since you repeatedly express a fear of being indoctrinated, do you feel your personality is unable to withstand being exposed to the ideas of others?

There is a LOT of value in the information available through interaction with other-selves. This is something Ra mentions over and over again. Yes the true source of truth is the self, but you are not the only self here. Trust that other people are able to think for themselves Seeking as a group is FAR more effective than seeking alone.

---

(02-28-2014, 03:36 PM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-28-2014, 02:55 PM)Bring4th_Plenum Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-28-2014, 02:38 PM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]Indoctrination and strict following of others is a valid path. However, complete reliance on others leads to a great disservice and eventual elimination of the self. Completely valid; however, I think some form of autonomy will eventually be wanted for most.

these things aren't absolute Adonai.

think of the co-existence of the orange chakra and the yellow ray chakra.

one is the personal identity, and the other the social identity.

these can co-exist and support each other in the process of learning.

The orange-ray is not always a direct reflection of the yellow-ray. The orange-ray can have a different set of values than what is accepted in the yellow. Coexistence is not equal to submission.

is that not what he was saying?

I agree with the basic message. I always go on my gut feelings on the matter. I think people often try and look deeply into knowledge hoping that once they have understood enough material they will some how become enlighten or whatever you want to call. I don' think that is the case. Rather the honest opening of self to other self and then to the creator through the development of will/faith is the key to self realization from my own personal experience.

I'll sum it up:

I don't trust authority. I find authority to be a result of a depolarized/negatively-polarized society. No, I don't accept authority as a concept. It is not within my values but I accept the potentiator/society I am within. I will not try to end it but I will support my belief/understanding of the positive polarity.

I do not take knowledge on authority. At least, I'll try not to anymore.

(02-28-2014, 02:38 PM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-28-2014, 02:31 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]Intuition is a faculty of intelligence just as rationality is. They exist on the same ontological level. What you are confusing is "spirit" with the psychological faculty that may access it.

I agree. However, rationality works on abstraction. In a world of abstraction, it is always needed.

Psychology and mammalian/primal theory works all the way up to the question "Do I exist?" and other questions a primate couldn't answer.

There are at least two forms of abstraction. The first is due to the veiled 3D mind and includes societal and personal "as-if" conventions which forces a context, expectation and treatment of information. Within that mind, the second abstraction is due to the evaluating mind which uses intuition to suggest where things are coming from and where they are going to, from the standpoint of one's worldview, whenever one is perceiving the unconscious or unknown. Note that the worldview is composed entirely of rationally evaluated experience.
Therefore the more refined and comprehensive the worldview (learning/acceptance), the more illuminated the suggestions from the intuition will be.


The intuition is quite helpless without experience, and experience is epitomized by the archetype of authority.

Absolutly love this thread, the gold nuggets are a raining! A big thank you to everyone involved!

Intuition is typically defined by psychologists as certain thought processes that have become very automatic - your information processing time is very quick and does not require too much conscious awareness of what is happening. You're basically picking out information based on flow of things and can transform that into a pattern. This is thanks to past experiences that we've somehow learned and probably stored in the unconscious mind (you probably won't remember immediately why you know what you know or cannot recall bc our memory is faulty).

Rational thinking involves analysis and developing plans to engage in certain behavior, observing, analyzing feedback, then further modifying plans. They overlap but they are not the same thing, basically bc rational thinking requires conscious analysis (rational analysis is usually demonstrated by function of the frontal lobe, the most newest part of the human brain).

Intuition, altho quick in processing time can be full of errors bc you do not use the rational-thinking feedback system to make the decision. Rational thinking or making things conscious means you have not only had past experiences in certain situations but you've given time & thought to process situations. You're crystalizing your learning.

Most likely in survival-related situations like the potential to be hit by a car or being eaten by a dinosaur, it is more about your emotions at work (flight, fight, or freeze function.. the most primitive part of the human brain functions in such situations).

Both feeling and intuition are quick. Actually, being time/space functions, they are instantaneous with the only delay being their evaluation through reasoning process. In time/space we have a pattern of mind which interfaces our intelligence to our boundary of consciousness. Our feeling function does provide instantaneous impressions just like our intuition, except intuition is purely perception whereas feeling is a holistic evaluation (and also part of the rational worldview which forms experience).

The post was so nice I liked it twice, there's some real magic for ya

I am not speaking of psychology nor the primal lobes of the brain. I am speaking of an aspect of the spirit complex.

There is no access to the spirit complex without what has been provided by mind.

What you're talking about seems to be the mind and its cognitive processes. Would you please explain why you think intuition and rational thinking is something to do with the spirit complex?

(03-01-2014, 02:43 PM)reeay Wrote: [ -> ]What you're talking about seems to be the mind and its cognitive processes. Would you please explain why you think intuition and rational thinking is something to do with the spirit complex?

The mind is what allows anything of the spirit to actualize. Rationality and intuition are faculties of mind which may be used to refine its own distortions thus providing acceptance or allowance of spirit (which exists in infinity). The "spirit complex" is sort of an idea of the spiritual connection (again, infinity) as if it was somehow not intimately involved in this balancing of mind.

Yeah that's what I thought, which is why I want to understand why Adonai thought it was of the spirit complex.

Except knowledge is not the same as experience. Experience is how you evaluate the unconscious in general.

We are one self, so is not the truth found everywhere and in everything? It all depends at what point you place the boundary of "self" in relation to your experience.

When you are trying to compare to the infinity of one, everything is true, has infinite worth, and is always appropriate.

(03-02-2014, 09:38 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]When you are trying to compare to the infinity of one, everything is true, has infinite worth, and is always appropriate.

Until those pesky feelings start jumbling it up.

(03-02-2014, 09:50 PM)Sagittarius Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-02-2014, 09:38 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]When you are trying to compare to the infinity of one, everything is true, has infinite worth, and is always appropriate.

Until those pesky feelings start jumbling it up.

How's that?

(03-02-2014, 11:02 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-02-2014, 09:50 PM)Sagittarius Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-02-2014, 09:38 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]When you are trying to compare to the infinity of one, everything is true, has infinite worth, and is always appropriate.

Until those pesky feelings start jumbling it up.

How's that?

Never mind my notion didn't make sense.