Post No. 056 - Musing: a new "world religion"?

One of the things the controversial author Lobsang Rampa (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobsang_Rampa) has written about is the development of a new "world religion", in the sense that every few hundred years a new major religion seems to come along (e.g., Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, etc). He predicted that a new religion would come, with an inclusive basis (although I suspect his interpretation of "inclusive" may have been cultural and/or racial; Rampa suffers from being quite sexist at times, and shows a limited understanding of homosexuality etc). At the time I read that, when I was young (a teenager), I was quite happy to be Buddhist, and didn't put a great deal of effort into thinking about it. Now, a few decades later, I have been spiritualist, shamanka (which I understand to be the female version of the word "shaman"), Druid, Wiccan, etc, and have friends, family and acquaintances of many other faiths (including Hinduism, Judaism, and Islam) I have asome experience of the commonality behind these various religions. (I also know of some of the differences, but thjat is a topic for another time and place.)

I've talked to people doing religious study courses (and am doing a Coven based study course [see Septen Seethers] which covers a dozen established pathways). Maybe there is "room" (or perhaps "need"?) for a new, major world religion which facilitates bringing people and other paths together?

Rampa said, back in the 70s, that the leader of the new world religion had not yet been born, but that some of the coming leader's supporters were active, and preparing the world for this. I'm not aware of being one of those "supporters", incidentally :) However, it would be nice to be able to contribute to the world being better in a big way, so I'll do that in my little way by suggesting that it could be worth you, dear Reader, thinking about what you would like to see in a new "world religion", what could possibly lead you to change any current belief/disbelief system you have and join it, and what type of movement would lead you to want to be a better person.

Happy musings :)

Love, light, hugs and blessings

Gnwmythr

This post's photo is yet to be posted.

Tags: religion, about me, change, control, inventiveness, commitment, communication, leadership, personal characteristics, personal responsibility,

First published: Saturday 8th November, 2008
Last edited: Saturday 8th November, 2008

Post No. 055 - A Nobody’s Laws of Psychic Stuff

When I was studying engineering, we learned a technique for predicting probable formats of equations called (I think) dimensional analysis. One night, as I idled away the time sleeping, a though came to me that it could be interesting to apply that sort of approach to the psychic (energetic) clearing that I do. I have to admit to being slightly influenced in this by some of the references to such-and-such’s laws on shows like “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” – excuse me while my aura blushes.

Anyway, the laws. I’ll give them first, and add a commentary as time permits.

I’ve called them “a nobody’s laws of psychic stuff”. I’m not quite a nobody in my local area, but I AM unknown to most of the rest of the world (and that is perfectly fine by me!), but I have chosen this step more in reaction to the egotistical addition of names to scientific discoveries, engineering papers, psychic pontifications, etc, etc, etc. Maybe this way people will look at these suggestions, and agree/disagree/pass over as trivial purely on the basis of their assessment of my proposals, rather than either favouring/disfavouring them on the basis of some alleged (or real, in the case of those who know me) source.

1.The strength of psychic effects is a function of the psychic closeness of the effecter and the effected.
2.Psychic closeness is a function of (total) activity and strength of psychic interconnections.
3.The number, activity and strength of psychic interconnections is affected by the number, activity, strength and consciousness of interactions (not only psychic interactions).
4.Psychic interconnections that are passive, whether harmonious, disharmonious or neutral, can be reactivated. Such reactivations can lead to surprising (unexpected) interactions, both pleasant, unpleasant and neutral (not only psychic interactions). They can also be altered, replaced or removed without reactivation.
5.The amount of psychic energy that is required to alter, replace, renew or remove an interconnection is a function of the strength of that interconnection. One may, however, be able to receive help or hindrance from other sources, both known and unknown, in response to matters such as past karma (good, bad or indifferent) and constructive and destructive alliances. One “good” thought does NOT outweigh a thousand “bad” thoughts, but it might trigger nine hundred and ninety nine thoughts worth of help.
6.It is said that the only constant is change. Your psychic and spiritual states of being are also subject to constant change, even if they have attained a dynamic equilibrium. (A good way of managing this constant change of state of being may be to think like a spiritual warrior, including thinking about logistics [supplies, replenishment, etc].)

Love, light, hugs and blessings

Gnwmythr

This post's photo is

Tags:
First published:
Last edited:

Post No. 054 - Superstitions can be codes for guides to use

OK, most cultures, and some people, have a range of superstitions – for instance, throwing salt over your shoulder to “ward off evil/devil/bad luck”, not walking under ladders, not crossing the path of a black cat (anyone ever bother to check what happens to the black cat when someone crosses its path?), wearing lucky socks/bling/underwear. Ask most reasonable people what’s behind superstitions, and they’ll often give an explanation about how superstitions have a core of some truth, and some might even talk about examples like one from Africa (which I think I first read about in one of Lyall Watson’s excellent books) where a long, complicated procedure involving virgins, certain types of food, certain exposure conditions, etc for the purpose of fixing certain types of illness just happened to also create the right conditions for growing a particular type of penicillin. Hmmm – willow bark tea and aspirin all over again, eh? And I can hear the scientific/”rational”/Vulcan minded amongst you lot, my readers (both of you – I know who you are! Ahhhh ... must stop eating certain types of food prepared by virgins in another type of way ...) talking about the value of using objective testing to find out what is essential about procedures so you don’t confuse the waffle with what is of real value.

Well, you know what? I agree with you.

So there.

I actually do think there is too much blind faith and desire for things to work in too many metaphysically/spiritually inclined people – which, given the sad, unduly sceptical, materialistic state of our world, is understandable (though actually counter productive, as it leads to what does work being swamped in a sea of shoddy details which feed the sceptics). We would be better off maintaining some objectivity, and lots of true scientific enquiry. But that “true scientific enquiry” does not assume things either work or they don’t: there are rules, contraindications, circumstances/people for whom things will work and others for whom it won’t work.

I always tell people, in my crystal workshops, this won’t work for all people. When we cover dowsing with a crystal pendulum, I then talk about theories that this will not work for a couple of hours each day, and that you have to be very precise in your questions (e.g., don’t ask “can you tell me if ...?”, as the crystal may well answer “yes”, meaning it can tell you, which may be WRONGLY interpreted by you to mean the answer to your 2^nd question was yes), and check how each combination of you + crystal will indicate yes, no or maybe. The rules for communication can change for each combination.

And that, dear readers (both of you :) ), brings me back to superstitions.

MAYBE the reason there seems to be a kernel of truth in these for some people is that they are true for SOME people. MAYBE those people’s guides know they are inclined towards certain types of beliefs, and so they USE those beliefs to frame their communications. For instance, someone close to me has a superstition that seeing magpies has meanings: one for sorrow, two for joy, three for a girl and four for a boy, five for silvery, six for gold, seven for a story never to be told. That works for her – infallibly (well, the one and two do anyway), but doesn’t for me. However, the superstition that owls are a harbinger of death does work for me (as far as physically seing owls is concerned – that doesn’t apply to psychic visions for me, which is fortunate considering owl is one of my power animals).

Well all is said and done, superstitions are superstitions. They don’t necessarily have a rational basis that can be used universally (but neither do, say, all medicines), but, in this irrational, imperfect world, they may be being used a valid means of communication from those who are busting their guts to try and help us as best they can.

Love, light, hugs and blessings

Gnwmythr

This post's photo is yet to be posted.

Tags: guidance, communication, inventiveness, mirrorology, perceptions, persistence, personal characteristics, personal responsibility,

First published: Saturday 8th November, 2008
Last edited: Saturday 8th November, 2008

Post No. 053 - Reality and money

OK, we have a financial crisis on our hands at the moment: we even have people talking about the end of capitalism as we know it. Well, that may be. This world has experienced such endings before, and will continue to experience them. And, despite such endings, the world will continue to revolve on its axis as it rotates round the sun. Gravity will continue to work in much the same fashion ... sentient beings will continue to think, and living organisms will continue to seek to survive and even flourish.

The reality is that the current financial crisis means not all humans will flourish, and some may not survive. But THIS crisis, unlike the nuclear threat when I was growing up, and the environmental threat that goes with our materialistic, capitalistic ways, does not threaten the physical survival of this world.

Do you know that a recent article in “The Age” (www.theage.com.au) found deforestation had annual costs of around $5trillion, and far outweighed the severity of the financial crisis?

A slightly different perspective on the matter there.

Perspective is the issue I wish to consider in this post: perspectives on money. I’ve heard money described as being an energy. Certainly in the literal sense money is a token representing value or units of work. In the case of the stock market, the monetary value of shares is largely – far TOO largely, in my opinion – a perspective on the potential money energy in each share. I have a hard, pragmatic viewpoint on this topic, and consider blue chip shares and investments that lead to tangible results (whether that be more widgets, or better education/health care/quality of life) have a greater reality than things like selling short, or trading in shares and aiming to make money out of changes in perceived value of shares.

Don’t get me wrong: I KNOW that money can be made on the stockmarket – the father of an ex of mine had given up an engineering career and spent twenty years making a very good living off trading shares when I met her. That, however, does not change my view that any system which relies so heavily on perception is in need of a reality check.

I think that also applies to the house owner who thinks that, because their house has gone up in value (according to the market) they are better off. The house has not changed in its functionality, or size. Nothing in the real world sense has changed. Be careful not to mistake perceptions for reality. If the change in value was realised by selling the house and having more tokens [“money”] “in the bank”, I would consider it real: in that case, the potential energy has been changed into tokens which have a reasonable form of reality.

Those tokens, however, are not always assured. Financial crises – such as the one we are currently facing – have the potential to, if not managed properly, lead to inflation which – through a common, shared perception called “the financial market/reality” – can rob the tokens of their previously assigned value. And that leads to the situation of using wheelbarrows to collect pay cheques and the like.

I think I’ve possibly spent too much time running household budgets to be impressed by economists/financial advisors’ preaching.

It’s not that I have a great inherent distrust of markets. In my day job, as an engineer, I’ve seen the good and bad of public and private enterprise, and advise clients to use market forces – when it is appropriate, and in ways that are appropriate. Which includes ethical. Because karma is also an energy.

As a digression, I’m currently experiencing great problems in my life because of stress caused by a bureaucratic, bloody-minded, penny-pinching approach being taken by a public sector organisation. This approach is costing the community money, and making the projects timelines impossible to meet. On the other hand, I’m aware of times when the private sector does work which will cost the community money (e.g., using higher velocities in pipes, which increases power consumption – such matters typically happen when design & construct approaches to work are badly written).

Both parts of the market have advantages and disadvantages – one matter I am very aware of is that a healthy public sector avoids problems such as those associated with the rampant individualism and greed of the US economy, where, for instance, poverty exit-rates are FAR lower than those of the more socially aware and responsible European market, and where health care is unaffordable for many people. (I have seen people in the US Wiccan community ask for help with financial costs; I wrote to the US ambassador about these problems in a general sense, but was a bit stumped by privacy considerations when the ambassador [or ambassador’s lackey] did the Margaret Thatcher thing of “what are these people’s names?”)

Another part of saying things have advantages and disadvantages is that there are times when they are appropriate, and times when they are not.

In my opinion, the current financial crisis is showing, as the 89-92 recession did with the decade of greed, that there are limits to milking people out of money (my veiled reference to the sub-prime mortgage market, where people were duped into loans they could not afford – and approach I found starting to sneak into Australia in recent years). To put this more nicely, there are possibly limits to situations where capitalism is “good”.

You know what? That is OK. Things can evolve – for instance, democracy nowadays is far better than the free-male-only version the ancient Greeks invented.

On a personal level, I consider everything you do you should be aware of your needs and wants, and your risks. For instance, in undertaking psychic development, is your want really, perhaps, something like fostering friendships? Perhaps your need is spiritual self discipline, rather than adding one or two more healing techniques to your resume? In any case, are you actually applying your personal/spiritual/psychic development to making you a better sentient being, and your life a “better” (whatever that is!) life? I’ve had two major changes of path (away from Christianity, and away from [westernised] Buddhism) because I became fed up with people who failed to apply their beliefs to make themselves better people.

As I wrote: things change and evolve, and those “things” can include spiritual paths.

Are you being genuine in your spiritual beliefs with respect to this financial crisis, or are you writing it off as something afflicting only either the rich or the ignorant? Shame on you if you are, as the effects are being felt by many hard working, honest people who deserve help.

If you are working on the financial crisis, are you ideologically committed to capitalism, or are you open minded, fair and objective?

Life has a way of bringing us lessons we would rather avoid at times. What lessons is this current crisis bringing to you?

Love, light, hugs and blessings

Gnwmythr

This post's photo is yet to be posted.

Tags: perceptions, change, life lessons, personal responsibility, personal characteristics,

First published: Saturday 8th November, 2008
Last edited: Saturday 8th November, 2008

Post No. 052 - Who is in YOUR family?

A view that I come across from time to time is to the effect of “Why should I help them? They’re not family!”. In a slightly different form, it is often expressed as “Family is all that matters”.

Such views actually have a useful place – for instance, the comment about the importance of family is often about the only way people can convince greedy bosses to back off and allow them some time to have a life. In my view, however, “I need more time to spend with my friends”, or “I need some time to have a life” should be just as credible as “I need more time with my family”. That it isn’t is a sad reflection on our world.

I know that the experience of love for a family, including “add ons” to that family (e.g., parent’s new partners, fostered/adopted children – ALL of whom are as legitimately part of the family as the original members) has benefits. With respect to spiritual growth, for example, these benefits are that one begins to think of others before oneself, which is a good step along the way towards attaining the spiritual ideal of “universal love/goodwill” that many faiths espouse (albeit, in some cases, a bit nominally). I personally consider attaining a state of universal goodwill/neutrality a key part of spiritual evolution, and I see the progression as typically being something like:

- realisation (as a toddler/young child, usually) that you have a separate identity/consciousness

- self absorbance as this separateness is relished

- self love as one emotionally and/or spiritually matures (which, IF it occurs, may be at any stage between young child and venerably aged)

- love for those about oneself (family and friends – and this I by no means universal: there are families and “friends” who are abusive; this can also be a struggle where such family/friends are “not nice”, or where the love impacts - or seems to impact - on one’s earlier self absorbance/self love, possibly because there is a fear that there is a limit to such love)

- realisation (or stirrings of realisation) that we are all connected, and that the initial realisation of separateness of identity/consciousness may not be quite as clear-cut as it initially seemed

- struggles to develop some universality of love/goodwill (or at least a genuine neutrality), which will be exacerbated by inappropriate/wrong views on the Universe/Deity/the nature of our interconnectedness/basic reasons (“rewards”) for doing this, as well as where other people are “not nice” or where the universality impacts - or seems to impact - on one’s earlier self absorbance/self love/family love/love of friends, possibly because there is a fear that there is a limit to such love.

Also, just to complicate matters, things are not just a simple always moving forward matter. We backslide in the one life, and with some lives interspersed between other more clearly forward moving lives. As an example of that, one of my partners in this life (actually most of them, but I am thinking of one ex- in particular) was someone who I have known in previous lives. We’ve been marrier previously, with both of us swapping male and female genders at times, we’ve been friends, we’ve shared lives including piracy and frontier lifestyles, and we’ve also been “enemies”, in the sense of being on opposite sides of war, where we have been responsible for each other’s death. Our paths differed in the last thousand years or so in a couple of significant ways. Firstly, I am of the opinion that I probably had a life in a Tibetan “monastery” (of sorts) in about the 1200s/1300s, and had a significant reawakening of my spirituality as a result of that. I also learned a great deal about self discipline through a life in the British Navy in the early 1800s (no, I was NOT at Trafalgar, and I was NOT anyone famous in either of these lives). My ex didn’t, so wound up leading a less disciplined, more family oriented lifestyle in this incarnation, whereas I wanted to focus more on my broader family: all humanity (maybe even all sentient life?). How does this illustrate the backsliding? Well, the piracy life was after the Tibetan life. So, despite the long term reawakening and flowering of my spirituality owing to that life, that did NOT mean I was continually thereafter a “spiritual” or “good” person.

(Incidentally, if you want to ask “can I prove any of these lives?”, the answer is “most probably not”. If you’re asking that, the sort of verifiable detail you are after is such that I could probably only provide that if I had been hypnotised. I wasn’t, and cannot be bothered stuffing around with such trivialities for the sake of others’ uncertainties about such matters. I have too much to do with getting on with life and growth to waste time and energy on such. There is evidence that I am satisfied with – such as being “recognised” by a former colleague from my most recent life – but what matters about that is that it matches MY standards on veracity, NOT yours.)

Going back to family, those who fail to understand the inherent abundance of the Universe (I have always liked the definition of Deity, from Stuart Holroyd’s “Briefing for the Landing on Planet Earth”, that “Deity” is to the effect of “a universal intelligence which grows on love”) may feel that it isn’t possible to care deeply about strangers. This may show in statements like:

- “Why help them? I don’t know them!” or “They’re not family”

(which I’ve heard sometimes about people overseas struck by some terrible disaster, sometimes about people who may or may not be “blameless” with respect to their conduct [such as the homeless – and the assessment of blame is in the mind of the beholder, in this case], sometimes about acquaintances who are not family by blood or relationship)

- “What matters most is the support of your family”

(which is a slightly reverse view of the topic, where one is prepared to expect to be loved by others for whom one is related, but not others)

- “How can you really care for them? They’re not blood!”

(heard, for instance, when some people comment about adopting or fostering; such people should (a) read “The Selfish Gene”, by Richard Dawkins (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene), and (b) think about how this could possibly be different to other people coming is as, for example, new partners)

- “You’re part of this family now”

(whoop-de-frickin’-do; I was always a person in my own right, with my own inherent right to exist – I don’t need someone else’s approval or validation)

I think it is high time such family-only apologists thought seriously about the lessons of exemplary people such as Mohandas K. Gandhi (“Mahatma” is an honorary title), Christ (I’m not a member of the book religions: I don’t see Christ as being any more God than the rest of us already are), Martin Luther King, Bishop Desmond Tutu, and (in his later life) Nelson Mandela. (Mother Theresa has been excluded because of her views on same sex attracted people; I don’t know what Bishop Tutu’s views on homosexuality are, but I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt for now.) We’re all part of the same, big family, on the one small planet. We’re all in this together, so let’s start respecting each other equally, and pull together by AT LEAST not hating or inferring or treating as second rate anyone not in our blood/intimate relationship family.

Love, light, hugs and blessings

Gnwmythr

This post's photo is yet to be posted.

Tags: arrogance, about me, control, family, growth, interpersonal interactions, judging others, life lessons, personal characteristics,

First published: Saturday 8th November, 2008
Last edited: Saturday 8th November, 2008