| Author | Message | ||
    David_chance Member Post Number: 37 Registered: 03-2003 |
What is Creation? http://www.figu.org/us/spiritual_teaching/creation.htm | ||
Eric_drouin Member Post Number: 54 Registered: 05-2004 |
Hi: Cpl is right To have a glossary of definitions of spirituality would be of help for us "beginners", we could refer when needed, since current definitions from approved dictionaries are misleading us. The example with "spirit" and "psyche" convinced me A suggestion: Perhaps a glossary of basic "spirituality" words with appropriate definitions on the web site on-line? (What do you think Scott?) Salome Eric | ||
Phaethonsfire Moderator Post Number: 348 Registered: 01-2004 |
Very good idea Eric, I will compile a list of definitions as soon as possible. Salome(Peace in Wisdom), Jakobjn Saalome gam naan ben uurda, gan njjber asaala hesporoona! | ||
Scott Moderator Post Number: 596 Registered: 07-2000 |
Hi Eric, If Jacob is willing to put a list together, it would be a great addition to the Forum. Salome Scott | ||
Cpl Member Post Number: 53 Registered: 08-2004 |
Hello Jakob, Leiden is a beautiful university city. I remember being a student sketching some of the houses and cityscape on an architectural field trip there many years ago. My area of research is semiotics (going for my PhD by correspondence), and within that the usage and meaning of images and signs – including words, of course -- in art and language, and also to a limited degree dreams and psychology. My only reason for saying psychology/psychiatry is an art is in terms of its applicability to people/patients. Science requires known defined parameters, in which experiments can be set up resulting in the same results every time. However, each person is unique and has unique experiences, dreams, and combinations of emotions, feelings, mental processes, physiology etc. Therefore successful application of psychology requires, at the very least, a degree of artistry. The same could be argued for doctors, of course, despite the strong scientific base for the study and development of medicines and diagnosis. The patients are all different, but the drugs are the same. Thus the doctors “artistry”, experience and/or considered judgment comes into play. Of course, there is a strong scientific basis for psychology – which you are no doubt far more aware of than me – and I do think the scientific aspect will develop in leaps and bounds this century. In fact it is very possible IMO that profound scientific discoveries in the field of psychology will pave the way to the discovery of the human spirit/soul. You are in a magnificent field of endeavor at this point in time IMO. As time goes on, the “artistry” in these fields will become less and less and the scientific develop exponentially. The way of all things is towards this greater understanding and knowledge. “When you take a good look at Nature, then it will be very obvious that Nature in itself is absolutely logical, a stone which ripples the water of a pond will do that exactly according to the mass of that stone, velocity, angle of impact, etc, etc. and the result are always exactly the outcome of all those parameters.” Yes. An interesting question arising from this truth is; can we know all of the variables in order to scientifically predict the result? In theory we can. If the pond water and the wind are still and no other factors impact the environment we could. But if the water is of varying density and is in organic motion and the wind is forever changing, affecting the size and directions of the waves, can we then know or predict the waves? Again in theory all we need to know is how those changes are going to impact the environment and we can predict the outcome. However, can we ever really know all the variables enough to actually predict the outcome? It will depend on our state of knowledge and the complexity of the organic motion. There can always be factors beyond our ability to predict that could in theory be predictable. Isn’t one reason for our inability to ever fully predict or know Creation because Creation is also organic and begets new things? Of course these new things – like the wind in the above example – are all created and in motion according to law, but sometimes we just lack the complex knowledge of that organic system and knowledge of what is to come, making it impossible for us to predict the outcome. This touches on the forum question asked as to whether there is frustration in not being able to know all of Creation. IMO there is no frustration there, just as there is no frustration at not knowing all that is going to happen in one’s life before it happens (and with not having perfect recall of all events ever transpired). Isn’t the organic freshness of the “new” an aspect of Creation in motion or at least our opportunity to know and learn more? It would more likely be the lack of that which would create boredom and frustration. “This principle is the same for the Psyche, Spirit, Gemuet, Logic, Emotion and Feelings, all these terms have their own intrinsic basic definitions and those definitions will be more detailed after time goes in the course of evolution.” I’m sure this is so, especially for words like spirit, soul, psyche etc. ‘Emotion’ and ‘feeling’ are words used to describe what we already know or experience. They are not subject to discovery, though we will learn more about them. I guess in the FIGU terminology we have to be a bit philosophical with regard the English terms as they may have somewhat different meanings in the German original. Perhaps FIGU’s ‘emotion’ is actually ‘sophisticated’, ‘adult’, ‘learnt’, or ‘trained’ emotion? “When a baby cries, its not sad in the regular way, but its a reaction of the Psyche of the baby, that it needs to have to change it diaper, or needs to be fed, etc.” So it does feel discomfort and feels hunger while not thinking about them because it lacks the language to think in thoughts. Actually now it’s my turn to feel your frustration, Jakob,  because the dictionary says thought and thinking can also be feelings and emotion. It doesn’t even mention language! Presumably the dictionary compilers never thought about the necessity of language in relation to thought itself. LOL! Again, of course, “I think…” and “I feel…” are often used synonymously in conversation. But then sometimes people’s thoughts are intricately tied up with their feelings. A point I think you made earlier. In conversation, Japanese speakers of English in Japan will usually say, “I feel…” rather than “I think…” Westerners of course usually say “I think…” rather than “I feel…”. ”Conscious thinking is developing rapidly after the baby is born, but the initial responses you see from a new born baby or infant are clearly steered from the basal ganglia and the psyche, the psyche is like a 'guardian' which reacts strongly to negative circumstances like danger, fire, physical pain, discomfort and reacts to pleasant impulses like attention or care from his/her parents, these reactions are initially emotional and primary, but not thought related yet.” I would say ‘consciousness’ is developing rather than “conscious thinking”. Neural pathways start to form but there is no language knowledge or language-based thought yet. Impressions of language are coming in from the environment but there are still no language thoughts. So it does feel before it thinks. I notice you use the adjective ‘primary’ here. Could the corresponding adjective be used for the other emotions to make it easier to distinguish the different emotions perhaps? Maybe ‘major’, ‘developed’, learnt, or ‘sophisticated’ emotions? Just an idea. “When you touch a stove, it is not your brain, or better defined, the Cerebrum or neocortex which responds, its your nervous system and the brainstem which respond much more quickly to sensory-impulses from your sensory nerves then the cerebrum ever can, that's why you pull back your hand and only when your hand is already is being pulled back you feel the physical pain. This is again a function of the psyche which guards the body from being hurt.” Again the pain or hurt is felt before there are any thoughts. Here it is the experience of the feelings that result in thought – as they, and experiences, often do -- rather than the other way round. But perhaps you refer to these as “primary feelings” as opposed to ‘developed’, ‘learnt’ or ‘sophisticated’ feelings. “As long as there are no public well-defined and logical definitions for psyche, spirit, consciousness, etc there will always be confusions as is apparent here.” Exactly. IMO it will be science that eventually gives us the definitive answers and definitions of these terms because these three are scientific terms representing actual things. Until then it looks like we have to attempt to thrash them out. Although to date I personally find no disagreement with FIGU’s definitions of these three terms. In fact, FIGU and Billy’s writings on the nature of spirit and its nature after death are some of the very few extant that completely echo the nature of spirit experienced in my own transformation, or what has been called the “mythic death”; an experience interestingly enough, not triggered by FIGU or Billy’s writings. Thanks again, Jakob. No need to reply if you are too busy. And thank you for the post on Creation, David. | ||
Phaethonsfire Moderator Post Number: 349 Registered: 01-2004 |
Yes. An interesting question arising from this truth is; can we know all of the variables in order to scientifically predict the result? In theory we can. When we say that with our material consciousness, I would say, No, the material consciousness is too limited, even when it's highly evolved, the 5 physical senses and the material consciousness are too limited to be able to grasp all variables at the same time and compute the correct results, at least not in real time. I would say yes when the taken spirit consciousness is taken in consideration, because the spirit consciousness and its senses are able to sense a phenomena as a stone falling in the water of a pond as one united impulse and therefore grasping all those variables all at once, making it possible to determine exactly where the stone hits the water and what effect it will have, and this with absolute certainty. This is possible because the spirit consciousness works on a much higher speed then the material consciousness ever can, and then I am taking about 10 to the 7000th power faster then the speed of light, where the material consciousness works at a top speed of 1x speed of light. We will be able to grasp all things in Creation / Universe when we become one with the Universal Consciousness/Creation/ The universe itself, in that case, our awareness will extend to all things existing. I would say ´consciousness? is developing rather than ?conscious thinkingî. Neural pathways start to form but there is no language knowledge or language-based thought yet. Yes, about the consciousness is correct, your right, I meant consciousness and conscious thinking, I forgot about that, because a baby or a infant is still very 'natural' it will be much more sensitive in picking up the vibrations of feelings, thoughts and emotions from other people, especially from its mom and/or dad. They react upon those 'sensed' feelings and thoughts quite naturally, neutral-positive to neutral-positive feelings and thoughts, negative to negative thoughts and feelings (a baby will respond very nicely to love of a mother and/or father) That's why Jmmanuel said that people need to be like childeren again (which means unbaised, natural, and free in thinking and feeling), in order to be able to understand the spiritual side of life. Adults and older children are bound by all kinds of do's and don'ts of society, mental blockages, abstract book knowledge, inhibitions caused by circumstances and upbringing, etc, etc. Babies don't have those inhibitions yet and are therefore able to react naturally to their parents, this changes rapidly when the baby/infant/young child learns and often learns to disregards their own senses/awarenesses. Again the pain or hurt is felt before there are any thoughts. Here it is the experience of the feelings that result in thought ? as they, and experiences, often do -- rather than the other way round. But perhaps you refer to these as primary feelingsîas opposed to developed, learnt or sophisticated feelings. I meant here, the physical sensation caused by the warm stove, which causes a sensation of pain, and the subsequent pulling back of the arm. This is much like a source of bright light what makes people to shut their eyes, especially when they are suddenly confronted with it. Such a reaction would be automatic and steared from the Psyche and the brainstem. So this is not a feeling, but a sensation triggering an automatic response. Salome(Peace in Wisdom), Jakobjn Saalome gam naan ben uurda, gan njjber asaala hesporoona! | ||
Cpl Member Post Number: 88 Registered: 08-2004 |
This definition of "soul" may show how confusion has spead over the use of the words "spirit" and "soul" and how they have become largely intermingled in usage. “Soul” Definitions from: http://protoscience.wikicities.com/wiki/Definition_of_the_Soul Etymology: Author: Esau Posted: 03/15 11:09 AM Having tried scouring online dictionaries for definitively different etymologies or definitions of the two words and failed, I took comfort in reading that the same confusion occurred in the minds of the translators of the KJV (from this article by Frank R. Zindler in “The Probing Mind”): http://www.atheists.org/Atheism/mind.html the Hebrew word neshamah (literally meaning 'breath') is translated as 'spirit' x2 as 'soul' x1 the Hebrew-Aramaic word ruach (literally meaning 'wind') is translated as 'spirit' x240 as 'mind' x6 the word nephesh (literally meaning 'breath') is translated as 'soul' x428 times as 'mind' x15 as 'ghost' x2 as 'life' x119 the Greek word pneuma (literally meaning 'breath') is translated as 'ghost' x91 (including the rendering 'Holy Ghost') as 'spirit' x292 the word psyche (literally meaning 'breath') is translated as 'soul' x58 as 'mind' x3 as life' x40 He argues that the etymolgies of both words ultimately lead back to ancient words for 'breath' or 'wind' or 'air', which is easy to see with “spirit” (from the Latin spirare, to breathe). This leads him to conclude that “the derived meanings were an outgrowth of the inability of primitive people to solve a basic biological puzzle, namely, what constitutes the difference between a live body and a dead one?” Their solution: living things breathe, dead things do not. He adds later that Quote: When a man sneezed, his spirit was forcefully ejected from his body, and one had to say "God bless you" or make a magical gesture, such as the sign of the cross, very quickly, before evil spirits could come to take over the momentarily spiritually vacant carcass. | ||
Wolfbrother New member Post Number: 3 Registered: 07-2005 |
hello all...I have come to an understanding that Creation is boundless and limitless. This would also mean that there would also be an infinite number of spirit forms. So I have been wondering : What causes overpopulation(on a spiritform level)? Also I read something about how spirit forms are incarnating too early and thus have not had sufficient time to process the CCB of the previous life which could cause the person incarnated to have fragments of the previous CCB still with him/her which could lead to suicidal tendencies or psychosis. Im rather confused about that. If that is what is happening then is there not a way to somehow keep the previous CCB data from messing with you? Any input will be greatly appreciated. If the answers or clues to the answers to my questions already exists please tell me where they are. Thanks | ||
Jo_jo Member Post Number: 56 Registered: 04-2003 |
Wolfbrother, Billy has said there are approximately 80 billion spirit forms incarnating to planet Earth. He has further said that the time a spirit form needs to fully process the CCB of the previous life is 1.52 times the number of years lived. So, with only 7 billion humans on the planet at this time, that means approximately 73 billion spirit forms are in the "beyond". According to these numbers, there should be no reason why some people are incarnating too soon. Out of that large group there should be a sufficient number of spirit forms that have fulfilled the requisite time in the beyond. Why that's not the case is a mystery to me. | ||
Eric_drouin Member Post Number: 88 Registered: 05-2004 |
Hi: In Figu Bulletin 50, here is what Billy answered to a question: Auch bei extremster Überbevölkerung kann es nicht sein, dass die Geistformen ‹ausgehen›. Gemäss der planetaren Geistformen-Speicherbank existieren zur Zeit (18.4.2004) 128713911000 vielfach reinkarnierte Geistformen in der Geistformebene, während laut plejarischen Angaben und gemäss den Aufzeichnungen der Speicherbänke am 8.4.2004 auf der Erde 7101500011 Menschen lebten und also gleichermassen viele Geistformen reinkarniert waren. Also ist es absolut unmöglich, dass auch bei einer äusserst extremen Überbevölkerung die Geistformen ‹ausgehen› könnten 128,7 billions spirit form in the spirit level and 7,101,500,011 spirit form in the material level. (notice the 11 people are counted in the total!!) It is impossible to the spirit form to be missing (ausgehen?) even in extreme overpopulation. Regarding the time, Jo-jo, think about say a bath being filled and in the same time being emptied at a fast rate. Depends on the rate of death and rate of birth. Salome Eric | ||
Moonshine Member Post Number: 49 Registered: 01-2005 |
I think Jo_Jo raises a great point. Does anyone know? | ||
Kaare Member Post Number: 16 Registered: 03-2003 |
Hello Wolfbrother On the German Figu site, Billy gave the following numbers in a reply to a reader’s question See Figu Bulletin no 50 at : http://www.figu.org/de/figu/bulletin/50/leserfragen.htm 128713911000 (more than 128 billion) spiritforms, with multiple reincarnations behind them, were residing in Earth’s spirit form level ("beyond") as per 18.4.2004 7101500011 (more than 7 billion) humans were living on Earth , and same number of spiritforms were reincarnated on Earth, as per 8.4.2004. Hope this of some help Regards Kaare | ||
Wolfbrother New member Post Number: 4 Registered: 07-2005 |
another thing: What would cause psychosis? Is it simply because of the genetics becoming too thinned out or is it because of poor diet? Or do you think there is a spiritual aspect to this as well. I think it may be a combination of these factors, but I also feel that if there is a spiritual factor then there may exist the possibility that psychosis may be alleviated or the person may be helped up to a point where he/she can help him/herself. I am studying to be a psychologist but I tend to take a more spiritual approach to these issues. I am in the process of determining what techniques could be the most benefit to the most people (ideally). Any ideas or suggestions would be helpful. Thanks for the replies by the way | ||
Cpl Member Post Number: 113 Registered: 08-2004 |
Hi Moonshine and Jo jo, I think Billy mentioned the main reason for incarnation before the CCB was fully absorbed was due to sudden deaths through murder, war, suicides etc. These tend to reincarnate quickly before all the CCB has been assimilated. If this is so, the answer to the problem is to end wars, murder, and all the institutions propagating and supporting such evil actions. This, it seems, can only be done by making such institutions and people accountable for their inhumane actions. | ||
Jo_jo Member Post Number: 58 Registered: 04-2003 |
Eric, I agree that the birth and death rates are significant. However, with a ratio of 18:1 in favor of spirits in the Beyond, increases in both the birth rate and life expectancy would have to be extraordinarily steep (exponential) for many thousands of years before exhausting the supply of spirits in the beyond. I don't think there would be a serious problem until the ratio approached 1.52:1. One factor to consider is perhaps a majority of spirit forms in the beyond are too advanced to incarnate at the present time. That might also explain the sorry state of world affairs. | ||
Scott Moderator Post Number: 665 Registered: 12-1999 |
Hi Jo_Jo, I may be wrong in this, but I think our evolution has advanced enough that many of the spirit forms can not incarnate at this time. In addition there are ET spirit forms alive right now who are over 10 billion years old, which I think qualifies for being advanced. If I remember most of the "newer" spirit forms have been incarnating in China, but I don't know if that is the case now. Also, I believe Creation has stopped creating spirit forms for this planet at this time...my 2 cents Regards Scott | ||
Jo_jo Member Post Number: 59 Registered: 04-2003 |
Scott, Do you mean many of the spirit forms can or cannot incarnate at this time? I'm unclear as to what you mean. | ||
Scott Moderator Post Number: 666 Registered: 12-1999 |
Jo_jo, I mean that many of the spirit forms are so new, that they cannot incarnate now. This is because our evolution has increased to the point that these (spirit forms) would be unable to assimilate into society due to their lack of knowledge and development. Even though it would seem at times we are living in times of darkness and ignorance, this does not preclude the many advancements that have taken place in the world in the last 100 years. Also, ET spirit forms which are reincarnated on this planet cannot tolerate the non ET spirit forms vibrations. As a result a form of protection has been "installed" by the Arahat Athersata level to allow these ET spirit forms to coexist with normal earth humans. Hope this helps. Scott | ||
Jo_jo Member Post Number: 60 Registered: 04-2003 |
Scott, When do you suppose the time will be right for the "newer" spirit forms to incarnate? Won't they fall further and further behind with the passage of time as the planet evolves? Does man need to be driven back into the "stone age" before these spirit forms can incarnate? And when we talk about the evolution of people on this planet, are we talking material, spiritual or both? | ||
Jplagasse Member Post Number: 334 Registered: 09-2000 |
Hi Scott, "Also, ET spirit forms which are reincarnated on this planet cannot tolerate the non ET spirit forms vibrations. As a result a form of protection has been "installed" by the Arahat Athersata level to allow these ET spirit forms to coexist with normal earth humans." Can you elaborate or give more details on this? Thanks & regards, Pierre | ||
Scott Moderator Post Number: 667 Registered: 12-1999 |
Hello, Considering our Sun is quite old and life on this planet at some point will be threatened by the sun's extinction, I would say none of the newer spirit forms will incarnate on this planet. It has been stated before there are many chances for these spirits to migrate to another planet to start their evolution. Granted this may take some time, but considering the amount of time Creation has allowed for evolution, this is a very brief amount of time. As I understand it the Creation will create an abundance of spirits, in order to insure its own evolution. Just as an animal in the wild may have a large litter with some of the litter not making it. At least some of the offspring will hopefully survive to continue the species. When I think of evolution I think of it in terms of material and spiritual, but I also think in the longer run it becomes more spiritual as time goes on. JP, I learned about this from another passive member not too long ago. As I understand it this applies to all ET Spirit forms that are currently alive on this planet. This is based on the fact that all ET spirit forms have very limited access to knowledge from the Akashic records, because if they did it would create havoc amongst the normal earth person, and vice versa. It has also been mentioned in contact note block 6 that Billy has a relatively primitive consciousness adapted to Earth, compared to the level of his own spirit. Scott | ||
Phil638 Member Post Number: 38 Registered: 07-2004 |
Hi Phaethonsfire, just about ur prior comment before about babies and infants - "Yes, about the consciousness is correct, your right, I meant consciousness and conscious thinking, I forgot about that, because a baby or a infant is still very 'natural' it will be much more sensitive in picking up the vibrations of feelings, thoughts and emotions from other people, especially from its mom and/or dad. They react upon those 'sensed' feelings and thoughts quite naturally, neutral-positive to neutral-positive feelings and thoughts, negative to negative thoughts and feelings (a baby will respond very nicely to love of a mother and/or father) That's why Jmmanuel said that people need to be like childeren again (which means unbaised, natural, and free in thinking and feeling), in order to be able to understand the spiritual side of life. Adults and older children are bound by all kinds of do's and don'ts of society, mental blockages, abstract book knowledge, inhibitions caused by circumstances, etc, etc. Babies don't have those inhibitions yet and are therefore able to react naturally to their parents, this changes rapidly when the baby/infant/young child learns and often learns to disregards their own senses/awarenesses." A baby or infant is also mainly and more importantly picking up false truths/beliefs (systems) from ppl around it too as well as picking up the vibrations of feelings, thoughts and emotions from other people, especially from its mom and/or dad. Let me quickly explain as I'm a clinical hypnotist. A child up until the age of about seven years of age is in whats called an autosuggestive state which means it will readily accept other ppl's truths and beliefs as its own because its not at that age where its able to evaluate whats its being told/seeing/perceiving as a truth. In the vast majority of cases it will automatically accept other ppl's beliefs and ideas as its own without questioning them, especially if its from the child's parents. This is part of everyone's main part of their conditioning. (personality, self outlook, mental makeup, ect). Isn't this what should be considered as the main governing factor to fit in with what ur saying up there? regards phil | ||
Phil638 Member Post Number: 39 Registered: 07-2004 |
I remember reading in the bible somewhere a while ago now the nazerene once saying - "give me a child, and at the age of seven I will show you a man". regards phil |
