Comments on Nothing Based in Love Can be Threatened. Nothing That is Not Love Exists.

Go to SannhetseekerAdd a commentGo to Nothing Based in Love Can be Threatened. Nothing That is Not Love Exists.

San-I love your thoughts "Love is really all there is"

posted by Aria4 on November 11, 2005 at 8:43 AM | link to this | reply

Clearly -
Thanks for stopping by.

posted by sannhet on November 11, 2005 at 6:02 AM | link to this | reply

Ciel -
I really like the toys analogy. That really fits, since most of us are children when it comes to spiritual matters.

posted by sannhet on November 11, 2005 at 6:00 AM | link to this | reply

Avant -
Thanks. Sometimes I get lucky.

posted by sannhet on November 11, 2005 at 5:59 AM | link to this | reply

And why do we have all these illusions to play with?

My theory is that, like the toys our kids play with, everything we have is in imitation of some aspect of Reality--as you have identified it.  But kids use toys to gain comprehension of a Reality too big for what they know already. 

All the unreal things we have in the here-and-now-- that is the greatest illusion of all-- are our toys and tools and reminders,  to find our way back to what is real.

Here's another definition for Real:  Among all the things you can't take with you when you die-- the only thng you can!

posted by Ciel on November 10, 2005 at 12:15 PM | link to this | reply

Sannhet
You have it.

posted by avant-garde on November 10, 2005 at 11:58 AM | link to this | reply

Ariala -

I see what you mean, but let me try to explain a bit more. I believe this world that we live in is an illusion – not a slight of hand but an “erroneous perception of reality” (American Heritage College Dictionary). It’s real to us because we buy into this particular perception of reality – we created it.

 

When I say we, I’m talking about most of humanity. In order for reality to be created, or changed, critical mass needs to be reached. This is based on the theory of morphogenetic fields. Since most of us are controlled by Ego, then critical mass has been reached and we have the current reality. If however, we believed that unconditional love is the only thing that is real, and we all acted from a position of unconditional love, then the reality we live in would be completely different. The axe murderer you referred to would not exist because that kind of negativity would not exist in a world of unconditional love.

posted by sannhet on November 10, 2005 at 11:46 AM | link to this | reply

Cool.

Truth speaks to no debate, except with those of debating minds, and here the granduer of illusion seeks still a place before truth. Thaks for the read that is deeply seated of power to give itself to those that would receive it; seated to be uprooted of none.

posted by clearlyperceived on November 10, 2005 at 11:44 AM | link to this | reply

sannhet, but an individual is solid and if that individual is an ax
murderer, and we don't want him to exist, he doesn't cease to exist in the world, only in our imaginations or our in our scope of existence.  Do you see what I mean? 

Illusion indicates that something is a slight of hand...I just can't imagine pretending something doesn't exist when it does...i.e. person, places, or things...I can agree with you up to a point -- by not giving these things power, they cease to affect me...but their existence is still there.  They still take up space and therefore energy.  Therefore they are real and exist. LOL

posted by Ariala on November 10, 2005 at 9:15 AM | link to this | reply

Ariala -

They do exist, because as you say, we give them the power to exist. They are illusions made visible by the energy we give them. When we understand this and don't give energy to illusions, illusions cease to exist.

posted by sannhet on November 10, 2005 at 9:05 AM | link to this | reply

sannhet, interesting concepts...I'm not sure I agree totally. I do think
all these things that you mention DO exist, but whether or not I give power to them determines if they affect MY existence.

posted by Ariala on November 10, 2005 at 9:02 AM | link to this | reply