Thursday, March 11, 2010

Mind Syntropy Users Blogs

Jan 19
2010

Surrender Guilt

Posted by cbaxley in surrender , Spirituality , happiness , David Hawkins

cbaxley

"There is no this causing a that" therefore it is not your fault.

Guilt is coming from an opinion that somehow the situation could
have been different, which it could not have... "Everything is arising of its own".

Surrender "feeling guilty is wrong" it is also arising of its own.
"Surrender everything as it arises".
 
Judging that the feeling is somehow improper takes us out of the "crest of the wave". All is perfection(God) even events that appear tragic.

This is how I use the teachings when such an event arises.

Love,
Clint

Dec 31
2009

Caring & Loving Unveiled

Posted by admin in Untagged 

admin

To expand a bit upon Clint's remarks on "Caring" in response to yours, Zak, (because spiritual progress requires its understanding)...
First, and please, indeed do click on the link provided by Clint and go have a look at Webster's definitions of "care" and "love." In so doing, one will quickly find some of the ways in which we all seem to "care" for things in our world. In respect to "care" Webster clearly demonstrates, "Painstaking or watchful attention" - as in the case of caring for the sick or caring for the basic needs of our children or caring for the maintenance of our cars - is a very common way in which we apply "care" to our personal realities. "Regard, coming from desire or esteem" - as in caring about our spouse or family members or even employers or friends - likewise emerges from Webster's dictionary as a way in which everyone commonly employs the distinction of "care" in our everyday lives.
But, consider too, that other elements of the definition of the word "care" are also used every day in the life of most people, and often, are not applied in any way aligned with what most relate to as the limit to its definition - referring to Clint's remark that most people confuse "caring" for someone or something with "loving" that person or thing. To wit, "loving" someone or something is not at all the same as "caring" for someone or something. They are distinct from each other. They are not the same. This is why the two experiences have different words we use to express them.
Consider, that if I am personally experiencing in my body physical feelings toward someone or something which typically accompany the "suffering of mind" or a "disquieted state of mixed uncertainty, apprehension, and responsibility", or relating to a person, thing or circumstance as the source of my own unpleasant "feelings of anxiety", then what I am actually doing is applying another existing element of the word "care" to my own reality while thinking (and being) that these feelings of despair are necessary and required in order to love that person, thing or circumstance about which I "care" and toward which I am feeling uncertain, apprehensive and responsible. I am effectively confusing the two very distinct worlds of "loving" and "caring." And, we've all been taught that in order to "love" we must also "care", and that when I am "loving" I must also be "caring" about that person or thing. Clinically - and more to the point, mathematically - here is what we are doing...
Love = Care, Care = Love
Through social programming we have all developed personal realities which do include beliefs (or memes) that say that we are suppose to suffer and feel emotional pain in our bodies in order to love something. Or, better said, we have all been taught that if we do love someone or something, we are then biologically required, in the presence of certain types of circumstances, to feel emotional pain in our bodies and then suffer about those people or things toward which we feel loving.
As Clint stated, we have all been programmed to confuse - or collapse together - the separate distinctions of "love" and "care." Yes, please do, care for the sick and care for the needs of your children. And, by all means, care for the maintenance of your car. But please, cease and desist in the confusing of those applications of the word "care", with the ones that suggest that you are required to feel bad about those people or things that you "love. " In short, we are not required to "care" for that which we "love." Contrarily, we are not required to "love" that for which we "care."
The mere fact that Webster is pointing out that, in addition to waxing our cars and feeding the sick or helpless, we humans also seem to suffer and feel emotional pain, anxiety and solicitude about that which we care, is not suggesting that we are required to suffer and feel emotional pain about such things or matters that we feel loving toward. That is not what the dictionary is suggesting at all. The publishers of the dictionary are merely pointing out to those interested that this - feeling anxious or grief about that which we care - is simply something that we, as humans, do by social programming followed by habitual behavior. It's just an observation made by the writers of the dictionary. They are coming to the matter without any passion nor prejudice. They are simply making a clinical observation about human life.
But, make no mistake...just because it's being pointed out in writing within the pages of the dictionary, it doesn't mean that "suffering of mind" is a biological predisposition to the human animal. Webster is merely making the observation of what we humans currently seem to do. The fact is, in life...suffering is only an option. We don't recommend it. But, it is an option. We're leaving the choice to the reader - the witnesser and experiencer of life.
What we're pointing out here - in fact, illuminating - is only one element of how we all develop the grander picture of the entirety of our own personal realities. Consider that each of our personal realities are delivered to us, and developed by us, through language. Without language of some kind how would any of us have a reality at all to express or to which we could even relate?
So, if language is the medium by which we all develop and express our personal views of reality, then it might be worthy of our time and attention to have a look at the words we actually use and how we use them. It becomes particularly noteworthy when we likewise notice that some words and their definitions have been a part of our reality for over 700 years, as in the case of the word "care."
The word "care" came into common use in the 12th century A.D. That's a really long time for a word's original intent to become corrupted by the what appears to be the confused, albeit innocent, default state of mankind.
What we're asserting here is that some parts of each of our personal realities are derived from sometimes having confused some elements of the definition of the words that we use to express ourselves and define our personal realities.
So, if we are all living life every day with the inclusion of all of the distinctions of the word "care", we may do well to investigate every distinction of the word and whether or not the entire definition is being equitably applied to all of our personal experiences. In other words...
Am I suffering and feeling emotional pain because someone I love is not doing what I believe they should be doing? Am I likewise suffering and feeling emotional pain because something I want or aspire to be or belong to is not working out the way I want it to in reality?
Who among us cannot honestly say that this is an experience that we have all had at some point? Let's make this really clear. Consider this very common scenario...
I love someone.
This person I love is not living their life the way I believe is best for them.
This person I love is not doing the things I want them to do.
Now, at this point in the thinking process I'm not yet in trouble. So far, we've only uncovered 3 actual facts in reality.
Fact 1: I love someone
Fact 2: I have a belief system
Fact 3: This person I love is not applying my belief system to their life.
No problems yet in the thinking process because we're still only dealing with the facts. But...
We humans don't stop there, do we? Typically, we humans then apply our confusion of "love" and "care" to the situation. When I notice that I am feeling bad about the fact that this person I love is not applying my belief system to their life, I just stopped working in the world of reality and instead, began applying that one distinct element of the definition of the word "care" that says I'm supposed to suffer, feel anxiety, despair, grief & solicitude about that which I care. In this case, I am "caring" about whether or not this person I love is aligned with my personal belief structure, and suffering emotionally upon the discovery that they are not doing so. As if to suggest, that my personal belief structure is more correct than theirs. Sort of an arrogant position, isn't it? I'm holding out as some sort of Truth that my opinion contains within it more value and Truth than theirs.
Notice then, that the definition of the word "care"  includes not a single mention about the "love of someone or something." Likewise, per Clint's suggestion, look up the word "love" and you will also see that there is no part of the definition of "love" that has anything to do with "caring" for someone or something.
Here's the shortest path to deliverance from the pain and suffering of "caring."
Love someone or something. Let that someone or something be whatever they are, it is, or whatever they are or it is ever going to be. Cease in your attempts to control them or it. Abandon your wish that they or it be something other than what they already are, what it is or what they or it are or is ever going to be. John Lennon said it best I think......"Let it be." Loosely translated...
Stop caring. Just love.
Consider that, in order to even have something to observe with your senses, whatever it is to be observed has to be something or someone that has already happened or is already what it is. "Caring" about what they are or about what it already is, is not the same as simply loving they or it for what they already are or for what it already is. Caring so much about that things are not different than what they already are is where we all get into trouble.
Our advice? "Care" for nothing. Love everything you observe. Period.
Then simply watch and observe how life unfolds before you in a completely new way that is more aligned with everything you've ever wanted than anything you could have ever imagined before.
In short...allow reality. Make space for what is. Give a wide berth to Truth. We've already given a helluva lot of due diligence to the way we were programmed to think. We already know what's at the end of that road. We could try something new. Or not.
The Four Steps are the access to this new realm of which we speak. It is a doorway, or path, to a life without anxiety, emotional pain, suffering, solicitude, grief, worry and concern. This doesn't mean that life isn't going to continue throwing curve balls. It just means that there might be another way to engage with the curve balls when they come. If they way I've been swinging the bat doesn't seem to send it over the fence or even get be to first base, I may wish to consider learning a new batting technique.
Usher in Mind Syntropy.
Love,
Nathaniel

Dec 31
2009

Gubmint and How Gubmint Works

Posted by cbaxley in government , ftc , fda , codex alimentarius , codex

cbaxley

Gubmint and How Gubmint Works

Once upon a time, the government had a vast scrap yard in the middle of a desert.  Congress said, "Someone may steal from it at night." 

So they created a night watchman  position and hired a person for the job.

Then Congress said, "How does the watchman do his job without instruction?"  So they created a planning department and hired two

people, one person to write the instructions, and one person to do time studies.

Then Congress said, "How will we know the night watchman is doing the tasks correctly?"  So they created a Quality Control department  and hired two people.  One to do the studies and one to write the reports.

Then Congress said, "How are these people going to get paid?"  So they created the following  positions, a time keeper and a payroll officer, then hired two people.

Then Congress said, "Who will be accountable for all of these people?"  So they created an administrative section and hired three people, an Administrative Officer, Assistant Administrative Officer, and a  Legal Secretary.

Then Congress said, "We have had this command in operation for one year and we are $18,000 over budget, we must cut back overall  cost."

So they laid off the night watchman.

NOW slowly, let it sink in.

Quietly, we go like sheep to slaughter.

Does anybody remember the reason given for the establishment of the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY during the  Carter Administration?

Anybody?

Anything?

No?

Didn't think so!

Bottom line.  We've spent several hundred  billion dollars in support of an agency... the reason for which  not one person who reads this can remember!

Ready??

It was very simple... and at the time, everybody thought it very appropriate.

The Department of Energy was instituted on August 4, 1977, TO LESSEN OUR DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN  OIL.

Hey, pretty efficient, huh???

AND NOW IT'S 2009 -- 32  YEARS LATER -- AND THE BUDGET FOR THIS "NECESSARY" DEPARTMENT IS AT $24.2 BILLION A YEAR.  THEY HAVE 16,000 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES AND APPROXIMATELY 100,000 CONTRACT EMPLOYEES; AND LOOK AT THE JOB THEY HAVE DONE!  THIS IS WHERE YOU SLAP YOUR FOREHEAD AND SAY, "WHAT WAS I THINKING?"

 

Thirty-two years ago 30% of our oil consumption was foreign imports.  Today 70% of our oil consumption is foreign imports.

Ah, yes -- good ole bureaucracy.

AND, NOW, WE ARE GOING TO TURN THE BANKING SYSTEM,  HEALTH CARE, AND THE AUTO INDUSTRY OVER TO THE SAME GOVERNMENT?

HELLOOO!  Anybody Home?

Dec 22
2009

Codex Alimentarius Haccp - The Sinister Truth Behind Operation Cure-All

Posted by codexalimentarius in ftc , fda , cure all , codex alimentarius , codex

codexalimentarius

What's actually behind Operation Cure-All? Is it just the FDA and FTC taking their power too far? Or is there a deeper, more baleful purpose to this campaign? Who are Codex Alimentarius?
How could a nation that prides itself in its liberty of speech, freedom of choice, and freedom of information be facing such severe limitations in health liberty and dietary supplements? Haven't the people made their will known? Failed to our government pass the dietary Supplement Health & Education Act of 1994 to insure our right to health supplements?
Indeed, our government did. The laws instituted to protect us are being ignored. And what's worse is that those laws are on the point of being replaced, if the powers that be have their way.


Behind the Codex Alimentarius Commission is the United nations and the World Health Organization working together with the enterprise pharmaceutical cartel and international banks.
Allowed the World Health Organization and the Food and agriculture Organization to develop a universal food code. Their purpose was to 'harmonize' laws for diet supplements worldwide and set global safety standards for the needs of increased trade. Pharmaceutical interests stepped in and began exerting their influence.
REAL GOALS OF CODEX This is to bring about international 'harmonization.' While worldwide harmony sounds benign, is that the real point of this plan? While the stated objective of Codex is to build one sided regulations for dietary additions in every country, the actual goal is to outlaw health products and information on vitamins and dietary additions, except those under their direct control. These rules would displace US domestic laws without the North American folks's voice or vote in the problem. north Americans gasp at the thought. It is going against everything America stands for. Many are convinced this can't be possible. The truth is, it is not only possible , it's needed by the Codex Alimentarius Haccp agreement. In fact, under the conditions of the Uruguay Round of GATT, which created the World Trade Organization, the U. S. This includes standards for diet supplements being developed by the United state's Codex Alimentarius Commission's board on nourishment and Foods for Special dietary Use.
The Uruguay Round Agreements carry explicit language obviously indicating that the U.S. Must harmonize to global standards :
'Members are fully responsible under this Agreement for the observance of all provisions.... Members shall formulate and implement positive measures and mechanisms supporting the observance of the provisions.... By aside from government bodies.' [WTO TBT Agreement at Article 3.5]'
to explain, the government must NOT ONLY CHANGE federal LAW, but must ALSO need state and local governments to modify their laws as well to be as agreed by world law.

Dec 16
2009

Caring, loving what's the difference?

Posted by cbaxley in Spirituality , miracles , love , healing , happiness

cbaxley

When I start to distinguish the differences between caring and loving with people they at first think they are the same thing. The programming that we received was that our parents were punishing us because they loved us. "This will hurt me more than it will you" never really jived with me as a child. We were taught that caring was showing love.

I can begin by giving  a definition of the two in such a way as to show the differences.

Caring is based in the belief that the world is dangerous and that there is something to protect ourselves from. It is always seeing dangers and boogey men around the next corner. It is constantly calculating the next "bad" thing that will happen and attempting to stop it. Caring projects an unconscious fear onto whatever is cared about. Caring is selfish and wants to keep what it has. All judgment in caring is from that the point of view that the thing cared about is weak and cannot care for itself. YOU MUST MAKE THE THING CARED ABOUT A VICTIM BEFORE YOU CAN CARE ABOUT IT! Caring always uses contraction and less movement (death) as a solution for the thing cared for. Caring always feels bad and extends bad feelings to others even though it gives the appearance of being a "kind" or "good" person. It is totally inauthentic. Caring is possessive, arrogant, fearful, judgmental, controlling, forcing and restricting.

Love on the other hand is based in the belief that the world is safe and that there is nothing to protect ourselves from. It always sees the world as benign and perfect. It is constantly seeing the "good" side in everything. It allows for maximum movement and ability in the thing loved. Loving never is possessive. Loving allows anything to happen to itself or others. Loving is generous because loves' world is generous to it. Love totally realizes that it does not know what is best for anyone and so assumes that what is happening is best for everyone involved. Love assumes strength in everything that it encounters and gives strength and encouragement to the strength and possibility in the thing encountered. Love always feels good and extends that feeling to everything. Love is expansive. Love does not pretend to be kind to people, it is a natural occurrence for those around it that the loving person is kind. Loving does not worry about "what people will think" it allows for people to have all points of view. Love can "be with" anything. Love is powerful because it is the source of all power.

The only way to get to true love is to let go of all caring about anything except for being loving and then let go of that. Letting go of my plan for my life and others lives will open this world up for me. If every act of observation or movement comes from love we will naturally do the "loving" thing. Our paranoia about the "dangers" in life will slip away. Benign things will begin to happen regularly as a result of our benevolence. Generosity will come our way as a result of our generosity. Freedom will show up as we give freedom to the world we look apon. Joy will result as we allow freedom and joy in others. A sense of wonder and gratitude will arise as we watch the universes' plan unfold for us in a way that is beyond what our rational minds could have imagined!

When we stop punishing our bodies by feeding them negative emotions we will stop punishing the world around us and they will experience us as a safe haven to be around. The universe will then begin to trust us to see its secrets because it knows that we are in harmony with its plan for us. As we move into harmony with the universe we will see that it is now on our side and its power and wonder will be ours.

The Four Steps to Freedom will alter your perspective on each of the points that you still are not in harmony with the universe and as you "switch" each of the thoughts to a loving thought power will rush in. What cannot be done with any amout of force is easily accomplished with true power. If you have the power of the universe on your side how can you fail at anything?

Love,
Clint

Dec 16
2009

What is meant by the term "mystic"

Posted by cbaxley in Spirituality , Mystic , David Hawkins

cbaxley

On page 132 of I, Reality and Subjectivity, the following question and answer can be found. 

Q. What is meant by the term "mystic"? 

A. The mystic knows, experiences, and identifies with the Self as both context and content, that is, context is content. The content of the ego is transitory and a product of perception and, like a movie, it has no independent existence. The content of perception is an automatic byproduct of positionality and goes hand in hand with the creation of the illusions of perception. Science is the authority of the linear domain and the Newtonian paradigm; the mystic is the authority of the nonlinear domain.

Dec 15
2009

Love heals all wounds

Posted by cbaxley in love , healing

cbaxley

He is a Chief Master Sergeant in the USAF. As high as you can go in enlisted ranks (E-9)

John Gebhardt's wife, Mindy, said that this little girl's entire family was executed. The insurgents intended to execute the little girl also, and shot her in the head...but they failed to kill her. She was cared for in John's hospital and is healing up, but continues to cry and moan. The nurses said John is the only one who seems to calm her down, so John has spent the last four nights holding her while they both slept in that chair. The girl is coming along with her healing. He is a real Star of the war, and represents what America is trying to do.This, my friends, is worth sharing. Go for it!! You'll never see things like this in the news.  Please keep this going.  Nothing will happen if you don't, but the American public needs to see pictures like this and needs to realize that what we're doing over there is making a difference. Even if it is just one little girl at a time. 
James Gates U. S. Navy 

Dec 03
2009

Dr Wayne W Dyer

Posted by WayneDyer in Untagged 

WayneDyer

Autobiography Dyer, born to Melvin Lyle and Hazel Irene Dyer, spent much of his puberty in an orphanage on the eastern side of Detroit. Dr. Wayne Dyer is a 1958 student of Denby highschool ; he got his D.Ed. Degree in support from Wayne State University.

Dyer was a steerage advisor in Detroit at the highschool level and a professor of advisor education at St. John's University in New York. He first pursued an educational career, publishing in books and running a successful personal care practice, but his lectures at St. John's, which targeted on positive thinking and inspirational talking methods, attracted scholars beyond those enrolled.

A literary agent swayed Dyer to package his ideas in book form, leading to Your Erroneous Sections ; though 1st sales were thin, Dyer quit his teaching job and commenced a hoopla tour of the U.S. of America, untiringly chasing bookstore appearances and media interviews ( "out of the back of his station wagon", according to Michael Korda, making the best-seller lists "before book publishers even spotted what was happening" ), which at last led straight to countrywide TV talk shows including Merv Griffin, The Tonight Show, and Phil Donahue. Dyer proceeded to build on his success with lecture tours, a collection of audiotapes, and regular publication of new books.

Dyer's audience wasn't restricted to business as with Dale Carnegie or Stephen Covey, and so his message resonated with lots in the New Thought Movement and beyond. He regularly recounted yarns from his folks life, and frequently used his very own life experience as an example. His self-made man success story was part of his appeal. Dyer told readers to chase self actualization, calling dependence on the self as a guide to "religious" experience, and advised that readers match Jesus Christ, whom he named both an example of a self-actualized person, and a "preacher of self-reliance".

Dyer criticised societal focus on guilt, which he saw as an unhealthy immobilization in the present due to actions taken in the past. He suggested readers to discover how elders, establishments, and even they, themselves, have imposed guilt trips on themselves. though Dyer resisted the spiritual tag, by the 1990s he was changing his message to incorporate more elements of spirituality, in Real Wizardry , and higher consciousness, in Your Holy Self. Now , his focus is on interpretations of Tao Te Ching and he's got many US talking engagements. Private life Dyer lives in Maui, Hawaii.

He's been married 3 times, having 7 of his 8 kids by his 3rd other half, Marcelene. Wayne and Marcelene Dyer's youngsters are Shane, Stephanie, Skye, Sommer, Serena, Sands and Saje. His oldest child, from his first wedding, is named Tracy. All his youngsters live in Florida. In 2009 Dyer announced he has Protracted Lymphocytic Leukemia.

Spiritual sentiments "My belief is that the truth is a truth till you arrange it, and then becomes a lie. I don't believe that Jesus was teaching Christianity, Jesus was teaching kindness, love, concern, and peace. What I tell folk is don't be Christian, be Christ-like. Do not be Buddhist, be Buddha-like." "Religion is orthodoxy, rules and historic scriptures maintained by people over long periods. Usually folk are raised to obey the customs and practices of that faith without question. These are customs and expectancies from outside of the person and don't fit my definition of spiritual."

Dr Wayne W Dyer's philosophy welcomes all faiths in an indirect way outlined as religious and is nearly an altered version of the philosophy of solipsism.

Dec 03
2009

Wayne Dyer Divorce Mildness Humility

Posted by WayneDyer in Untagged 

WayneDyer

If you're on a religious trail it is necessary. It permits us to admit when we are wrong, to say sorry. Audacity and Pride are fuel for the Ego. Humbleness is a powerful antidote and religious ally. Meekness gives us the power of spirit where ego leaves no room for the Higher Power. it's been a very good learning experience. Some folk look at humbleness as a weakness. The opposite is true one who is really humble has power.

Mildness helps us to accept our constraints and our humanity. It makes room for the Higher Power in our lives. Meekness takes bravery. The bravery to do something and claim an authentic identity and do something, to do things that might fail. To assert oneself in the vicinity of fear,Without courage we yield to be afraid of, avoid risk and are unsatisfied.

Modesty is the flip side of bravery it's the capability to step back and let go of an identity and say this isn't working. It takes humbleness to point out it's not that I am making it in this business. I suspect true modesty takes credit for assets and well as attributes we might just as shortly not have. The center of meekness is a heart that esteems others bigger than itself. It serves others, it submits, and it desires Meekness is the 1st virtue in non secular life. It's the vanguard that protects virtues and abilities. Every virtue that's not accompanied by meekness is probably going to be snaffled away by the vain glory, and wrecked by conceit, boastfulness and self-admiration.

That's going to mean I'm going to be forced to keep my capabilities and achievement into some kind of perspective. I'm going to be forced to be modest. I suspect I already had a number of these marks as I have for a very long time now valued variety in folk and their views. I valued all things both human and non-human.

I was actually ready to take a honest self investigation of self and when I was wrong soon fess up. However, I've been working with some Wayne Dyer material and I've now learned another definition of meekness. I now know humbleness. The best outline I can provide you with is going beyond the ego and detaching from self. If one really has mildness one isn't in danger of humiliation or ignominy. When I first attempted to be humble I claimed, "you mean I must stop having things my way?" "I have to stop making an attempt to be right even if I'm right?" that's going to be difficult.

Nov 24
2009

How can neutralizing your thoughts cause healing miracles?

Posted by cbaxley in miracles , happiness

cbaxley

There is a part of us that knows everything. There is also a part of us that wants to know everything. The part that wants to know everything is the part that the unenlightened identify themselves with.

The second we think we "know that" we are now limited by the conceptualization of the real "that". Once we are operating on the level of conceptualizations we are not interacting with reality any more. We are interacting with an image that we have of "that" in our minds. The image is a frozen image (graven image) and does not morph over time like the real thing. The image may have been a pretty accurate representation of the thing when we made it but just like a photograph the objects move after the photograph is taken.

So we are constantly working with "old" or "inaccurate" data about what the world is or how it works. A miracle to us would be something that works outside of how we know the world works. Just no way to explain it in terms of what we already know.

When we change (using 4 steps) the static images or rules about how things work we may feel happier in the minute but we do not realize that we have altered how the world "out there" will occur to us. We do not have proof yet of this new world and as we move along things now operate in a new way. This new way has new rules that are not limited by the old rules and they occur as miraculous to us.

As we give up our fixed ideas the world becomes fluid and our ability to operate within it increases. As our ability increases we are now able to be, do, and have things easily that would have been impossible for us in the old paradigm. This again will appear miraculous to us. 

With continued practice we will begin to see how the whole universe is conspiring to give us what we truly desire in our soul. We will think a thing and it will present itself on TV or somewhere else where logic, physics, and reason could never explain its presence. This is when we have opened to the truly miraculous.

The world is constantly operating in a miraculous way that is blinded by our rigid religious beliefs, scientific knowledge, and our ego driven goals and desires.

As we let go of our beliefs about how the world works it begins to work in a whole new way that is completely outside of anything that the image maker can comprehend.

Click Here to work with a Mind Syntropist at 18mind to gain the ability to see this new world.

 

Recent Activity

4 days ago
gus my Inner Inmate tells me to notice how gratitude is the precursor to Joy!
08:49 AM
 

Login Form