You have every reason to be confused! Most of the writers talking about consciousness and metaphysics over the past hundred + years have been vague at best, and often confused themselves about the differences.
I’ve chosen Carl Jung’s model as being the clearest description. He said that only part of the mind is actually conscious, that is, aware of itself and its current environment. That part is our “personal awareness” or “conscious mind.” The rest of the mind is the “unconscious mind.” It has 2 aspects: the “subconscious mind”. which deals with fears, distressing emotions, and the body functions; and the “superconscious mind” which deals with ideals, values, and our experience of divinity. Jung went beyond that to say that both the “subconscious” and the “superconscious” were in touch with a larger mind, which he called the “collective consciousness.” This collective mind is filled with what he called “archetypes” – images and behavior patterns that apparently all people experience, regardless of where or how they grew up. These “archetypes” include the stuff of myths and fairy tales: the handsome prince, the endangered maiden, the earth mother, the wise old wizard, the shining being of light, etc.
Napoleon Hill, Charles Haanel, and others often referred to the “subconscious mind” when they really meant what Jung called the “superconscious.” They were trying to say that there’s a very powerful part of our mind that is hidden from our normal awareness and has access to an even larger mind – and we are “unconscious” of it.
All of them are trying to get us to stop trying to make things work with our normal thought processes, our “conscious mind”, and allow the part of our mind that has access to the infinite intelligence of the “collective consciousness’ (called the “Divine Mind” by some) to take care of things.
One of the major shifts we’re experiencing in our culture is an acceptance of intuitive awareness as valid. We see it in the media, with all the shows about mediums and channeling; we see it in the scientific research – just this week, an article was published about how computers may be used to mimic telepathic communication; we see it in the growing numbers of people learning to rely on angels and spirit guides for help and wisdom.
The meaning of the word Intuition is “teaching from within” and most spiritual teachers across the ages have suggested that much of what we really need to know we can find by “going within” or “entering the Silence.”
For developing our intuition, I teach a class on expanding intuitive awareness based on a few simple principles, Continue reading What is Intuition & How Can I tap into it?
Two ideas are helpful here.
First is the idea that spirit is eternal, part of the ONE that most of us call God. Spirit, Holy Spirit, Higher Self, Sacred Self, Oversoul — these are all terms that apply. Spirit has all the qualities of the creative source of all that is.
Then there’s a concept in systems theory called “emergent properties.” It describes what happens when a set of elements work together and something entirely new emerges.
As I understand it, based on all kinds of literature and my own “past life regression” experiences, the eternal spirit that we are chooses to take form, to incarnate as a body, for purposes of extending the ALL in new ways through the creative power of Love. As it does so, it encounters many kinds of unexpected experiences which, being eternal and unchanging, has no effect on it, but which may be part of its purpose.
For me, then, what we call soul (as described by Thomas Moore in Care of the Soul, or Gary Zukav in Soul Stories) is what emerges out of the interaction of the spirit with the body. Soul is the temporary means by which our eternal spirit integrates physical experience into its extension of the All. Soul comes into form as the spirit incarnates, and ends after the spirit completes the incarnation process – usually some time after what we call “death”, and sometimes after many “death” and “rebirth” experiences.
When we think of angels, we think of beings of light, love, and help. Some of us consider them messengers of the Creator-source of the Universe, others consider angels a higher life form working with humanity for our well-being.
When we think of ETs (extra-terrestrial beings) we think of “little green men” or “grays” or “Pleiadeans” or “reptilians” – not all of which seem loving or helpful, and none of which seem to be messengers from the Creator.
In the Hindu traditions, light-beings are called devas, whether they’re associated with plants and animals, or with godliness. They all can be visible in our normal 3D world, or not. They work across dimensions and aren’t restricted by space and time.
Angels, fairies, dryads, nymphs, elves, brownies, sprites, and all the various forms of light beings are intelligent, able to work in different dimensions of space and time, and do things that are for our greater good.
So do ETs qualify? Well, there’s more and more evidence that the UFOs we see are traveling across different dimensions and are not limited by space or time. It also seems that some ETs are only visible some of the time to some people.
Is it possible that ancient stories of elves, brownies, sprites, and the like are really stories of ETs? That they’re one and the same form of being?
I think so. All indicators suggest that they are. And, if that’s the case, it’s likely that many stories of Angels are, as well.
What Shinn is saying is that we can override the old, no-longer-effective patterns by focusing on truer ones — and she’s right for the usual kinds of things her contemporaries were dealing with. But for us it’s a little like chipping away at an iceberg: the bulk of the conflicting ideas that we’ve picked up from school, church, our parents, and the media are below the surface and not being addressed at all. As a result, we’re still blocked; not able to receive the intuitive insights we long for.
Which is why I developed my method for “releasing the past” (on my website: http://revruthlmiller.com/releasing-the-past/). As you read through my method you’ll see my version of “casting the burden” involves more than just saying the words. And I think you’ll find, if you do the process around whatever issue is “triggering” you, that you’ll begin to experience the kind of intuitive insights that Shinn promises.
I truly understand how frustrating it is when we seem to have “done everything right” and still don’t get the results we anticipate.
What I learned in my own experience–and have seen in dozens of peoples’ lives since–is that the current upsetting incident is simply the indicator of the actual “burden to be cast”, rather than the burden itself.
When we have an experience that seems to shatter our life, we are actually playing out a kind of script about how the world is that we set up years before–typically in our childhood. There’s a pattern that began way back then which is now showing itself in such a huge way that we can’t ignore it. In many cases, somewhere way back when, a child experienced someone very close to betraying them and deep inside they made up their mind that “the people closest to me betray my trust and abandon me.” In others, it’s more subtle: a parent put the child in the role of parent; or physical abuse led to a belief that the world is dangerous, a source of painful iniquities; or illness at a critical moment led to a belief that one was incapable of doing certain things… I’ve encountered dozens.
You may know immediately who, what, where, and when as you read that.
Or you may not. If not, take a while to consider the things you remember–or don’t–about your parents and siblings in your first years. Most likely some pretty big event or series of events happened and you’ve been adapting around it most of your life–as friends in school, or coworkers, or teachers or bosses played out their roles in that pattern.
What we need to do, then, is not just release the current (or most recent) triggering situation, but find the trigger event and release that–along with all the others over the years that reinforced it.
Continue reading I tried to “Cast the Burden” as Shinn suggests, but no results – what’s happening?
The term “Science of Mind” was applied by the Holmes brothers to their experience and understanding of how it is that the mind can be consistently used to heal the body and change life conditions. They encountered the use of the word “science” through 2 streams of thought and work.
One was a British judge, Thomas Troward, who found in the 1880s and ’90s that when he applied the scientific method to the phenomena he was experiencing, he could derive principles that were consistently applicable. The other was a clockmaker from Maine, holder of several US patents for a variety of technologies, named Phineas Parkhurst Quimby. He, after experiencing relief from symptoms his doctors had said were incurable, undertook a 20-year study of the mind and its abilities, basically from 1832 – 1852, finally developing a method that was consistent across thousands of cases. He called it the “science of Christ” partly in the belief that it must have been the method used by Jesus as described in the New Testament, and partly because that was the only model of mental or spiritual healing known at the time. A patient of his became a student and lectured on his method of “mental healing” for several years, then, about a decade after his passing, revised the method to more directly conform to biblical narrative and formed what is now known as the Church of Christ Scientist.
The Holmes brothers had studied with her and knew that hers was a limited and not entirely accurate doctrine, rather than an application of science, and so looked elsewhere. Continue reading Was the word science thrown in Science of Mind in the 1920’s to add legitimacy to the belief system? There’s not that much science to it these days…
As I understand it, we experience only what we are currently resonating with/as and are emotionally and intellectually prepared to accept. This applies to the material, as well as the semi-material (astral) and spiritual-energetic (etheric) worlds we’re experiencing all the time.
Given that basic assumption, we can anticipate that whatever we are experiencing is a function of our current resonant pattern and our emotional-intellectual readiness.
At the same time, most traditions teach (at the advanced/esoteric level) that the guidance we receive is not from a person, but is in fact, a field of information that we’re tapping into (akashic records; Source energy; Infinite wisdom; Holy Spirit; collective consciousness; Oversoul). And, like everything else, how we experience it is a function of our resonant field (we get the info that we resonate with) and our emotional-intellectual framework (the form it takes is what we’re prepared to experience).
Most of us are not ready to experience multiple perspectives and possibilities at the same time, so most of us “interpret” what we’re experiencing as a single input: a Voice; a Spirit Guide; a saint, angel, Christ, or god. Julian Jaynes, in his work on the Bicameral Mind, has said that when a predominately left-brained person receives intuitive info from the right brain it’s experienced as a voice from outside the person. Swedenborg, Goethe, Emerson and Jung suggested that the collective consciousness is constantly being tapped into and transformed into inner experiences of archetypal forms and voices. The Greeks and Romans called them the Muses. Many people who channel higher wisdom have been told by the informer that they’re receiving from many entities as one voice: Jane Robert’s Seth and The Betty Book material are examples. Esther Hicks has said that when she started receiving her information she felt a need to name the source so she named it Abraham–but the voice that speaks through her refers to Itself as Source energy.
Some of us either don’t trust a single voice and so want corroboration from other sources, or we experience different resonant states in which we receive different kinds of info, which we associate with different “Guides.” So we experience many of them.
Basically, as you can tell, it’s all the same: One infinite Intelligence permeating all matter-energy, of which we are a part and to which we have as much access as we are willing to let go of our normal thought patterns and allow.
Ah, yes… I know whereof you speak… confusing, isn’t it?
As I understand it, the body being convinced it is separate and isolated, identifies the bliss of union as a source of distress at the worst and deep longing at best–both of which it responds to by curling up and crying.
So, for me, allowing the crying until it is done then allows the bliss to be experienced fully–both in the present and in following experiences… the more freedom I give the body to express, the more ready it is to actually experience the bliss being offered through the spirit and mind.
James the Just, also called James the Greater, is usually said to be an “older brother” of Jesus, a son of Joseph by a previous marriage. James the Lesser is said to be either a younger brother or cousin. In all likelihood they were part of a cohort of students or near-relatives who called each other “brothers”.
According to the Book of Acts in the New Testament, James the Just took on the formation of a community in Jerusalem based on Jesus’ teachings, after Jesus was no longer around.
The name James comes from the Greek word iamos, which means “healer” (and became Iago in Spanish; hence Santiago meaning “Saint James”). Aramaic sources call both of these men Ya’acov, or Jacob, which is probably their given name and means “usurper, supplanter” referring to the Genesis story in which Jacob (who later becomes Israel) supplants Esau to receive his inheritance. Unfortunately, as a result, many people think that the name James means the same thing as the name Jacob.