Suspension of Disbelief

[usmaak]

One concept with which I've always struggled is the concept of "suspension of disbelief."  It makes a certain amount of sense when dealing with a new concept.  My first instinct may be that something is complete and total BS, but I can set that aside and at least read the material and give it a somewhat fair chance.  But then there are those cases where I am 101% convinced something is complete horsesh1t and attempting to suspend my disbelief feels disingenuous at best.

I am reading a book right now - Awaken to Ascension.  For some reason, I've felt drawn to this book for a while.  I keep seeing it pop up on Amazon.  From reading the Living a Safe Universe books, I've learned that I'm supposed to listen to my impulses and follow them.  I felt like this book was an impulse and so I bought it and am now reading it.

I will likely post more about the book in the section of the forum dedicated to other books/teachers at some point.  In some ways, it's like A Course in Miracles, but without all of the hokey religion thrown in.  It does talk about Christ but it refers to it as "The Christ."  The book describes it like so:

The overall most important point of enlightenment for me was learning that Christ is a spiritual office held by many masters over the years, not just the role of Master Jesus. The teachings of the Office of the Christ through Melchizedek, Jesus, and others transcend all religions and encompass all the aspects of christ consciousness.

Hankins, Marsha. Awaken to Ascension: Mastering Oneness and Knowing Yourself as Source (pp. 20-21). Kindle Edition.

I can get on board with this.  It divorces it all from the dogma of organized religion.  The book talks about how teachers have come to set us straight when needed.  It discusses about how religions form around teachings like this, and how eventually a new teacher comes along to set things straight until the next time everything gets mucked up again.  It's a repeating cycle.  There's something about it that just feels right to me.  Key aspects of ACIM also felt right to me, but I could get past the waves of nausea that I got from the language used.  According to the course, that's just my ego playing tricks on me.

So this book says that we're all one with source, talks about the experiment in duality and how we chose to separate from source as an experiment and how our goal has always been the end of the experiment and joining back up with source, we're all one, blah blah blah.  I'm ok with those ideas.  It follows Seth's concepts of camouflage and about how three dimensional existence is not real.  The book is not overly Sethian.  It deals loosely with a few ideas, but it is firmly rooted in time.

Where it loses me is when it starts talking about things like chakras and altering our DNA.  I try, but I simply can't force myself to suspend disbelief over ideas that I think are so ridiculous.  Like I said at the start of this post, I'm mostly ok with suspension of disbelief on new concepts, but things in which I firmly disbelieve or think are silly?  Well I just can't do it.  I suppose that this could all fall into the concept of take what you can use and toss the rest.

How do you all handle the suspension of disbelief?

[Deb]

How do you all handle the suspension of disbelief?

Great question! Personally I can't do it with some things. At least with what people say are "the way things are" that don't resonate with me. I can watch movies and TV shows, or read fiction books and suspend my belief/disbelief long enough to get absorbed into the story. How many times have I cried over a death in a movie or book (like ET for instance, lol), knowing it's only make believe?  I'm ok with that because they are just part of a story and I go along with it. Such as the Harry Potter stuff. All fantastical magical things and characters that I loved despite the fact they are not real. I even "get to know" characters, miss them when a movie or series is over or they get killed off (thinking Walking Dead now). That type of belief suspension is temporary and voluntary, and most of us do it all the time.

But when it comes to things regarding reality claims that I think are BS and don't feel right,  I just accept that while others may believe them, I'm willing to listen to or read and consider their beliefs and let it go at that. Such as chakras or even auras... I've never seen or felt them, others swear they do, so how to I know if they're real or not? Those are the types of things I just set aside, acknowledge my skepticism, and consider that maybe some day I'll have an experience that changes my mind.

And I agree about ACIM, I put that one down pretty quickly, it was too religious-sounding to me. Yet there are millions of people who think it's amazing. That's fine, there are plenty of people who think I'm crazy to entertain the idea that the Seth materials are anything but fiction or the devil at work. Different strokes. So I agree with take what you can get and leave the rest for others. I don't feel suspending belief is necessary or practical in those cases.

[leidl]

The overall most important point of enlightenment for me was learning that Christ is a spiritual office held by many masters over the years, not just the role of Master Jesus. The teachings of the Office of the Christ through Melchizedek, Jesus, and others transcend all religions and encompass all the aspects of christ consciousness.

usmaak, I like this perspective a lot.  I've always felt that Jesus wanted to model a way of being that is achievable for all of us.  We can all occupy that office, in my view.  Oh...that wasn't your question.   

Regarding suspension of disbelief, I take what resonates and toss the rest.  I don't fight my own resistance to an idea.  I've never won a fight with my own mind.  Sometimes when the mind becomes still, my perspective changes.  But if my mind is in fight mode, I avoid entering the ring with it until it lays down its defenses.

I've never done much with chakras either, but I do remember one time, years ago, when a friend of mine who was pregnant was sitting on my sofa having a heart to heart with me.  I saw a distinct gold aura around her, and outside of that a cobalt blue one.  I kept looking at it instead of her, and finally had to tell her about what I was looking at, because I kept breaking eye contact with her.  It was just so beautiful, I couldn't not look.  So...I've seen one aura, maybe, in decades.  Two, actually...a golden baby one contained within a cobalt blue mama one.  That's how I've always interpreted it. 

[usmaak]

usmaak, I like this perspective a lot.  I've always felt that Jesus wanted to model a way of being that is achievable for all of us.  We can all occupy that office, in my view.  Oh...that wasn't your question.

I actually really felt like this resonated with me.  I'm very religion averse and anything Jesus makes me cringe.  But this explanation I really like a lot.  The idea of a series of teachers that show up when we need them to right the ship is...  Well it just feels right to me and I feel none of the ickiness that I feel when contemplating religion.

Regarding suspension of disbelief, I take what resonates and toss the rest.  I don't fight my own resistance to an idea.  I've never won a fight with my own mind.  Sometimes when the mind becomes still, my perspective changes.  But if my mind is in fight mode, I avoid entering the ring with it until it lays down its defenses.

It's another thing that I struggle with.  If someone tells me A, B, and C, and I don't believe B, then it calls A and C into question.  I see things too black and white and sometimes struggle to acknowledge that most everything is shades of grey.  It's something that I'm working on.

The book also says this:

At lower levels of consciousness, we believe that there is only one truth. We believe in absolute rights and wrongs. As we begin to mature, we understand that everyone has their truth based on their experiences and where they are in their evolution. We have more than seven billion people on the planet as of this writing, and each one of them has their personal beliefs, which means we have more than seven billion versions of the truth. One is not right, and one is not wrong. They are just different because of cultural heritage, education, religious teachings, and other factors.

Reconciling the idea that there are many valid truths is challenging for most people. Most people believe in a straight right and wrong and tend to judge what is different from their beliefs.

Hankins, Marsha. Awaken to Ascension: Mastering Oneness and Knowing Yourself as Source (pp. 90-91). Kindle Edition.

It's an interesting way of looking at it.  I'm trying to integrate the idea that there is more than one answer.  This is a theme through the book.  She says something to the effect of our path going back to source and that everyone has a different way of getting there and that no one way of doing it is more "right" than any other way.

I've never done much with chakras either, but I do remember one time, years ago, when a friend of mine who was pregnant was sitting on my sofa having a heart to heart with me.  I saw a distinct gold aura around her, and outside of that a cobalt blue one.  I kept looking at it instead of her, and finally had to tell her about what I was looking at, because I kept breaking eye contact with her.  It was just so beautiful, I couldn't not look.  So...I've seen one aura, maybe, in decades.  Two, actually...a golden baby one contained within a cobalt blue mama one.  That's how I've always interpreted it.

When I was in college, my girlfriend was really into auras and crystals and chakras and stuff like that.  She was also into Seth.  Anyway, one time we went to some kind of new age fair or festival or show or something.  They were taking pictures of people's auras and I was somehow convinced to cough up the 10 bucks to get ours taken (or maybe it was her money lol).  It showed me surrounded by a hazy pink with more solid pink around my heart area.  I'm sure it was just some kind of heat filter on a Polaroid camera because hers came out pretty much the same as mine.  Of course that showed that we were meant to be together.  But our breakup a few months later showed otherwise.

I'd love to see stuff like that.  I'd like for chakras to be a thing as well.  It'd be cool.

[Deb]

I saw a distinct gold aura around her, and outside of that a cobalt blue one.  I kept looking at it instead of her, and finally had to tell her about what I was looking at, because I kept breaking eye contact with her.  It was just so beautiful, I couldn't not look.  So...I've seen one aura, maybe, in decades.  Two, actually...a golden baby one contained within a cobalt blue mama one.  That's how I've always interpreted it. 

I wish I could do that! I've always thought of myself as being spiritually or psychically dumb, that probably has something to do with it. The closest I've come to experiencing outside our norms was with Reiki... I could feel something like static energy/electricity coming from my and others' hands. It was an interesting experience, there was a little more to it that I won't go into right now.

At lower levels of consciousness, we believe that there is only one truth. We believe in absolute rights and wrongs. As we begin to mature, we understand that everyone has their truth based on their experiences and where they are in their evolution. We have more than seven billion people on the planet as of this writing, and each one of them has their personal beliefs, which means we have more than seven billion versions of the truth. One is not right, and one is not wrong. They are just different because of cultural heritage, education, religious teachings, and other factors.

Beautifully said. This book sounds really good, I'll have to add it to my wish list. Considering there are 7B people on the planet, all with different sets of beliefs, it's amazing we get along at all.

This is something I consider when people say there is a shift in consciousness coming... how do 7B people with in some cases VERY different beliefs suddenly shift towards cohesion? That would take a psychic miracle. Unless the shift is more in tolerance for others' beliefs, which would also take a miracle. But then, one of my favorite Seth quotes is that "miracles are nature unimpeded". I used to think it would take an invasion from aliens to unite humanity due to a common threat, but then covid, an invasion of another sort, seemed to have the opposite effect.

[Sena]

This is something I consider when people say there is a shift in consciousness coming... how do 7B people with in some cases VERY different beliefs suddenly shift towards cohesion? That would take a psychic miracle.

Deb, I agree that 7 billion people cannot be lumped together. Perhaps Seth readers will be selected. The Law of One uses the rather controversial term of "harvest". Many clearly don't want to be harvested:

https://www.lawofone.info/results.php?q=harvest
:

[Tob]

This is something I consider when people say there is a shift in consciousness coming... how do 7B people with in some cases VERY different beliefs suddenly shift towards cohesion? That would take a psychic miracle.

Deb, I agree that 7 billion people cannot be lumped together. Perhaps Seth readers will be selected. The Law of One uses the rather controversial term of "harvest". Many clearly don't want to be harvested:

https://www.lawofone.info/results.php?q=harvest
:

Only those versions of persons which are compatible do 'shift'. The versions of persons which are not compatible remain on a version of Earth which is not, let's say, future-oriented. They may be 'shifting' as well, but into another or even opposite direction.

There is an infinite number (Bashar), or nearly infinite number (Seth) of You's. Think of the probable Janes and probable Roberts in the Seth material. Versions of people which are not compatible with you and your belief system (with the vibratory rate of your belief system) remain on a version of Earth which is sooner or later no longer linked to your version of Earth. The versions of your friends and colleagues which you continue to see on your version of Earth are compatible, i.e. they adjusted their belief systems and are in alignment with yours. Others vanish. They are on other versions of Earth - together with non-compatible versions of You, which are no longer You. (The You you were 10 years ago which entered a problematic path at key decision making points in your history).

Seth talks about a nearly infinite number of probabilities. All of them are materialized (Seth). But he did not clearly provide the physics aspects. If you have a look at Robert Butts drawings in Jane Robert's 'Aspects' book, you will see the alternative You's and the alternative timelines (paths). For each alternative You there must be an alternative Earth. But they did not go so far as complementing the drawings consequently by these alternative versions of the planet.

When it comes to the concrete number of alternative versions (e.g. of Jane and Robert), the number given is however far away from being infinite. It looks that it is around a dozen or so (Seth) (my guess) depending on a threshold of probability, or between 100 to 200, constantly changing 'from moment to moment to moment' (Bashar). This is the info provided by these two sources. Of course if you wish you can complement it by Hugh Everett or Carl Deutsch. The question always remains: where are all these universes physically? The virtual reality approach may provide a solution. They just don't exist physically, but are created as 3D illusions by the outer senses (Seth sessions nos 60 to 64). There is just no 'out there' out there.

However, an INFINITE number of alternative You's (and alternative, physically not existing, but 'physically perceived' universes) can in principle only be reached if the absence of time is taken into account. If there is no time and everything is infinite, yes, there may be also an infinite number of Jane's. But the practical information given by both, Seth and Bashar, is different. More conventional. There is a version of Robert Butts who died in WW II as a pilot. Makes it ONE alternative. However, if it matters - in terms of a threshold of probability - whether the killed pilot was wearing a red shirt or a green shirt, had a good breakfast the morning when he died or not a good one, was depressive or not, and each variation would give rise to a separate timeline, then you may indeed be reaching something 'infinite' (Bashar) or 'nearly infinite' (Seth). Especially if there is no time. (Because then there is 'time enough' for all the nonsense). Otherwise rather not.

In 'Unknown Reality' Seth is describing exercises how to 'travel' to the alternative or probable You's - using the inner senses. Thus, it is clear that there must be alternative 'physical' universes as well where these alternative You's are 'physically' living. And of course alternative, physical versions of the planet Earth as well.

[Deb]

Perhaps Seth readers will be selected. The Law of One uses the rather controversial term of "harvest". Many clearly don't want to be harvested:

Yikes, harvest, a poor choice in words as far as I'm concerned! It sounds like an invasion of body snatchers, or that we're just cattle waiting to be eaten by aliens.

Due to my Catholic upbringing, the idea that only a select few will be enlightened reminds me of Christians saying you will only go to heaven if you accept JC as your savior. But it seems practical, since everyone is in a different place spiritually. A lot of death row prisoners turn to JC when they're about to be executed. I've always marveled at how those who disrespect life, cling so desperately to their own. I guess the fear of punishment has a lot to do with it. That always ticked me off a little, thinking that someone could spend years killing people and then be suddenly absolved by saying the magic words.

Years ago I'd read "Left Behind" at someone's request. I actually enjoyed the mystery aspect of it, the "what ifs" captured my imagination (it's set in modern times), but couldn't continue on with the series because it was all about the apocalypse & rapture, where believers suddenly disappear and the non-believers are left behind and it quickly became too religious for me.

"On a Boeing 747 headed to London, passengers instantaneously disappear from their seats, resulting in terror and chaos for those left behind―not only throughout the plane, but also worldwide as the apocalypse begins.

"Included in this 25th anniversary edition is an essay by Jerry B. Jenkins, exploring cultural and spiritual changes over the last quarter century through the lens of this groundbreaking work of fiction."

That bolded bit has me curious about what the author has to say.

Versions of people which are not compatible with you and your belief system (with the vibratory rate of your belief system) remain on a version of Earth which is sooner or later no longer linked to your version of Earth. The versions of your friends and colleagues which you continue to see on your version of Earth are compatible, i.e. they adjusted their belief systems and are in alignment with yours. Others vanish. They are on other versions of Earth

If that's the case (of incompatible people vanishing), do you suppose we would notice that? Here I'm thinking about the concept of changing the past—where I imagine there may be no memory in the present of a past event that's been changed. Or maybe we drift apart, as happens with people when they no longer share commonalities, and we lose touch entirely with them. We may be told they've died, or they can't be tracked down if we try to reach them, when in fact they've moved into a different reality. That would sure be another great topic.

Here is another explanation, not that different from yours:

To change what's happening, large masses of people have to change their thoughts and emotions, and newer and better thoughts and emotions will materialize into less-bad-things, even better-things.

On the other hand, the few people that evolve graduate to other planes of existence, and the pool of humans is replenished with new, less evolved souls. That is why the human society's progress is so slow, if any. In fact, from higher realms' perspective, humanity's progress isn't a goal. This is a place for learning, where freshmen students come, practice, learn, graduate, then new freshmen repeat the cycle.

Whatever bad-things happen here, don't negatively affect our non-physical essences.

Currently, there is a lot of hate in the world that materializes, and will materialize in bad-things happening, including climate change (see Seth on this), unrest, suffering, pain. A seemingly natural way of reacting to these bad-things is to get angry and hateful of those apparently responsible. As Seth explained, hate isn't the way, violence isn't the way. People have to firstly take control of their own thoughts and emotions, and become responsible creators of their own reality. As it is now, most people believe that others have to change, that they themselves are owed to, deserve, are entitled to receive, are right in their thoughts and emotions.

And, there isn't an Evil force that does these to us either. 

When it comes to the concrete number of alternative versions (e.g. of Jane and Robert), the number given is however far away from being infinite. It looks that it is around a dozen or so (Seth) depending on a threshold of probability, or between 100 to 200, constantly changing from moment to moment to moment (Bashar).

Do you remember where you read about there being a finite number of probabilities in the Seth materials? My impression was they are infinite due to the constant choices we make. Certainly our personal probability-choices end in this physical reality when our bodies die, but during a lifetime most people tend to make a lot of decisions. Somehow I don't see things as minor as choosing beef teriyaki over chicken would create a probability, but I suppose it could.

[usmaak]

The Law of One uses the rather controversial term of "harvest". Many clearly don't want to be harvested:

That term reminds me of sci-fi books I've read.  It never goes well for humanity.

[usmaak]

Years ago I'd read "Left Behind" at someone's request. I actually enjoyed the mystery aspect of it, the "what ifs" captured my imagination (it's set in modern times), but couldn't continue on with the series because it was all about the apocalypse & rapture, where believers suddenly disappear and the non-believers are left behind and it quickly became too religious for me.

"On a Boeing 747 headed to London, passengers instantaneously disappear from their seats, resulting in terror and chaos for those left behind―not only throughout the plane, but also worldwide as the apocalypse begins.

I saw a movie with the same title that must have come from the book.  It wasn't awful, but the religious aspects of it were overbearing (as, of course, they would be).  I think that there were other movies made from books in the series, but I never did see them.

[Tob]

Perhaps Seth readers will be selected. The Law of One uses the rather controversial term of "harvest". Many clearly don't want to be harvested:

Yikes, harvest, a poor choice in words as far as I'm concerned! It sounds like an invasion of body snatchers, or that we're just cattle waiting to be eaten by aliens.

Due to my Catholic upbringing, the idea that only a select few will be enlightened reminds me of Christians saying you will only go to heaven if you accept JC as your savior. But it seems practical, since everyone is in a different place spiritually. A lot of death row prisoners turn to JC when they're about to be executed. I've always marveled at how those who disrespect life, cling so desperately to their own. I guess the fear of punishment has a lot to do with it. That always ticked me off a little, thinking that someone could spend years killing people and then be suddenly absolved by saying the magic words.

Years ago I'd read "Left Behind" at someone's request. I actually enjoyed the mystery aspect of it, the "what ifs" captured my imagination (it's set in modern times), but couldn't continue on with the series because it was all about the apocalypse & rapture, where believers suddenly disappear and the non-believers are left behind and it quickly became too religious for me.

"On a Boeing 747 headed to London, passengers instantaneously disappear from their seats, resulting in terror and chaos for those left behind―not only throughout the plane, but also worldwide as the apocalypse begins.

"Included in this 25th anniversary edition is an essay by Jerry B. Jenkins, exploring cultural and spiritual changes over the last quarter century through the lens of this groundbreaking work of fiction."

That bolded bit has me curious about what the author has to say.

Versions of people which are not compatible with you and your belief system (with the vibratory rate of your belief system) remain on a version of Earth which is sooner or later no longer linked to your version of Earth. The versions of your friends and colleagues which you continue to see on your version of Earth are compatible, i.e. they adjusted their belief systems and are in alignment with yours. Others vanish. They are on other versions of Earth

If that's the case (of incompatible people vanishing), do you suppose we would notice that? Here I'm thinking about the concept of changing the past—where I imagine there may be no memory in the present of a past event that's been changed. Or maybe we drift apart, as happens with people when they no longer share commonalities, and we lose touch entirely with them. We may be told they've died, or they can't be tracked down if we try to reach them, when in fact they've moved into a different reality. That would sure be another great topic.

Here is another explanation, not that different from yours:

To change what's happening, large masses of people have to change their thoughts and emotions, and newer and better thoughts and emotions will materialize into less-bad-things, even better-things.

On the other hand, the few people that evolve graduate to other planes of existence, and the pool of humans is replenished with new, less evolved souls. That is why the human society's progress is so slow, if any. In fact, from higher realms' perspective, humanity's progress isn't a goal. This is a place for learning, where freshmen students come, practice, learn, graduate, then new freshmen repeat the cycle.

Whatever bad-things happen here, don't negatively affect our non-physical essences.

Currently, there is a lot of hate in the world that materializes, and will materialize in bad-things happening, including climate change (see Seth on this), unrest, suffering, pain. A seemingly natural way of reacting to these bad-things is to get angry and hateful of those apparently responsible. As Seth explained, hate isn't the way, violence isn't the way. People have to firstly take control of their own thoughts and emotions, and become responsible creators of their own reality. As it is now, most people believe that others have to change, that they themselves are owed to, deserve, are entitled to receive, are right in their thoughts and emotions.

And, there isn't an Evil force that does these to us either. 

When it comes to the concrete number of alternative versions (e.g. of Jane and Robert), the number given is however far away from being infinite. It looks that it is around a dozen or so (Seth) depending on a threshold of probability, or between 100 to 200, constantly changing from moment to moment to moment (Bashar).

Do you remember where you read about there being a finite number of probabilities in the Seth materials? My impression was they are infinite due to the constant choices we make. Certainly our personal probability-choices end in this physical reality when our bodies die, but during a lifetime most people tend to make a lot of decisions. Somehow I don't see things as minor as choosing beef teriyaki over chicken would create a probability, but I suppose it could.

No, This is exactly what Seth is NOT saying. He did not say that there is a finite number of probabilities. Never. He says 'infinite number', or 'nearly infinite' and he is providing a qualifier: the threshold of probability. But in the context of the considerations to buy the house on the hill, the information collected by all of them (and pertaining to all of them) in terms of probabilities is NOT infinite. It corresponds much more to our common sense (Unknown Reality, Vol. 2 towards the end).

If you think of creation as a painting with inner dimensions which you are constantly adding to the painting as an artist, without 'consuming' space behind the canvas (Seth), you can think of a materialization of an infinite number of probabilities. In no time and no space (inside the picture). Think of fractals. If you let the 'fractal' - producing' program (or the painter) work long enough you get a lot of fractals, far away from common sense if every fractal is to depict a slightly modified alternative reality. All the Robert Butts in a red shirt, and a blue shirt, and a good breakfast, and a not so good breakfast, etc. The question is what and where is the threshold of probability (for the coming into existence of alternatives and differing timelines)? Not really clear in the case of Seth.

And not clear either in the case of Bashar. Usually these questions are not being asked during the Bashar sessions because the auditorium is overwhelmed. And many are not interested in physics. They want to hear the wizzard, not the expert who comes with valuable first-hand information regarding the universe.

When asked about these things it happened several times that his reaction to the questionner was: 'You just lost half of the audience'.

To make it short: According to Bashar 'everybody goes to heaven', shifting or not, polluting the planet or not, because we never left heaven. The largest part of us is there, not here. The largest part of us never left heaven. This corresponds to the drawings depicting the Seth cosmology. 3D is an illusion.

Those who are not 'shifting' now, take a later turn. There will be always options. No judgements. But we may be destroying the planet now. This is what the greys did. They were humans, polluted their version of earth, poisoned the atmosphere, went underground where their eyes turned larger and black and where they finally mutated. They are dying out and they are in need of our DNA. for the hybridization program. They are not hostile. They are us. We do not only have incarnations in the 16th, 19th and 22nd century. We have incarnations on other planets as well. Bashar is a future incarnation of Darryl Anka.

They want us not to go down the same path.

[Sena]

Only those versions of persons which are compatible do 'shift'. The versions of persons which are not compatible remain on a version of Earth which is not, let's say, future-oriented. They may be 'shifting' as well, but into another or even opposite direction.

There is an infinite number (Bashar), or nearly infinite number (Seth) of You's. Think of the probable Janes and probable Roberts in the Seth material. Versions of people which are not compatible with you and your belief system (with the vibratory rate of your belief system) remain on a version of Earth which is sooner or later no longer linked to your version of Earth. The versions of your friends and colleagues which you continue to see on your version of Earth are compatible, i.e. they adjusted their belief systems and are in alignment with yours. Others vanish. They are on other versions of Earth - together with non-compatible versions of You, which are no longer You. (The You you were 10 years ago which entered a problematic path at key decision making points in your history).

Tob, thanks for your explanation. I think what you have written is compatible with the Law of One. One of the deficiencies of Seth is that he does not have much to say about possible future developments except for the rather fanciful idea of Christ returning in 2080 or thereabouts.

[LarryH]

This is something I consider when people say there is a shift in consciousness coming... how do 7B people with in some cases VERY different beliefs suddenly shift towards cohesion? That would take a psychic miracle.

I am reminded of Buckminster Fuller's views. He set out to find out what one person could do. There is no doubt that his lectures, books, and inventions have had and continue to have a profound influence on humanity. He once said, "Call me trim tab." What he meant by that was that a trim tab aids in adjusting the rudder of a ship. The rudder then changes the direction of the ship. In this metaphor, the rudder stands for a small group of people who are influenced by the trim tab. This small group, when it reaches critical mass (perhaps 40,000-100,000 people), changes the direction of the ship (the larger population). Thus, one person with sufficient power of persuasion can influence enough people to result in a transformation of consciousness of the planet.

[Tob]

Perhaps Seth readers will be selected. The Law of One uses the rather controversial term of "harvest". Many clearly don't want to be harvested:

If that's the case (of incompatible people vanishing), do you suppose we would notice that? Here I'm thinking about the concept of changing the past—where I imagine there may be no memory in the present of a past event that's been changed. Or maybe we drift apart, as happens with people when they no longer share commonalities, and we lose touch entirely with them. We may be told they've died, or they can't be tracked down if we try to reach them, when in fact they've moved into a different reality. That would sure be another great topic.

_________________________________________

According to Bashar the development and the splitting into alternative realities follows common sense logic and is organized and materialized smoothly and without major frictions.

According to him YOU, while shifting to a more future-oriented version of Earth may be killed or appear to be killed in the version of Earth you no longer want to be a part of (without actually being killed). You are just shifting: vanishing. The killing makes it just seem plausible  on that other version of Earth. Or people just forget about you as it may be the case vice versa.

A few days ago I provided the examples of the indigenous people in ancient Greece who could not see the Moon, and the Native Indian tribes who could not see the Spanish ships. They were literally inhabiting parallel versions of Earth, vibrationally. It looks this is even documented.

There is a grave site in Kashmir where Jesus is said to be buried. According to Bashar reference to an alternative version of the Gospel, an alternative version of the events.

Obviously there are many overlaps, including non-compatible versions, seemingly existing 'at the same time' until the final splitting  of the common 'bubble realities' occurs or is accomplished (Bashar). Timeframes given by him are unclear and differ. The loud and unidentified sounds in the sky over the US are a 'physicalized representation of the splitting' (Bashar).

According to Seth we are constantly producing (and re-producing) our own version of the universe and each version seems to be different. In Jane's and Robert's appartment, the cat Willy was producing a bug larger (and longer living) than the one seen by the two humans. Robert saw a bug which was different in appearance from the bug seen by Jane. And obviously the bug was creating a (partial) picture of the cat (only the head) in its own universe. (session 6o to 64).

What we perceive as 'outer world' is far from being neutral and objective (Seth).

There is the strange New York Beach event where Jane and Robert met fragment personalities (I am not sure that I am using the terminology correctly here), an alternative Jane and an alternative Robert, which were emanating such an unfriendly and hostile atmosphere that they instantaneously decided to go dancing. According the Seth this was decisive. Otherwise they could have ended up as these other versions.

For those in the US, you may know that people are regularly vanishing in National Parks (missing 411 cases). In Australia as well (Black Mountain). According to Bashar there are portals. So it looks that reality is definitely different from what we generally think we know about it.

[Kyle]

A few days ago I provided the examples of the indigenous people in ancient Greece who could not see the Moon, and the Native Indian tribes who could not see the Spanish ships. They were literally inhabiting parallel versions of Earth, vibrationally. It looks this is even documented.

Lots of interest here, thank you, but I have trouble suspending disbelief on this one point about the ancient indigenous Grecians who couldn't see the Moon. I have a strong impression that the Moon was fundamental to myths in every culture, everywhere, just as much as the Sun, if not more so. Would you say that the invisible Moon was their myth? How would anyone know that they couldn't see it? I just need some supporting text, I guess.

Also, it seems like apples and oranges to compare that with the Spanish ships. I read somewhere that the natives who met the Spanish said the ships looked like clouds; they just couldn't identify them as ships.

[Deb]

Thanks Tob for the further explanations. I thought when you said around a dozen or so of probabilities, or 100-200, I thought you meant that's with Seth said, which didn't jibe with my understanding.

And thanks Larry for the ship metaphor from Fuller, it's perfect. A gradual shift that changes the direction once the rudder is past the tipping point makes sense to me, and I feel like we've been working on that for a while thanks to speakers/teachers such as Seth, Bashar, and others around the world that we don't know about. And helpers, such as Lynda Dahl, Richard Roberts, Paul Helfrich and all the others that attempt to make the teachings of Seth, et al. understandable and available to a larger crowd. Thanks to the internet as well.

What I've had a hard time with are channelers that have been saying there will be a sudden observable shift in consciousness, a transformation, a divine intervention, that will occur in the near-future. And when it doesn't happen, there are explanations as to why it's so hard to predict these things. It's not that I read or listen to any of these on a regular basis, it's usually because friends point out something that I need to read.

I read somewhere that the natives who met the Spanish said the ships looked like clouds; they just couldn't identify them as ships.

Yes, I remember that story. It was explained that is was because they had never seen ships before and so didn't know what they were. But I can also imagine how sails would look like clouds in the distance. There are some that say it's a myth, and that the natives weren't concerned with the ships until the sailors approached the shore in longboats, which they then were met by two well-armed natives. Since that took place in 1770, it's hard to imagine shore-dwelling natives not knowing what ships are, I've seen articles saying that people from Africa traveled to South America as far back as 13,000 BC. Can you imagine crossing the Atlantic in one of their row/sail boats? I find this article fascinating.

By the way @Tob, I don't know if you saw that you can take short quotes from posts, rather than quoting the entire post. For some reason people don't always notice the link to the right of post titles that says "Quote Entire Post (or highlight some text for a PARTIAL quote)". I'm attaching a screen capture on how it works. Once you highlight what you want to quote and click that link, it will instantly put the quote in the Quick-Reply box at the bottom of the page. With the last software update, it even allows quotes to be added to the Text Edit box after Preview has been chosen, except now I see the link says "Insert Quote." I'll figure out how to change that to match the language of the other one.

[Tob]

A few days ago I provided the examples of the indigenous people in ancient Greece who could not see the Moon, and the Native Indian tribes who could not see the Spanish ships. They were literally inhabiting parallel versions of Earth, vibrationally. It looks this is even documented.

Lots of interest here, thank you, but I have trouble suspending disbelief on this one point about the ancient indigenous Grecians who couldn't see the Moon. I have a strong impression that the Moon was fundamental to myths in every culture, everywhere, just as much as the Sun, if not more so. Would you say that the invisible Moon was their myth? How would anyone know that they couldn't see it? I just need some supporting text, I guess.

Also, it seems like apples and oranges to compare that with the Spanish ships. I read somewhere that the natives who met the Spanish said the ships looked like clouds; they just couldn't identify them as ships.

As physical reality does not exist (onto itself), what determines what kind of reality we 'get' (what we project into 'being out there' with our consciousness), at a renewal rate of billions of virtual reality frames per second) is the vibratory level of the actual driver of the physical illusion game: our individual definitions and belief systems. According to Bashar the control panels on his ship are invisible to others. When asked about ancient Greek and Roman texts referring to a time when inhabitants of parts of Europe could not see the Moon, as the Moon was 'not yet there', he explains that these people, the Proselenes, were just not vibrating on the levels, which would have allowed them to see this planetary object. It was there, but they were not able to perceive it.

'The period when the Earth was Moonless is probably the most remote recollection of mankind. Democritus and Anaxagoras taught that there was a time when the Earth was without the Moon. Aristotle wrote that Arcadia in Greece, before being inhabited by the Hellenes, had a population of Pelasgians, and that these aborigines occupied the land already before there was a moon in the sky above the Earth; for this reason they were called Proselenes'. (https://www.varchive.org/itb/sansmoon.htm)

According to Seth a black garden hose could theoretically turn into a vicious black snake. Not likely, but also not impossible. Has to do with belief systems. It is the belief systems which underpin the creation of reality. Individually and collectively.

If you familiarize yourself with the 'Nine levels of Consciousness' session of Bashar you will see that there is a level where the rules for our common reality production system are laid down. Common rules (like common rules for a chess game) such as gravity and the common illusion of time, by which everybody will usually (have to) abide. We have a Sun which is yellow and not green, but with modified rules there could be a reality with two Suns which are green, and no gravity or an inverse gravity. These are NOT our rules.

If you listen to Tom Campbell you will see that he makes similar statements as far as the 'rules' behind the reality production mechanism are concerned. Usually we can take it for granted that we do not have to think about gravity. It's just there. And the Sun is yellow. Every day anew. And a black garden hose cannot turn into a snake. But it could.

[Sena]

The Law of One uses the rather controversial term of "harvest". Many clearly don't want to be harvested:

That term reminds me of sci-fi books I've read.  It never goes well for humanity.

usmaak,
That would be a wrong interpretation. If a person gives Service to Others (STO) at least 50% of the time, as opposed to Service to Self (STS), then he/she will ascend to the next level. That is not difficult to achieve.

[Sena]

This small group, when it reaches critical mass (perhaps 40,000-100,000 people), changes the direction of the ship (the larger population). Thus, one person with sufficient power of persuasion can influence enough people to result in a transformation of consciousness of the planet.

Larry, what you have written is partially compatible with the Law of One teachings. I think you are correct in saying that when the group reaches critical mass, a major change could occur. I don't think, however, that a single person could effect such a change.

[LarryH]

Is there a difference between suspension of belief and suspension of disbelief? Both have been discussed in this thread. I can see where they may be the same, in that disbelief is also a belief (Someone might say, "I do not believe in UFOs or psychic phenomena, therefore I believe that they do not exist").

[Deb]

Is there a difference between suspension of belief and suspension of disbelief?

Not in my mind. 

[leidl]

Well, while suspension of disbelief and suspension of belief can amount to the same thing, I don't think they necessarily do, and I don't think they do in the way usmaak was using the term.  He mentioned wanting to give new ideas a "fair chance" before a belief crystalized.  Larry's example offered a positive phrasing of a belief and a negative phrasing of a belief--a belief was formed in both cases.  I hope this makes sense.   

[Kyle]

'The period when the Earth was Moonless is probably the most remote recollection of mankind. Democritus and Anaxagoras taught that there was a time when the Earth was without the Moon. Aristotle wrote that Arcadia in Greece, before being inhabited by the Hellenes, had a population of Pelasgians, and that these aborigines occupied the land already before there was a moon in the sky above the Earth; for this reason they were called Proselenes'. (https://www.varchive.org/itb/sansmoon.htm)

Thanks, Tob! I have to confess, my jaw hung open for a while after reading that stories of "pre-lunar" peoples are widespread and that even Aristotle wrote about them. I had never heard this before, despite my interest in ancient legends. This is enough to stimulate my curiosity for sure.

[usmaak]

Well, while suspension of disbelief and suspension of belief can amount to the same thing, I don't think they necessarily do, and I don't think they do in the way usmaak was using the term.  He mentioned wanting to give new ideas a "fair chance" before a belief crystalized.  Larry's example offered a positive phrasing of a belief and a negative phrasing of a belief--a belief was formed in both cases.  I hope this makes sense.   

This went off the rails, off a cliff, and then sailed off of the planet.

What I wanted to know.  What I wondered was, how do people handle suspension of disbelief.

[Deb]

Wish I could do a "like" and a "funny" at the same time. Glad I got my answer in early.

[Kyle]

Hi, I know this is neither a Bashar nor an astronomy forum. But if you are into lunatic issues maybe it could be of interest to you that -

Tob, I fear I have given you the wrong impression by trying to suspend my disbelief. The term "lunatic issues" seems to fit well with my impression of Bashar's material. My disbelief totally wins out when it comes to this sort of thing. My apologies. I'm in the midst of a Seth homecoming, and there's just no comparing Seth with any of the competition, for me.

[Tob]

Hi, I fully understand your approach. I will read Vol. 2 of the Early Sessions entirely and produce a few lines on Seth's understanding of physical creation.

Talbot: 'The Holographic Universe' helps a lot. This is the easiest approach to get familiar with the holographic character of the universe. (all information is contained in the smallest parts). This is meant by Seth when he talks about the 'capsule comprehension of particles'. Without understanding the physical qualities of his terms it is not easy to read his texts. For me, the Seth material is outstanding. But I could not read the books until reaching the point at which I got an idea what a hologram is (Bohm) and how the processing of information in the brain can be understood 'holographically' (Pribram), two Nobel Laureates. Talbots book is easy to read. If you in addition 'accept' that everything in creation is virtual, not 'physical', reading Seth is not hampered by constant questions: 'Where are all these other versions of me and the world?'. They are all also 'Here and Now". As there is nothing else. It is just a matter of vibration.. Talbot is/was a science journalist. Bohm a physicist and Pribram a psychologist. No esoteric, execpt for Seth.

Kind regards, Tob.

[Kyle]

Yup, I remember reading 'Holographic Universe', way back when, it was a good read but I haven't gone back to it since then.

[Deb]

The Law of One uses the rather controversial term of "harvest". Many clearly don't want to be harvested:

That term reminds me of sci-fi books I've read.  It never goes well for humanity.

OK, this is for entertainment purposes only.

Today I finished a well-rated but not-so-good Dean Koontz audio book, The Taking (2004). I only stuck with it because I kept hoping it would redeem itself. Somehow Koontz managed to combine UFOs, alien invasion, Lovecraftian monsters, good vs. evil, religion, the bible and Satan (we are legion). And of course extraordinary dogs and kids, as usual.

While UFOs have been in the news (and here) lately because of the upcoming release of newly unclassified information, we were also talking here about, ummm, a shift and harvesting souls, and so there came a coincidence for me. IMO, it's not significant enough to be called a synchronicity.

At the conclusion of the story, it turns out that aliens invaded Earth to harvest those less-than-perfect humans that had become tolerant to violence and murder. The parallel was to the great flood and Noah's Ark—apparently same premise. A huge amount of humanity became fodder for the aliens, and the good souls were left to repopulate the planet.

So according to Koontz, that's how the shift is going to pan out—the bad players just get removed. 

[usmaak]

The Law of One uses the rather controversial term of "harvest". Many clearly don't want to be harvested:

That term reminds me of sci-fi books I've read.  It never goes well for humanity.

OK, this is for entertainment purposes only.

Today I finished a well-rated but not-so-good Dean Koontz audio book, The Taking (2004). I only stuck with it because I kept hoping it would redeem itself. Somehow Koontz managed to combine UFOs, alien invasion, Lovecraftian monsters, good vs. evil, religion, the bible and Satan (we are legion). And of course extraordinary dogs and kids, as usual.

While UFOs have been in the news (and here) lately because of the upcoming release of newly unclassified information, we were also talking here about, ummm, a shift and harvesting souls, and so there came a coincidence for me. IMO, it's not significant enough to be called a synchronicity.

At the conclusion of the story, it turns out that aliens invaded Earth to harvest those less-than-perfect humans that had become tolerant to violence and murder. The parallel was to the great flood and Noah's Ark—apparently same premise. A huge amount of humanity became fodder for the aliens, and the good souls were left to repopulate the planet.

So according to Koontz, that's how the shift is going to pan out—the bad players just get removed. 

It's funny.  The Taking was one of my favorite of the many Dean Koontz books that I've read.  I've never done audio books. I read the book about ten years ago.  I love the twist about how it's essentially the reverse rapture, but not in the way that anyone ever expected.

And another synchronicity.  I haven't thought about that book in years and the Kindle book came up on sale last week and I bought it.

[Sena]

While UFOs have been in the news (and here) lately because of the upcoming release of newly unclassified information, we were also talking here about, ummm, a shift and harvesting souls, and so there came a coincidence for me. IMO, it's not significant enough to be called a synchronicity.

Deb, it may not be just for entertainment, although the Law of One writings are significantly different to the Koontz version.

[Sena]

And another synchronicity.  I haven't thought about that book in years and the Kindle book came up on sale last week and I bought it.

usmaak, never under-estimate the spiritual insights of Amazon.

Here again was that unearthly power that did not differentiate between the
living and the dead, or even between the organic and the inorganic. It seemed
that Earth was being taken and remade not by ETs from another spiral arm of the
Milky Way or from another galaxy, but by beings from another universe, where all
the laws of nature were radically different from those in this one.
Humanity's reality, which operated on Einsteinian laws, and the utterly
different reality of humanity's dispossessors had collided, meshed. At this
Einstein intersection, all things seemed possible now in this worst of all
possible new worlds.

I think Koontz is unduly pessimistic.

[Deb]

I think Koontz is unduly pessimistic.

I've read a lot of his books. I think he's generally a good writer, but follows a formula most sci-fi and horror writers use, basically good vs evil. He tends to go overboard making the villain excessively detestable, so the endings are usually very satisfying. I think his pessimism could be contrived—he's writing what his readers want.

It's funny.  The Taking was one of my favorite of the many Dean Koontz books that I've read.  I've never done audio books. I read the book about ten years ago.  I love the twist about how it's essentially the reverse rapture, but not in the way that anyone ever expected.

And another synchronicity.  I haven't thought about that book in years and the Kindle book came up on sale last week and I bought it.

OK, that's an amazing synchronicity. What's going on here???

I think one problem with the audio book was the narrator, she had a baby-like voice (don't know how else to explain it), it did not quite stand up to the content. I just finished the Jane Hawk series and that narrator rocked. What I also didn't like about the Taking book was I thought Koontz went overboard with the Lovecraft-like creatures and I didn't get the purpose of the possession/reanimation of the dead. Maybe I need to think about that a little more. I did really appreciate the twist at the end of the reverse rapture, it was a surprise and I thought it was clever. And was very appealing to me, sounds like heaven actually. A fresh start for humanity. 

[strangerthings]

"As you do, you will discover yourself reacting to the desired beliefs as easily and automatically as you did to the undesirable ones. As you do, keep the idea of child's play in mind, however. This will allow you to keep the entire affair in a kind of suspension."

"For now, I simply want to suggest that all such beliefs should be understood and dismissed as soon as possible. We hope to show how most natural health-promoting beliefs can be applied to all mental, physical, or emotional illnesses or difficulties. I want to assure you that regardless of your circumstances, age, or sex, you can indeed start over, re-arousing from within yourself those earlier, more innocent expectations, feelings and beliefs. It is much better if you can imagine this endeavor more in the light of children's play, in fact, rather than think of it as a deadly serious adult pursuit."

"There is no need to search endlessly into the past of this life or any other, for the "original" causes for beliefs. Making a change in the present of a certain kind will automatically alter all beliefs "across the board," so to speak. It is important, however, that you do not strain too hard to achieve results, but allow yourself some leeway. You react to your beliefs habitually, often unthinkingly, and in usual ideas of time, and in your experience of it — you must allow yourself "some time" to change that habitual behavior."

Way Toward Health Chapter 10: June 3, 1984

------

"Your encounter with Leonard *(tonight) *was beneficial, because it allowed for expressions of friendliness on all of your parts, and the suspension of disapproving attitudes."

TPS4 Deleted Session May 1, 1978

------


CD 1

"For a moment, forget your question! You are a flower -- a very lovely flower. The sun is bright and warm and glowing, and you are blossoming. Because you are a flower, you exist in the natural world of abundance and glory. And the sun flows upon you, and you open your petals. "

My only point to adding this was "forget your question" to me is like saying "suspend what you are thinking and believing that has you compelled to ask this question....for just a moment and imagine this over here..."

-------

I do not think that if something is not sitting well with you that you *must* look at it and find out why. Unless of course you are in a relationship and want to improve (thework.com lol)

There is nothing wrong with not liking something, however, how flexible am I? Can I find at least some general ground to stand on if this *something rather* causes me stress?

With a suspension of beliefs we can PLAY, It is not a must, should and better do this ... kind of thing. We play. Seth reiterates...do not be so hard on yourself....and play around with stuff. Seth teaches also, "Never say no to your feelings--accept them. Hate will lead you back to love if you allow it to." (CD 3)

-----------

As far as yalls alien harvesting freaky side show *L*


CD 1

"It is a playground of creativity and joy if you realize that it is.

There are some that peek in at your windows to see what you are up to with your blocks. There are some who watch. But, watching, those observers do not see a block and say, "What a dirty old belief that is!"

Those watching do not feel they must come in and kick aside your blocks for you. They only make sure you have an infinite number of things to work with at your disposal. They only know that you form your own reality with the blocks that you have, and they do not judge. So that if such an observer peeks through the mortal window and sees a poor design, he does not say, "What a faulty picture!" He simply waits for you to kick the design apart and make a new one on your own. But the design as it was, was a design, and itself, a way of learning."



I 'handle' suspension of belief in different ways depending on my belief and if it is toward a who, a what or a place and its' intensity.

I have a lot of resources at my disposal... so I use whatever has worked previously and if I am bored with it I will find something else.

I work with my beliefs practically daily. If I find myself being very judgey or criticizing I have learned that my body will let me know if I am out of alignment with my true beingness. 

It really depends on the topic.

What would it be like if I did not have "this thought"? That is very helpful to me around certain topics.

I have recently learned that a certain topic irritates me *L* and I realize we are all here to add to the database and I can accept that. As I began to try to suspend my belief about it I was understanding also that there are other things at play. It is always all me. No one does anything TO me I do it to myself. I might feel protective but there isn't anything to protect because I have this ... knowledge and it isnt going anywhere for me.

Coming back to the now helps me too. Knowing I have a choice helps as well.

Is this that big of a deal? Is the world going to end because I believe such and such? How caught up am I in refusing to let go and let flow a natural joyful playful self?

Can I let go and suspend? Am I willing to try at least?

Sometimes I turn it around... For example: (a made up belief) wth is she wearing nothing matches and she looks like a clown.

That is not a very nice energy to hold. It feels unpleasant. She may love what she is wearing ...so I can suspend MY belief and appreciate her freedom and expression ...I can... step into freedom and expression and feel what it is like again because apparently in my lapse of judgement I have momentarily forgot what freedom and expression feels like for ME.

I think insane solutions can also work. I can distract myself with some out of this world thought and go there. Then when I come back I do not think or feel about a thing the way I had before.

It is almost like countering an unpleasant thought or belief or emotion with something that rates on a scale of 1-10 (10 being highest) that can overpower it equally or better. For me it has to be higher and not equal.

Sometimes the belief can stay but I go for a walk. Look at nature and appreciate and be full of thanks. My belief is therefor suspended and when I return home it doesnt even bother me anymore.

It really just depends.

[LarryH]

I have a problem with the title of this thread, "Suspension of disbelief". It sounds like an awkward double negative and appears to mean "to stop disbelieving and start believing". I suspect that it was meant to be "Suspension of belief", which is what strangerthings in her last post addressed. Others may have also interpreted the title in that way, but I didn't have the patience to actually search.

[usmaak]

I have a problem with the title of this thread, "Suspension of disbelief". It sounds like an awkward double negative and appears to mean "to stop disbelieving and start believing". I suspect that it was meant to be "Suspension of belief", which is what strangerthings in her last post addressed. Others may have also interpreted the title in that way, but I didn't have the patience to actually search.

I said it exactly as I meant it.  It doesn't mean to start believing.  It's commonly used when reading science fiction books.  If you spend all of your time saying "well that's ridiculous" or "that could never happen" then it ruins enjoyment of the book.  If I'm reading a book and things happen that absolutely could never happen, then I am suspending disbelief so that I may enjoy the book.  It doesn't mean that I believe what I'm reading.

[LarryH]

I have a problem with the title of this thread, "Suspension of disbelief". It sounds like an awkward double negative and appears to mean "to stop disbelieving and start believing". I suspect that it was meant to be "Suspension of belief", which is what strangerthings in her last post addressed. Others may have also interpreted the title in that way, but I didn't have the patience to actually search.

I said it exactly as I meant it.  It doesn't mean to start believing.  It's commonly used when reading science fiction books.  If you spend all of your time saying "well that's ridiculous" or "that could never happen" then it ruins enjoyment of the book.  If I'm reading a book and things happen that absolutely could never happen, then I am suspending disbelief so that I may enjoy the book.  It doesn't mean that I believe what I'm reading.

OK, that makes sense, thanks! Maybe I should actually read the thread. It did appear that at least some of the posts started to address "suspension of belief" instead. And then I found that I had brought up a similar thought earlier here:

Is there a difference between suspension of belief and suspension of disbelief? Both have been discussed in this thread. I can see where they may be the same, in that disbelief is also a belief (Someone might say, "I do not believe in UFOs or psychic phenomena, therefore I believe that they do not exist").

[strangerthings]

I think it is all relatively the same thing and we are all talking the same language using different ways to express it *L*

When I read or watch ..say...a horror movie with zombies...my disbelief in physical zombies might prevent me from watching such "nonsense" BUT if I suspend this thought and disbelief....I might be able to sit down and enjoy being with say.... a boyfriend who loves horror movies or zombie shows....I could then suspend my disbelief and just enjoy the show and the time with the other person ....

I totally get all of that

For me it is the same thing. Suspending my beliefs about watching a horror movie or what have you and just chillin with ma homies or whatever  lol  enough so that I am not fussy or being rude or saying stuff etc.... just step into the enjoyment of being with others or friends or this companion...realize I appreciate that more so I can at least enjoy it in another way...

My beliefs I have about certain things be they a dis or not - will still require me to suspend my grasping thoughts if I want to not be a fuss pot and actually enjoy a new experience.

Either way I would handle them all the same. To suspend or not to suspend *L*

I also at this point in life would not sit down to watch certain things because it feeds a beast in me that wants to be fed and I feed it different food now. That is also a solution *S*

The other day I scanned some news headlines and I think I suspended my disbelief for a spell or two lolz! That was a joke *S*  I suspended my beliefs to enter into disbelief LOL That too was a joke! Sometimes the "X" in my browser just is not clicked fast enough teehee

Movies and TV shows to me are tricky little boogers...because if enough theme oriented "enter tainment" comes along over a set of some years I see patterns. lol And if something happens in the world I see patterns. Voodoo. We create reality with our thoughts not just beliefs and emotions.

So if for two hours I can fall into a state of something being real and say I start biting my nails or eating more or drinking more coke or I dunno whatever.... Is that healthy? Is this a playful joyful playfullness? What if it bothers you so much you cant stop thinking about it?

I watched this one movie called Banshee Chapter. That is one hell of a movie!!!!! Wonderful wonderful job at getting into my head lololol I suspended my belief/disbelief of joy in order to watch this movie I think? Not healthy and it fed that beast in me. nom nom nom ate it all up and I had one hell of a time getting it cleaned out of my head.

So I realized I had some belief work to do on this very topic if I wanted it gone - and that works too but more importantly I focused on joyful things and a like list . It countered it more than any detailed belief work ever could have. 10's and 10's all the way around. I did not want the creative expression of the movie gone, I just wanted the effect/affect of it inside of my head to be something else that was a constructive and beneficial understanding to me! To say "off with your head!" does not sit well with me so the movie can stay lol but inside of me where it is swirling around .... That is what I want to inspect or redirect this energy.

I find myself not watching much tv or movies anymore because now I have a belief I am free to be very picky about what I feed myself. My ego is very happy to be picky *L* But it is still a maintenance job because then an open mind can become closed. Flexibility goes out the door. So it is a ebb and flow of learning how to harness my energy and release it. I choose to release healthy uplifting thoughts more and more and I feel better. When I watch things that go against my joy of being - for two hours - what am I releasing into the world with my "grasping focus" in a movie or tv show? Or news or theater or someone's conversation or or or or or .....

When to suspend and when not to suspend your beliefs/disbeliefs. I think that is the trick. lol

(Im laughing at myself  )

[Sena]

The closest I've come to experiencing outside our norms was with Reiki... I could feel something like static energy/electricity coming from my and others' hands. It was an interesting experience, there was a little more to it that I won't go into right now.

Deb, I searched this site for "Reiki" because I came across a healer who claims to be a Reiki master. I have had several treatments from her, and I feel rather good.

There is a book which I downloaded, "A Little Bit of Reiki: An Introduction to Energy Medicine". It can be downloaded here:

https://book4you.org/book/3719306/a12b34

The book has many references to "hands", and it appears that the energy coming out of the healer's hands is a vital ingredient of the therapy.

A quote from the book:

The Reiki practitioner will spend some time talking to the client about what he or she wants to work through, resolve, or balance. Throughout the session, the practitioner will either use a light touch, or her hands will hover over yet off the client's body. The practitioner will be intuitively directed to different areas of the body. Just because someone comes in with pain in a certain area of the body doesn't necessarily mean that is where the practitioner will be placing his hands. There are invisible energy lines running throughout our bodies connecting to different areas and organs—in the practice of Traditional Chinese Medicine, these energy lines are called meridians, and in the Indian yogic tradition, they are referred to as "nadis." So, for example, perhaps kidney issues might be worked through by placing hands on the feet, or vice versa. It's nonlinear thinking, because we are working with energy and a different set of constraints.

[Deb]

Deb, I searched this site for "Reiki" because I came across a healer who claims to be a Reiki master. I have had several treatments from her, and I feel rather good.

That's awesome! Of course we all know the drill, about beliefs and symptoms cropping up in a different manner if underlying issues are not dealt with, but Seth did say healers can help people because they are able to work at different levels. So healers can heal if they are able to fix more than an immediate symptom. I imagine many energy healers are intuitive.

"There are also those who choose to be healers, and of course this involves far more than healing as you are familiar with it. These healers must be able to work with all levels of the entity's experience, directly helping those personalities that are a part of it."
—SS Part Two: Chapter 11: Session 547, August 24, 1970

I have had pets react to me when I was learning Reiki (I only took the first level), and I was not touching them, my hands were at least a couple of inches away. And I've been able to feel my own energy radiating from my hands the same way. So in my mind there's definitely something to Reiki.