Spiritual Forums

Home


Donate!


Articles


CHAT!


Shop


 
Welcome to Spiritual Forums!.

We created this community for people from all backgrounds to discuss Spiritual, Paranormal, Metaphysical, Philosophical, Supernatural, and Esoteric subjects. From Astral Projection to Zen, all topics are welcome. We hope you enjoy your visits.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to most discussions and articles. By joining our free community you will be able to post messages, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos, and gain access to our Chat Rooms, Registration is fast, simple, and free, so please, join our community today! !

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, check our FAQs before contacting support. Please read our forum rules, since they are enforced by our volunteer staff. This will help you avoid any infractions and issues.

Go Back   Spiritual Forums > Spirituality & Beliefs > Auras & Chakras

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 19-04-2012, 01:53 AM
IsleWalker IsleWalker is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Catalina Island, California
Posts: 3,067
  IsleWalker's Avatar
Sangress--

As a side note, this tends to be where the "higher self" thing comes in, when part of the subconscious (mental) resides along with other energies on a different dimension and seems to behave autonomously or separately to the incarnant because those mental attributes are actually active.

So this seems to imply that you feel Higher Self is not really behaving autonomously, but it's just that the mental raises the dimension enough and brings energy enough to sort of function separately?

I guess what I'm asking--is Higher Self a bogus concept?

Lora
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 19-04-2012, 02:03 AM
Sangress
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
I used Source--thinking all of them eventually come from One Source (that old Big Idea). I also used it because I wasn't sure.

But what kind of "different sources" are you aware of? Are there, like some people talk about, sort of Minor Creators? What exactly are they?

Oh you've opened a huge can of worms with this one, so to speak.

I made a thread about sources that I think will help with this and save me repeating myself.

Here it is - http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/sh...ad.php?t=33297

(Feel free to ask about whatever I've missed in that thread regarding the questions.)

The different sources I'm aware of dont actually have names in the english language, so I'm really not sure how to go about describing or explaining them. I might have to think on that one for a bit, I'm unsure if I can twist the english language to that extent. lol.

Quote:
How can you tell the source of an incarnate being?


Personally I can tell because I work with souls all the time, so they know where they originated from or of and I can tap into that and go take a look for myself if I like.

For everyone else they can immediately recodnise others in their "soul-family" (still trying to find proper terminology for souls from the same source) because its like an innate thing.

If its someone from another source then sometimes asking works. It's difficult for me to ascertain how others see it because I'm not them. I can just make educated guesses or mention observations that I've made.

Quote:
And then, to make sure I understand this: Mental is like intention or emotion---a sort of energy catalyst--something that directs energy.

Yes, its a catalyst for the behaviour and affect of energy, it influences energy directly. It's also a "thing" in and of itself, which is harder to define considering it doesn't have a litteral appearence, its something of the mind/consciousness/awareness.

Quote:
The metaphysical layer is anything that is not physical, right? I mean, even those layers you describe as primarily physical and secondarily mental or metaphysical --Do you consider them metaphysical layers?

Well I can consider them partly metaphysical, but to be wholy and truly metaphysical theres nothing physical involved.

It's difficult to define because everything physical has an energetic layer to it, everything is essentially made of energy regardless.

But I separate physical from metaphysical because one is fixed and ridgid (physical,) the other isnt and that makes them very distinct from one another (and mental isnt even energy so thats distinct too,) so I feel that distinction has got to be respected or at least catagorised despite the fact that the metaphysical technically can be considered a part of everything in some way.

Quote:
And in terms of what is metaphysical in a human, then it would be spirit/soul, core energy (?right)--in fact all the energy systems because they are not physical?


Yes, but keep in mind that some of those metaphysical areas are directly tied to and linked with the physical layers, so by default they are also physical.

It's the absence of a physical connection or influence that makes something metaphysical. (Does that definition make more sense than the other one?)

Quote:
Am I making this harder than it needs to be?

[Boy--the other option sure looks good right now! I can feel my brain getting in my own way.]

Hah. No I dont think your making it harder than it needs to be because there isn't a well defined separation between physical and metaphysical. They blend together so often that people have trouble figuring out where one ends and the other begins and thats fine.

Things of a metaphysical nature themselves are always shifting and changing and blending with itself and everything else, so its no wonder that its hard to get a set definition when its everywhere and so elusive at the same time.

When I'm trying to define something has physical or metaphysical I ask myself "Does this have a direct physical influence or is this more physical than metaphysical to my senses?" Maybe it'll work for other people too.

Quote:
Good stuff, Sangress. And thank you, Lora, for asking.

Um thank you?
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 19-04-2012, 02:07 AM
Sangress
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
So this seems to imply that you feel Higher Self is not really behaving autonomously, but it's just that the mental raises the dimension enough and brings energy enough to sort of function separately?

I guess what I'm asking--is Higher Self a bogus concept?

I dont think its a bogus concept, I just think that its not as separate to the incarnant as they think. People often treat their higher self as an entierly different and separate individual, which is why I tend to hint that its not autonomous.

Its the same mind and soul just opperating on different dimensional frequencies.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 19-04-2012, 02:13 AM
IsleWalker IsleWalker is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Catalina Island, California
Posts: 3,067
  IsleWalker's Avatar
Sangress,

Yes, I knew as I was asking it that some energy systems are tied to physical so they wouldn't technically be metaphysical.

But I get why you make those three distinctions now.

It's the absence of a physical connection or influence that makes something metaphysical. (Does that definition make more sense than the other one?)

Well, if it's not better, it's clarifying. And I see that it's the most difficult to pin down, energy always being necessary for physical and yet where the energy for physical stops and connection with pure non-physical starts---too difficult to define.

Got it. For now!! But just wait til I read your link--that whole kettle of fish!

Lora
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 19-04-2012, 02:39 AM
Sangress
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Got it. For now!! But just wait til I read your link--that whole kettle of fish!

Good, and hmm...I thought it was a can of worms? I guess the fish got hungry and we wanted to make tea. Not sure where the can went....
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 19-04-2012, 03:10 AM
IsleWalker IsleWalker is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Catalina Island, California
Posts: 3,067
  IsleWalker's Avatar
Sangress--

Ok. Read your thread about "sources". So basically, you're saying that any time there is destruction of energy, a new source is created? For some reason I'm thinking destruction of star systems, but I guess it would be more in the area of a "dimension" that gets subsumed (?sp) by another?

That's an easy concept for me to accept.

So what IS the "local source"? There are those Arcturian or Pleidian source ideas out there. Is that our --or one of our--"local sources"?

Details, please!

Lora
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 19-04-2012, 03:32 AM
Sangress
Posts: n/a
 
Ok. Read your thread about "sources". So basically, you're saying that any time there is destruction of energy, a new source is created? For some reason I'm thinking destruction of star systems, but I guess it would be more in the area of a "dimension" that gets subsumed (?sp) by another?

Yes and no. I'm still attempting to understand that, but thats the more basic possibility I see so yeh go with that for now. Lol.

That's an easy concept for me to accept.

Lucky you. :P

So what IS the "local source"? There are those Arcturian or Pleidian source ideas out there. Is that our --or one of our--"local sources"?

The local source is known as "God," around here lately (and allah and some other names in the past.)

I havent really explored the sources around here or attempted to connect them to any names, never had much need to. Theres about 8 in this dimension (and bleeding over into other places) that I know of. Most are on a sort of "crossroads" where dimension overlap or intersect one another. I only remember two that werent (god and some random flurescent blue one.)

But yeh, in essence I have no idea and am still working it out myself. Lol.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 19-04-2012, 04:13 AM
IsleWalker IsleWalker is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Catalina Island, California
Posts: 3,067
  IsleWalker's Avatar
Sangress, you are blowing my mind. What does this mean?


The local source is known as "God," around here lately (and allah and some other names in the past.)

It's known as "God" around here just because people don't know what else to call it, or they've been taught that's who it is.

But does that really mean that's who IS our source?

I havent really explored the sources around here or attempted to connect them to any names, never had much need to. Theres about 8 in this dimension (and bleeding over into other places) that I know of. Most are on a sort of "crossroads" where dimension overlap or intersect one another. I only remember two that werent (god and some random flurescent blue one.)

So, "god" and some random blue dude are the only sources that aren't at a dimensional intersection place? Huh?

And the ones who are at the intersections of dimensions are the "gods" of those dimensions --by virtue of the fact that they "see" or "control" or whatever--all those dimension they intersect with?

But "god" and random blue dude--are more global?

Now this is sounding weird! Even for me!
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 19-04-2012, 04:45 AM
Sangress
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Sangress, you are blowing my mind. What does this mean?

Give me a moment your making me laugh. (not at you, its just hilarious how you worded all of that.)

Quote:
The local source is known as "God," around here lately (and allah and some other names in the past.)

It's known as "God" around here just because people don't know what else to call it, or they've been taught that's who it is.

But does that really mean that's who IS our source?

Well, God is just the label thats in "fashion" with incarnants at the moment, its not the litteral representation like in the bible or anything like that..its *just* a label.

The whole white light, loving influence, feeling of utter awe, want for everything to grow and evolve and to have a world free of negativity in the sense of no "evil" (no oppsing forces or dangers) and such are some features of a connection to and influence of being a soul from that particular source that people are now calling "god" more often than anything else.

Features of a connection to the source "god" also includes a general lust for the metal gold and a strong connection with the sun (since they are part of that source as well,) a need to be orderly and have a hirachy and a need to continually grow without limitations or negative influences (I know I already said the last one, but its a really important one so it can be said twice.)

Thats all to do with that particular local source from what I've witnessed of the nature of the souls originating from it (appart from the actual appearence of the souls themselves.)

Quote:
So, "god" and some random blue dude are the only sources that aren't at a dimensional intersection place? Huh?

And the ones who are at the intersections of dimensions are the "gods" of those dimensions --by virtue of the fact that they "see" or "control" or whatever--all those dimension they intersect with?



Sources arent sentient beings, they are like a natural event or a feature of a landscape or an element of nature. They dont think or feel, they just occur and exist. Just making that clear.

Thats actually what made me laugh, the thought of some huge being sitting around inside this huge bubble of source energy conversing with souls passing through and out of it and being like "see you when you want to be reborn again!..and then striking down the souls they dont like with some kind of epic divine judgement. haha....anyways.

About the intersection thing, I have a theory that sources that exist within an area of intersecting dimensions have a lot more force or weight (I wont say power because i have beef with that word) to them because the interaction of the dimensions together could be fueling their existence.

Whereas sources that exist after two dimensions have "collided" or melded together might be "secondary" or exist in tandom with other sources to keep them stable.

It's a very rough theory and I have to gain more experience and observe more to understand it, but hopefully its making some form of sense at least in the beginning stages.

Quote:
But "god" and random blue dude--are more global?

Also, sources each have a specific appearence to me. I can see them like I see souls (I actually see souls, no echo location needed) so they have a kind of colour and texture and all that. Hence why I said blue since thats as close as I can come to describing it without it having a name. lol.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 19-04-2012, 05:32 AM
IsleWalker IsleWalker is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Catalina Island, California
Posts: 3,067
  IsleWalker's Avatar
Sangress--

[Sorry, old expressions just pop out sometimes. :) ...blow my mind--that's an old 70s thing.]

Ok. This is what I was looking for: Sources aren't sentient beings, they are like a natural event or a feature of a landscape or an element of nature. They don't think or feel, they just occur and exist. Just making that clear.

It makes sense to me in terms of the nexus of energies there. But are you saying these sources, these creator places are not a consciousness of some sort? I thought everything has a consciousness of sorts.

Why the emotion when connecting with source? I thought that emotion was an interaction between two consciousnesses.

And how do you know these sources are "local"? What do you define as "local" in the world of dimensions? Isn't everything local?

Lora

P.S. -- The part about no negative emotions, I don't think necessarily is a source or god definition, although I see where you get it from. Lots seem to feel that's part of the deal, not realizing it's part of creating new.

Now this is sounding more like typical SF discussions. IDK if that's a good thing or not!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums