Re: love as a belief -- lyn

[Guest guest]

Hi Lyn,

Hi Eva

> > > I have never had anyone disprove to me that before

> > anything

> > > happens in this world or dimension, it must be thought of

> > first.

> >

> > I'd be interested to see you prove that a thought always comes

> >

> > before an experience.

>

> I'll tell ya what )) You answer my first question above and

> then I'll answer yours.

I can't prove what you're asking.

But I wonder what you think about all the things that supposedly

happened before there were people to think them.

> > > Love isn't something that came first before " life " . Life

> > > created love because its a " vibration " . It has to be

> > created by

> > > someone or lots of someones first.

> >

> > I can't read this paragraph without thinking 'this is just a

> > story.'

> > How do you know it is like you describe it is?

>

> And your statement makes me think you've never really meditated

> too much. Or, if you have, perhaps a different way than I have.

> For me it was like that. For others I've talked to, it was like

> that (those who have gotten to that point). I could ask you how

> you know it all boils down to " love " . Is that true?

It is my experience that love is left whenever a stressful statement

is undone.

> > > So, in my opinion, love is an attitude and a high

> > vibration

> > > created by " life force " , if you are speaking of the highest

> > > love.

> >

> > Is that true?

>

> For me, so far it is.

I apologize for asking the question.

I was trying to get you to consider that, at least for some people,

experience could be different from what you stated.

> >

> > >

> > > When " all " beliefs are gone and you have nothing left -

> > then

> > > you would have nothing left. No love, no considerations, no

> > > vibrations. Ever been in that state? I have. Its

> > stillness to

> > > the max. No motion or " e " motion, no attitude, no thought,

> > no

> > > time, no space, nothing to it at all.

> >

> > This does sound like an experience to me. Would you say being

> > in

> > this state wasn't an experience?

>

> Well, so did yours - sound like an experience. Your own story,

> as it were.

My remark about it being an experience refered back to your

statement that no experience existed without a thought preceding it.

I understood that above you were trying to describe a state that was

not produced by a thought.

But I understand you still call this an experience, so I suppose it

is still produced by a thought (or image, or point of view).

> All comparisons, to me, are an experience. Its when you no

> longer have any type of body, or apparent life, that it no

> longer is experience, because you don't have anything to

> experience. So simple that most people cannot comprehend

> something like that and it might even scare a few.

What about dreamless sleep?

I still have my body, but can't recall any experiences, no conscious

ones at least.

> > > You don't have to love all that is to be an observer of

> > all

> > > that is.

> >

> > In my experience, if you observe attentively, you love it.

>

> Is that true? Who would you be without that thought .

I notice that whenever I observe attentively, I feel love. Just an

experience, and not a stressful one.

Eva

[Guest guest]

Hi Eva

--- Eva Lobach wrote:

>

> Hi Lyn,

>

>

> Hi Eva

>

> > > > I have never had anyone disprove to me that before

> > > anything

> > > > happens in this world or dimension, it must be thought

> of

> > > first.

> > >

> > > I'd be interested to see you prove that a thought always

> comes

> > >

> > > before an experience.

> >

> > I'll tell ya what )) You answer my first question above

> and

> > then I'll answer yours.

>

> I can't prove what you're asking.

> But I wonder what you think about all the things that

> supposedly

> happened before there were people to think them.

Without bodies? Bodies came later anyway. How do you think

they came about? They had to be somehow imaged and then

created. I don't have too much idea regarding quantum physics,

but I suppose it would be along those lines as to how atoms,

molecules, etc., combine together to create different forms.

Before " people " (I assume bodies) there were beings who were so

fast and light that this dimension is like watching a slow

motion picture.

But, that for now, is what anyone can consider as " my " story.

It might be true - but it doesn't much matter if it hasn't

been experienced.

>

> > > > Love isn't something that came first before " life " .

> Life

> > > > created love because its a " vibration " . It has to be

> > > created by

> > > > someone or lots of someones first.

> > >

> > > I can't read this paragraph without thinking 'this is just

> a

> > > story.'

> > > How do you know it is like you describe it is?

> >

> > And your statement makes me think you've never really

> meditated

> > too much. Or, if you have, perhaps a different way than I

> have.

> > For me it was like that. For others I've talked to, it was

> like

> > that (those who have gotten to that point). I could ask you

> how

> > you know it all boils down to " love " . Is that true?

>

> It is my experience that love is left whenever a stressful

> statement

> is undone.

I understand and actually know what you're talking about. I

totally see your view - I'm just saying that there's variety

there and not always does one have to have " love " necessarily

when releasing stressful moments. Again, its a " created "

attitude as I see it from an objective view (my objective view).

>

> > > > So, in my opinion, love is an attitude and a high

> > > vibration

> > > > created by " life force " , if you are speaking of the

> highest

> > > > love.

> > >

> > > Is that true?

> >

> > For me, so far it is.

>

> I apologize for asking the question.

> I was trying to get you to consider that, at least for some

> people,

> experience could be different from what you stated.

I believe it is different. I can actually see that what a

person considers is senior and above all else. That what groups

consider is above all else.

When I was very new on the list, I mentioned something about

" perfection " and how we really can't get away from it.

Everything we consider and intend is actuated in some way. If a

person considers that all there is as a bottom line is " love " in

the world - voila, there's only love in the world after all is

said and done. If another person considers that all there is

is the " void " after all is said and done - voila, they'll find

the void.

That's why I say, its a created consideration, whether there are

100 million people who believe it (which would make it an even

stronger reality) or only just a few.

>

> > >

> > > >

> > > > When " all " beliefs are gone and you have nothing left

> -

> > > then

> > > > you would have nothing left. No love, no

> considerations, no

> > > > vibrations. Ever been in that state? I have. Its

> > > stillness to

> > > > the max. No motion or " e " motion, no attitude, no

> thought,

> > > no

> > > > time, no space, nothing to it at all.

> > >

> > > This does sound like an experience to me. Would you say

> being

> > > in

> > > this state wasn't an experience?

> >

> > Well, so did yours - sound like an experience. Your own

> story,

> > as it were.

>

> My remark about it being an experience refered back to your

> statement that no experience existed without a thought

> preceding it.

> I understood that above you were trying to describe a state

> that was

> not produced by a thought.

It was what was left after removing all thoughts, images, etc.

> But I understand you still call this an experience, so I

> suppose it

> is still produced by a thought (or image, or point of view).

If I did what I was explaining all the time and had nothing to

compare it with, most likely the word or concept of " experience "

wouldn't exist. But because I have a comparison of close to a

" static " life force in comparison to a human being, then

basically, it was an experience at the time. Its not something

I do very often, as I don't know I'm ready for that just yet .

>

> > All comparisons, to me, are an experience. Its when you no

> > longer have any type of body, or apparent life, that it no

> > longer is experience, because you don't have anything to

> > experience. So simple that most people cannot comprehend

> > something like that and it might even scare a few.

>

> What about dreamless sleep?

I guess some people don't have any pictures when they sleep.

Dreams are usually full of images. But I don't see how it

relates to what I'm saying.

> I still have my body, but can't recall any experiences, no

> conscious

> ones at least.

I'm not sure what you mean here. What type of experiences are

you speaking of?

>

> > > > You don't have to love all that is to be an observer

> of

> > > all

> > > > that is.

> > >

> > > In my experience, if you observe attentively, you love it.

> >

> > Is that true? Who would you be without that thought .

>

> I notice that whenever I observe attentively, I feel love.

> Just an

> experience, and not a stressful one.

Okay . I don't always feel love. Sometimes its just strong

interest. Sometimes I'm in admiration - which isn't always love

either. But these two are so hand-in-hand that I had to really

look into their concepts to see that they are still different

from each other (love and admiration). I use to think they were

the same thing. Used to get me into trouble putting these two

things together (long story).

Warmth,

Lyn

__________________________________________________