Messages in the dark

MESSAGES IN THE DARK

From the moment of our birth, we are under the influence of our environment - the people around us, society, culture, our education, ideas and opinions we hear and read. We could say that all these factors represent the light in which we view our lives.

However, we didn't come into existence at the moment of our birth. Even though this life appears to be the only one, the past we have seemingly forgotten has left its marks upon us. They abound in our behavior. They can be found in our thoughts, imagination and ideas. And there is a way to view them: get our eyes accustomed to the dark.

Signs of our past lives can be found in:

• Thoughts that we consider the product of our imagination.
• Ideas we always held and do not seem to stem from our immediate environment.
• Characteristics of our personality we are not consciously aware of, as they lay hidden behind the conventions of everyday life.
• Gut feelings in general, dispositions and feelings towards certain people and subjects, which we often overlook because of their subtle presence.

(Some of these signs may not be connected to our past but to our ability to know without using our senses, as in telepathy. This ability can be developed in parallel, during the process of getting our eyes accustomed to the dark.)

Think about it... Could you be the person you are today, if this was the only life you have ever lived? Personally, I never questioned having lived before, but I was surprised by the number of signs I could find. I realized that most part of my present lifetime is somehow connected to my past lives. Even though I was seemingly born with a "clean slate".

If we take care to notice such messages, we will gradually become more sensitive to recognizing them. We will also need to recall ideas and thoughts that we had as children. To bring back to mind things that we thought or felt. Our reactions towards certain subjects. What we liked and what we were repulsed by. And, most importantly, we will need to take a critical look at our own behavior. At first sight, of course, it appears reasonable and obvious, and so it doesn't cross our mind that there's more to it. Still, there's a lot to be found behind it... 

This lifetime is not independent from our past lives. It appears this way, because we do not remember. But the messages can be found all over our behavior and thinking. These messages may shed light to the hitherto obscure theory of karma. No debt really exists on our part. There isn't such a thing as a "bill of our misdeeds". What seems to exist is a fixation of our attention to situations of the past. Unresolved, unfulfilled or in any way problematic situations that we unconsciously reproduce from one lifetime to the other. And so they keep coming up. We cause them without realizing it, through our choices and behavior. We appoint others as our opponents, victims or victimizers, in order to duplicate the conditions of the past. And if we do not realize what we are doing, we will be paying the supposed debt forever, and our "bill" will never be paid off. 

Identifying and interpreting the signs, however, can be like giving shots in the dark. This is the reason I used the metaphor for light and darkness. It is a route that requires concentration, persistence and dedication. 

Let's take an example. We change bodies like we change outfits. These bodies are extremely short lived. By the time we start our life, we already see the first wrinkles. Very annoying. Do you feel this way? This feeling of annoyance is such a message - for those sharing it, of course. The information we have "in the light" is that man lives an average of 80 years, this is how it has always been, etc. This message could of course indicate our reasonable distaste for old age and death. But it could also mean that we did not always occupy such short-lived bodies. Sounds far-fetched, but that is exactly why we tend to overlook it or interpret it differently - if we allow such a message to enter our conscious thinking at all.

Not all people receive the same messages, naturally, because everyone is a unique being, with a different, unique past. And then, one message alone does not mean anything. Only when combined with many more messages, it begins to decipher. It takes several tens of such messages to see part of the picture. They are separate pieces of the puzzle. And we will need enough of them to start seeing a picture that makes sense.

According to the theory of the New Age, our thoughts create our world, and therefore we should focus on positive thoughts only. Right, but wrong. This way we will bury our hidden messages even deeper and we will remain on the surface. We will focus on targets that we do not even know they are truly ours. Our long-term goals, projects left undone, open issues of the past will remain unresolved - just out of sight. We hide them in the closet. And sooner or later, they will return with a vengeance. Strangely enough, the very same theory can be both right and wrong. We will probably have to get used to the idea that no absolutes exist.

The above considerations and conclusions are empirical and the result of intuitively following a route I call "getting my eyes accustomed to see in the dark".

Conservation of the Cosmos

CONSERVATION OF THE COSMOS

Last night, I spent some time alone on the balcony, looking at the usual unattractive scenery around me. A rather stable scenery, just like my whole life. I'm always the same person that I can remember in this lifetime, and the world I know stays pretty much the same day by day. I can sit on the balcony being certain that I will not suddenly find myself at another place or time. My surroundings do not change or disappear in the blink of an eye. I'm self-assured that I will not be sucked by a green hole or start wondering around the mental worlds of other beings. 

Our world is pretty much stable. This doesn't mean of course that it is unchanging. It definitely changes through time, but in a predictable way. Besides, this is the purpose of time - to serve as a stable ground for life to evolve, following certain laws - known or unknown laws, it's not the point here. 

There is a lot of meaning behind this stability, which we are used to taking for granted... We always try to change our lives, but we never wonder how the world remains stable. How come the Earth never disappears beneath our feet? How come the universe does not change without notice? (which, of course, would be terribly disturbing...) 

We now know that we can create our own reality. Only to a certain extent, though... To the extent that we do not run into the realities of others. We do not have total control. No one has... fortunately! If one being alone could create, change or destroy the whole world, wouldn't that be a nightmare for the rest of us?

If we were to pick one cosmological theory as the most utopic (not an easy task, considering the existing theories), it is the one that explains the creation of the world by one God with unlimited powers. Do you think such a God would leave the world alone? That would require the highest level of ethics. And what would be the point of a concept like ethics for such a being? I seriously doubt that he would stand someplace watching his creation for eons... 

The gods we have known could at most create a flood. This can also be done today by non-gods, with the use of seismic weapons. Gods or humans can destroy a civilization or even a whole planet, but not in the blink of a thought... It can only be done in the blink of a bomb or with the use of some other technology, which however does not bypass the universe and its laws. It cannot bypass them, for it will collide with the thoughts of other beings, who continue to create them, keeping them stable. This is why mind control and eradication of individuality is the ultimate weapon in the hands of those seeking total control. 

Maybe once upon a no-time there was only a Whole - one being, who maybe was not one, but infinite and zero at the same time. But if we were all one, we would all have the same thoughts and there would be nothing unknown, anywhere. This world would obviously not exist, since the only way to preserve it is to lose total control over it. 

And this is the reason for individuality, the reason we once probably decided to not be one indivisible Whole: To achieve conservation of the world.

Are we all One??

ARE WE ALL ONE;

Unity is a beautiful concept. However, is it true that we are all one? That individuality is only an illusion? 

Quantum mechanics experiments have shown that no matter how far apart are two originally entangled particles separated from one another, every action on one produces a reaction on the other. This observation has led to various philosophical conclusions - "all are interconnected", "all are one", "individuality does not exist", to name a few. Even though science admits its inability to define or measure consciousness, it appears to accept a postulated truth: consciousness, too, is part of the material universe, regulated by the same physical laws. 

Cosmological theories start with the creation of the universe and assume - without explicitly saying so or maybe without even realizing it - that consciousness was developed afterwards as the universe evolved. Imagine a program mysteriously and unfathomably created, which then further evolved by itself to a point where it created its own users... The users, of course, are not visible when you only look at the monitor. However, the results of their actions are visible, and therefore we can suspect that there's something more, a determining factor controlling the program, although there's no way to measure it. Unfortunately, cosmological theories consider NON-EXISTENT that which they cannot measure, and SELF-EXISTENT that which they do measure. 

This background makes a good landing area for messages from Outer Space, communicated by higher beings through "chosen ones". Messages imbued with the idea that we are all one and that self is a bad thing to be done away with. The group is everything, the individual is nothing. 

Unity is a noble idea. Love is the highest ideal. Whoever promotes such things cannot be ill-intentioned... Besides, these highly advanced beings promise so many nice things - other dimensions, freedom, immortality. 

Immortality has always been a dearly desired goal, and religions certainly knew their business when they promised eternal life. The only problem being that eternity is inevitable for a spiritual being. You cannot die as a spirit, unless you lose your consciousness. It appears that some alien races are collectives and have been that way for thousands of years. I do not know how easily that was accomplished by their dominators or how long it took, but collectivity does not seem to be the normal state of affairs for a spiritual being. By definition, a spiritual being is Cause, Source, Creator. It is not a bee working forever in a beehive, blindly following a collective thought pattern. But if a whole society of beings operated on one consciousness only, what perfect workers would they make! Slaves to one controlling consciousness. One consciousness that at the same time would be everybody's. Can one be more dead than that? 

Hopefully, humans are naturally disobedient, and no matter how confused they are as to their true nature, have unknowingly resisted for thousands of years total control over their consciousness. And quite some of them are not ordinary beings... 

Unity is a beautiful concept. But it is beautiful concepts that make the best baits for entrapment in the hands of potential enslavers.

Philosophy and Dogmatism

PHILOSOPHY AND DOGMATISM

Philosophy is not ready-made knowledge that is revealed to one by a superior power. Philosophers of Ancient Greece used to prove their ideas using reason, oftentimes with a scientific precision. Nowadays, those able or inclined to do the same are usually discouraged by the fact that judgement and logical analysis have been largely degraded as tools of thought.

Nowadays, the procedure of proving a theory has been replaced to a large degree by persuasion techniques, and the reader is usually limited to agree or disagree. He often bases such agreement or disagreement on his intuition or, in other words, his "inner sense of truth". If we postulate that knowledge of truth exists within any person, then intuition could never err and, consequently, all those using their intuition as a reason why they accept or reject a certain theory should be in agreement with one another, which is obviously not the case. We must assume, therefore, that it is not necessarily their intuition speaking, but their existent beliefs, their preferences, the appeal of a theory, the personality of the person expressing it and many other factors. Modern man is used to take their voice as "intuition" without second thought. And dogmatism finds fertile ground to expand.

Authoritative statement or acceptance of beliefs and theories has no place in the search for wisdom. It starts with a marginalization of critical thought and leads gradually to its elimination. Beliefs that are based on the foundation of dogmatism are rigid, resulting to a further rigidity of thinking which brought them about in the first place. The greatest obstacle to knowledge is the conviction that we already know.

Causation or the Art of Influencing Life

CAUSATION

or

THE ART OF INFLUENCING LIFE

No system, no government, no magic wand or potion will ever set us free or give us what we want, if we do not unlock the knowledge within ourselves that will release our inherent power. The greatest misconception of people on this planet is the idea that their fate is determined by powers acting independently of them.

A concept never expressed

I look for a word that can define a very basic concept. The ability of man to be cause over situations and circumstances, over his body and emotions, his impulses and weaknesses, his life and the world, the space and time. I guess this statement alone strikes as odd. Because we hardly ever use the word cause in such context.

In our civilization, the word cause is mostly associated with negative effects and seems to be used with negative connotation: The cause of war, the cause of suffering, the cause of evil. But how would we call a person that interferes with circumstances and acts as a guiding agent? How would we call a person that refuses to submit to his fate and tries to control it instead? Is there such a word? Because the concept definitely exists.

I search in the dictionary. Causative: effective or operating as a cause or agent. Close, but not quite the word I'm looking for. There's no word with this definition: 

"marked by the intention and ability to act as a cause".

What happened to the concept that describes our most fundamental ability? How come it has never been expressed by a single word, thus lying forgotten through the ages beyond the created world, hidden behind gods and fate?

Man as a cause

When we were young, our mother probably never told us to be cause over school or relationships, over our body or life. Maybe she was even trying to be cause over us herself, especially in regards to our body - insisting that we should eat against our will or go to bed when we didn't feel like it. How many of us could walk barefoot without threats of catching a cold? Or eat ice cream in the winter? We were thus taught that someone else was cause over us or responsible for us.

Our schooling and life in general added to this frame of mind, leaving us full of uncertainty about our ability to create what we want, vulnerable to the unknown, subject to human or natural laws we cannot control.

We cannot be cause over something if we don't feel responsible about it to some degree. Responsibility is the recognition that something is our duty or depends on us. And this recognition leads to specific actions or behavior. When we disclaim any connectedness with something, it becomes impossible to exert any influence on it. When we just try to repel it or pretend it doesn't exist, we automatically become the effect of it. If we blame something, we will become the effect of it for a very simple reason: If something else is responsible for a situation, then that is the cause, and we, inevitably, the effect.

This has started to become vaguely perceived by a number of people in this new era of spiritual awakening, but they err in saying "the responsibility is all mine." Our decision to become cause does not require to falsely assume responsibility for all the errors ever made. Lacking any practical way to change conditions, this is just another kind of fatalism.

The film Kymatica promotes the idea that each one of us is responsible for all the plagues of our planet: famine, poverty, illness, globalization:

"...when you think the end is near, the Apocalypse, Armageddon,

and when you think we as a species are doomed...

It is not THEY, it is YOU that brought this about."

Full of high-sounding statements, I only wish that the film suggested a practical way to change all that for which each one of us is supposed to be personally responsible. It is not a matter of finding fault but rather finding a way to become cause.

The truth is somewhere in between. There's always something, small or big, we can have an effect on. Without necessarily "taking the blame".

Interfering with the "normal course" of events

Some will argue that it is not right to influence situations - we should just accept things the way they are, as they are guided by a "higher power". The beautiful moments "just happen". The setbacks "happen". And all we need to do is to simply learn to live our life as it comes.

But even those who say so do not really believe it. Even if they think that nothing depends on them, waiting for another power to bring about the change they want. They expect God or other people to produce the effect they seek.

Nobody wants to live life the way it is. Every person seeks to influence his or her environment and strives to be cause, at least to some extent. If people cannot control their boss, they control their spouse or their children. If they cannot control the government, they control their employees. Some try to be cause through shouting or the use of violence. Many accomplish it through lies or fraud. When all else fails, some will make an ultimate attempt to cause an effect by ending their lives. In the upper levels we will find the activists and active citizens, who seek to change the world through action. Artists try to accomplish it through their art. Philosophers through thinking.

Faith

At lower levels of causation, people deal with things within their reach. With those things they can influence and control with little or great effort, without having to use mind power. At any level, however, our success to influence or bring about an effect depends on the amount of our intention. By intention I mean the positive mental attitude of visualizing what we want and believing without any reservation that is will happen. We could also call it faith.

The less controllable is the effect we want to accomplish, the more faith we need. Faith means certainty that something will take place. That is the meaning of "Ask and you shall receive". The basis of the law of attraction.

Belief is power. This was known and used by the various religious leaders. They said: "If you believe in God, your prayers shall be answered". And he who truly believes without a shade of doubt that God will give him what he want will receive it! But it was not God who made the wish come true. It was his own power, a power that anyone can use effectively regardless of what ggd he believes in, if he believes in any god at all. Because faith is simply the ability of a being to create the world.

Limiting beliefs and counter intentions

There is no greater obstacle to our ability to cause things than ourselves. The faith factor, which I would rather call intention to avoid religious connotations, is not a simple matter. We want something to happen. We think about it positively and with intention, but all of a sudden we find ourselves overwhelmed by counter thoughts and reasons why it might not happen. Perhaps we are not even certain if we want it or not. Maybe we wonder if it is the best, after all. Perhaps we fear the responsibility attached to our desired goal. Our mind is reactively flooded with all the restrictive ideas we have been "educated" on. And so our intention is losing its power.

Limiting thoughts are commonly accepted beliefs by a very large number of people, and they derive great power from this broad agreement. They are not easy to overcome. Gradually, however, we could eliminate all these ideas that are not really ours, all these "truths" that are not true. And reaching our true self, having removed all the add-ons, our intention will suddenly gain great power and effectiveness. Because there will be nothing there to hold it back. 

If you think you cannot make a difference because you're one in a billion, because you're too small against the vastness of the universe, consider this: Figures have meaning and significance only in the material world. Fortunately, they mean nothing on a spiritual level.

Are we Created or are we Real?

ARE WE CREATED OR ARE WE REAL?

Commonly held beliefs are the greatest obstacle to knowing. One of them is that we come to a created world. Religions say we are ourselves creations. Animated beings designed by the Great Animator. And our lives go by as planned, the scenes succeeding one another according to the play.

But if we were cartoon characters, how could we have any self-expression? How could we have our own thoughts, how could we make decisions?

How could we create?

Only the Animator could do this. The animations do not have self-existence. But we do.

And if we have a nature, which I doubt, if we have a "special role", which I doubt, that would be best expressed by our willingness, desire and decision to create effects. Exactly like the Great Animator.

The Power and Trap of Agreement - A confession

The power and trap of Agreement 

A CONFESSION 

When I was a little girl, my world was filled with transparent fairy creatures. I could see them everywhere, any time of the day. And so I did not play with toys, as other children did. All day long, I was after my "butterflings", which constantly escaped my grip as they flew under and behind furniture or high at the ceiling... There was only one problem - nobody else could see them.

But how long can you see something, when nobody else can see it? 

Thus, as my 5th birthday was approaching, the ethereal creatures that filled my world began to fade away, until one day they vanished from view. I started to see the world like everyone else did. I did not find my bed decorated with white ribbons when I woke up in the mornings. Nothing was flying in front of the walls. 

When I was a little girl, I felt contempt for money and for people who felt sentimentally attached to material objects. I could not understand why the "grown-ups", who had lived longer than me (as I thought at that time), had not learned something more about life. I believed that the highest purpose of man is perfection, a rather extreme viewpoint, especially for a little child. 

But how long can you believe in something, when nobody else believes in it? 

Thus, as time went by, without realizing it, I started to believe that material possessions are valuable, as well as the acceptance and admiration on the part of other people. My superior ideals faded away like the fairies of my childhood, as I grew up and started having a different view of things. My dreams for spiritual excellence also faded away by the end of high school, through my striving to be as close as I could to accepted "standards". Even my decision to go to the university was not mine (though it could be, had I any idea of what I wanted). Somewhere from behind the screens, my true self guided me to study Physics, so that I might gain an understanding of the universe.

However, during the years at the university I pursued anything but knowledge. And in the following years I played many lower games, and I placed many more screens in front of me, so the world I used to see changed dramatically. I used labels for myself, I identified myself with people, trends and attitudes. 

It took me 40 years to realize the extent to which my view had been distorted by the need for acceptance and agreement. Little by little, I started to rediscover my own viewpoint, putting aside all the colored glasses that influenced the way I viewed the world. I found out that almost anything we "know", all the established and widely accepted "truths" are but a lie. 

Now I smile as I think about it, because nothing can exist without agreement. Reality is that on which most people agree. If ten people see a table and one thinks it is a chair, then this one must be "crazy". Because reality is established by majority, although we are being imbued since birth with the false idea that the world around us exists in its own right, without our participation in its creation. 

Maybe if I had persisted, the winged creatures would little by little become visible by other people and eventually become part of the agreed upon reality. Reality and truth are not the same thing. 

Many times I wonder, as the years go by, if I'm arriving again at the point where I was at the end of my previous lifetime. It would be sad to discover that it took me a lifetime to reach at the same point again. But I really don't think so. Because I learned something that will help me avoid the same mistakes, something I didn't know before. So if I'm going to forget everything else, there's this one thing that I would like to keep from this lifetime to the next: To never take anything for granted, to see with my own eyes and to seek my own truth. This is the only way to continue onward on my journey for new discoveries, new lands and new adventures.

Life - By chance of "by hands"?

LIFE

BY CHANCE OR "BY HANDS"?

The origin of life is a puzzling question since time immemorial. Today, however, people do not appear to be puzzled, since science has provided all the answers - or at least it thinks it has... Because the accepted scientific answer is that life was created by chance...

The accepted scientific theory which explains life on our planet is the theory of evolution. It says that as living beings developed certain characteristics, they tended to keep those enabling them to survive better in their environment, passing them on to the next generations, while at the same time discarding those not assisting survival. And the animals that did not adjust to their environments became extinct. This theory is opposed by the theory of intelligent design - the notion that there is an intelligent cause behind some of the characteristics of the living beings. Intelligent design is generally rejected by the scientific community, however there are several scientists more inclined to accept this theory instead of evolution and the idea that everything was created by chance.

What is “life”?

Can science provide the answer? By definition, science deals with observable facts, with the material world alone. That would be alright on the part of science if at the same time it recognized its inability to explain everything in terms of molecules and accepted the fact that there is something more to matter, something that ought to be studied as well if we are supposed to attain a certain level of truth. On the contrary, in an effort to answer everything, even though it obviously cannot, modern science maintains that only matter exists. It looks for intelligence inside the genes, as though the IQ could depend on the combination of nitrogen or hydrogen molecules or whatever makes up our DNA. Science says that life, intelligence, emotions, ideals, the strange nostalgia when we gaze at the stars, they are all the effect of molecular evolution... This is sad. Because scientists ought more than the "laymen" to not allow anything obstruct their thinking.

Man and computer: a parallel

But the biggest failure is when we try to explain man in terms of matter. According to classic biology, man is a highly complex computer, which (a) was created by chance and (b) operates without electricity and, most important, without a user! Let us examine this parallel. The human body is like the hardware, the genes contain the software programs and the brain is the processing unit. What would be the electricity or the batteries of our human computer? Well, here is the first fault of the materialistic science. To explain life, we have to postulate that living beings have some sort of "batteries", which we could call, for the purposes of this article, "vital energy". We therefore consider that vital energy is what differentiates the living from the soulless, and it is inside all living organisms, from plants to man. This vitalenergy is not measurable. It may have a wavelength which is not measurable by scientific means, however this does not mean it does not exist.

Now let's come to the user, the major factor in the equation of intelligent life. Who is moving your legs when you walk? Is it your muscles or your brain? Of course not! The muscles and your brain simply execute your order. And that is the second major fault in the theory of evolution: It completely ignores the user, the spiritual entity directing the brain. Here is a self-evident example: What is the similarity between human and ape DNA? Well they are similar by an astonishing 98,6%! And what is the difference between man and ape? Certainly not 1,4%. Their difference is immense, because it is not based on the DNA but on the user. And we do not need a microscope to observe that...

Does this mean that animals do not have a "user"? Could be, besides animals base their knowledge on their instinct, the memory stored in their cells. There areonly few things they can learn. In our computer analogy, we could say that animals have been preprogrammed and therefore they need little if any intervention by a user, and if a user does exist he definitely does not need to be specialized. Man, on the other hand, does not know anything when he is born. On our planet, only man is capable of learning, without this meaning that only human body would be fit for use by a spiritual being. It appears, however, that on planet earth only human brain is developed enough for a spiritual being to be able to "express" itself through it.

What or who is the user, who is us, in other words, is a mystery waiting to be resolved. Together with the mystery of what or who is the Creator. Until such time arrives, the mystery will continue to exist, adding spice to our lives. But this should not mean, however, that we should forget all truth, because then we will be like puppets in the game of life, a game that will be anything but fun.