The Key is to establish the link between you and the Sun

[aksis]

A point in a book was brought to this thread, in the threads origin.

My own direct experiance via the application of principles that i have read in books, that have been shared with me by people, and, have dawned upon me in what I would call epiphanies is what caused my original post.

My own direct experiance disagree with Omraam Mikhaël Aïvanhov in these points about the Higher Self being in the sun or the sun, and further, I gave an example of what "worshiping the Morning Star" (not Venis, though agreed, this planet was later given this Title as well.) had originaly ment based not on belief, but knowing gained by direct revelation.

If when Aïvanhov says "sun", and intend the word to be God (or some other word ~ I am not hung up on the word chossen), and, not the star at the center of this solar system that Earth orbits, then I would not say what I did.

The key is to linking one's mind/being with God.

While I like & agree with many of your points about doggma, I will not ignore any Truth I find within the doggma simply because the rest is inaccurate or wholy false.

The principle of "sifting the wheat from the tars" after harvest, comes to my mind. Cutting through the sea of truth/fiction with a dull knife.

One can read a book and gain knowledge.

Through the application of principles, one gains Knowing.

I did not make the qualification of this excercize of "establishing a link with the sun" based upon a doggam that is influancing me, but rather to clarify the doggam set in motion ages ago and is currently surrounding the statement about "whoreshiping the morning star".

Why rob a Bank when you are the Mint?

While I see nothing inherently wrong with the explortion of various excercizes, experiments, the different posturing and looking at life from various points of view, I was compelled to share an insight on this topic.

Time to pick some nits...

2000 - The school and the teaching of the Universal Brotherhood and Sisterhood of Light are 100 years old.

- Actualy, the teachings trace back to before recorded history on this planet... the principles remained the same, yet the name for the human race does change with the ages. :-)

***

Read yourself what the enlightened man wrote, before, jumping on him, falsely claiming that he was a racist or white Supremacist in cheap shoots attempted before by those who have no clue what he wrote and why?

-I claimed nor insinuated no such thing about the Family of Light, or this one member being a racist.

Simply that the name had been change to abate this distortion by the ignorant & shared this to further verify that I am not on the fringe of such a group but am a member.

Nor are you or anyone excluded, except that you exclude your self, or, do you claim to be a member also?

***

It is improper to speak on behalf of all masters or anyone unless you have the facts.

-Agrue it with them... I have no intention on reversing the accertion of this fact:

Originally Posted by aksis

The Masters have long advocated humanity to look within, and to not get distracted by outer things.

-Further, it is a "step" and not the destination.

***

Coming back to the Sun:

Why do you assume that the concept of the Sun, which is:

1) light,

2) warmth,

3) selfishness, as it shines and gives us life without asking anything in return,

4) all the best that there is –

is a distraction?

-It was the mistake/falsness of the the statement "the Higher Self is in, or, is the sun" that I rebukked & corrected.

The only key one will find in linking ones self with the sun is another example of what isn't true and another doggma as well.

***

It may be a distraction to some, that is their choice, I agree.

-The adventure is part of life, I was not intending to demonize/condem peoples exploration.

I also agree that not everyone on a jorney is dis-tracted. Quite the contrary.

Yet, again I ask, why walk around the block to get next door?

***

They may feel more comfortable in the dark than at the sunlight, I have no quarrel with that either.

-They may also like confusion rather then clarity, or, veild writtings rather then direct revelation.

***

Yet, how is the sunlight of distraction in reality?

-Rather then a distraction, I see it as misleading for one who is seeking Self realization/awareness to be directed anywhere but to their Self.

You have persisted in leading people away from the I AM. Why?

***

Do you know that the sunlight directly stimulates humans’

1) Pineal gland

2) Hypothalamus,

3) Solar plexus,

4) and other, vital centers of humans,
which are responsible for developing
the Higher Consciousness?

Have you studied that?

-What dose that have to do with Me?

I am not the body. I am the Atman, the Soul & I have a body... Know thy Self.

As you know your Self, you know God for you are created in the Image and Likeness of God.

It is not the body that is God's Image and Likeness, it is the Soul.

Do you know why the Solar Plexus is called the Solar precisely and not lunar or flashlight or batteries, as Solar is of the Sun?

- Yes. It is the great nexus of nerves in the body. They meet at this area, yet a "nerve nexus" is still only a convergance of channels and not Sources...

Are you seeking the Source or are you content with looking at things down stream? Or prehaps both...

He knew that all combined spectrum of light produce what appears as white light.

-Actualy the reverse is more accurate: All spectrums of light come from white light. A simple prisim proves this.

They do not combine to produce white light as they are not the source of it... yet, it is the source of them.

You seem to try to be working from the outside, in. Were you to choose to trace every thing from the point of Origin, you will see the reality of how it came to be.

***

Furthermore, the light is the property of the Sun, as we are directly nourished by such and there would be no life without the Sunlight at all, at least for us.

Is it not true?

Your and mine life and of all depend on the Sun!
That is a Maxim!

I simply make a distinction between the light (the various forms of energy in the universe ~ rays from the sun) and the Light (Spirit) that permiates all manifestation... even the light. The Light of the light is not the light... this would be a limitation of its expression.

Spirit is in the sun, yet the suns rays are downstream as a way to say it... a coarser form of Light, less pure. The sun is dependant upon Spirit.

It is Spirit that sustains all manifestation, another word that could be used is Prana.

It is the manifest forms that are seemingly dependant upon the sun, yet it is Spirit they are ultimatly dependant upon.

See, from my perspective, I am the Soul with a body, not a body with a Soul.

So from this prespective, I am not dependant upon the sun. I am dependant upon God.

Why do you choose and advocate others choose the husks of Life rather then Life it self?

If this is a symantic game where you intend Sun (as opposed to sun) being a veiled way to say God, I would appreciate it is you would clarify this.

Further, I do not intent to address every point you have made in all your posts. I would also appreciate not having to respond to 8 posts full of highly concentrated information. To even begin to address all the points would take me 8 posts and many of the points will get lost... I won't do it.

It has been my understanding that white light contains all colors of the spectrum - all of the colors combined produce pure white light - this is why a prism breaks up white light into primary colors. As I recall, a prism, having three sides, breaks up the white light into the three primary colors only - yellow, red and blue. The tertiary (intermediate) colors are all various combinations of the three primary colors; i.e. red + blue creates purple; red + yellow creates orange; blue + yellow creates green.

In art school we were shown that pigments differ from light because all colors of pigment, when combined, produce black pigment. This is because black pigment absorbs all light and reflects none of it. This is why black surfaces become so hot when exposed to the sun. White pigment reflects all light, and therefore appears white. This is why white surfaces are the coolest when exposed to the sun.

In contemplating the sun, and its power, and the effects of exposure to the sun, I am careful to remember that excessive exposure to the rays of the sun can be harmful. I respect and appreciate the fact that without the sun life on this planet could/would not exist. In balance, I also realize that too much exposure to UVA and UVB rays can cause skin cancer and cataracts. I appreciate the sun's beauty, warmth and life-giving energy... while I also respect the sun's power to burn, and I am careful not to be over-exposed.

I believe that we are all eternal souls, regardless of our religious upbringing (or lack thereof), that we experience reincarnation, and that our eternal souls are part of the omnipresent mind of God, which is manifested in the entirety of Creation.

No one is "chosen" while leaving out the others; no one is damned because they do not believe in a particular religious leader or a particular religion. Every soul is on a path of spiritual growth and enlightenment, unless they deliberately choose not to be... and even that unfortunate choice is probably made during the course of one particular incarnation, and will be balanced out in subsequent incarnations. The law of cause and effect is absolute and all-encompassing.

I have experienced and discovered far more believable evidence for the beliefs that I have just stated above than for any religion. The books (Bible, Torah, Koran) that claim to prove these religions are not believable to me. In each case, the writings defy common sense, and also espouse cruelty towards non-believers and towards other creatures. I do not believe in those things.

Peace; Shalom; Namaste (The gesture Namaste represents the belief that there is a Divine spark within each of us that is located in the heart chakra. The gesture is an acknowledgment of the soul in one by the soul in another)

[aksis]

Originally Posted by Heidi Guedel

It has been my understanding that white light contains all colors of the spectrum - all of the colors combined produce pure white light - this is why a prism breaks up white light into primary colors. As I recall, a prism, having three sides, breaks up the white light into the three primary colors only - yellow, red and blue. The tertiary (intermediate) colors are all various combinations of the three primary colors; i.e. red + blue creates purple; red + yellow creates orange; blue + yellow creates green.

The one preceeds the many.

Out of the White Light comes all the other rays.

I don't think that the combination of the particular rays "produce" or are the Source of the Light. This was more the idea I was attempting to express.

What tool do you know of that recombinds light rays into white light?

Originally Posted by Heidi Guedel

No one is "chosen" while leaving out the others; no one is damned because they do not believe in a particular religious leader or a particular religion.

I agree.

Originally Posted by Heidi Guedel

Every soul is on a path of spiritual growth and enlightenment, unless they deliberately choose not to be...

I don't see that such a choice is possable at this point in my life.

In an imagianary make believe state of mind, sure. I have thought like this in my past, then it dawned upon me that even that is still part of the jorney.

Originally Posted by Heidi Guedel

and even that unfortunate choice is probably made during the course of one particular incarnation, and will be balanced out in subsequent incarnations. The law of cause and effect is absolute and all-encompassing.

Yeah, thinking like that does have effects...

Originally Posted by Heidi Guedel

I have experienced and discovered far more believable evidence for the beliefs that I have just stated above than for any religion. The books (Bible, Torah, Koran) that claim to prove these religions are not believable to me. In each case, the writings defy common sense, and also espouse cruelty towards non-believers and towards other creatures. I do not believe in those things.

I like the idea of having the space & freedom to explore these things without being condemed...

I probably appear a hyprocrate seeing as how I was busting sharing_lights balls to some degree, yet I also enjoy sharing my perspective on such topics as well...

Call me arrogant if you must...

Originally Posted by Heidi Guedel

Peace; Shalom; Namaste (The gesture Namaste represents the belief that there is a Divine spark within each of us that is located in the heart chakra. The gesture is an acknowledgment of the soul in one by the soul in another)

Why exclude acknowledging it in the other 6 chakras?

Why exclude seeing it in every atom and cell of your body?

Where is the Spark of Life not?

I like the whole Namastee concept as well.

[Sharing Lights]

Dear Aksis.


Rushing to conclusions may not be the best venue, yet, let time be the judge.

I only got back from the things that had to be taken care of.

I would continue the Article as time allows and would reply to the key points.

I
was busting sharing_lights balls to some degree,

Once, you re-read some of your statements after the Article is completed, you may look at things differently.
You may...

"Jumping the gun" has never been a wise approach...

Allow the trigger to click first.

[Sharing Lights]

Dear Aksis:

Aksis: My own direct experience disagree with Omraam Mikhaël Aïvanhov in these points about the Higher Self being in the sun or the sun, and further,

SL: My question remains have you read Aivanhov books and if, yes, which ones?

As promised, I would reply by substance, but I have a chance for that only tomorrow, as have to finish certain things.

Which books?

Aksis: The question about the books. No.

Do I need to say much after basic rules of logic were no followed?

You have no idea what Aivanhov wrote about, as you admitted that have not read him; yet, you argue on what he wrote and meant.
Unbelievable!

Aksis: Also, I am certian that Omraam Mikhail Aïvanhov no longer agrees with everything that was written by him when he was embodied.

You continue that pattern: how can you be certain that Aivanhov or any one no longer agrees with what wrote if never read the person?
Where is the logic?


Really?
You are that sure...
This is, then, above unbelievable!

Aivanhov has 72 volumes of books.
His consistency and depth is amazing and precise.

I read enough to state so regarding from earliest to the latest.

SL: You attest that you are certain that he is not consistent, while have not read one book.

Such confidence, spilling into the realm of the paradox is amazing.

Please note, I only addressed the facts to which you attested yourself.

A point in a book was brought to this thread, in the threads origin.

My own direct experiance via the application of principles that i have read in books, that have been shared with me by people, and, have dawned upon me in what I would call epiphanies is what caused my original post.

What logic do you rely upon when apply what you "have read in books"
to the "book" you have not read?

My own direct experience disagree with Omraam Mikhaël Aïvanhov in these points...

All jokes aside, do you have a clue on what you argue and disagree when have not read the person with whom you disagree?

You took upon yourself the liberty of presenting Aivanhov: a man of great achievements and impact on the world's history in any light, as you may assume.
At the same time, you hope to gain credibility.
Is that how credibility is earned?
Were you fair to that man?

That raises the issue of how many people speak in the name of Jesus of Nazareth, while nowhere close to what he taught and said and/or meant?

It bewilders me how often people love to argue with authors without reading them.

Aksis: If when Aïvanhov says "sun", and intend the word to be God (or some other word ~ I am not hung up on the word chossen)...

Excuse me, that can change the hell of a meaning.
You should be precise as logic is precise, when the people intent ended one thing and you claim something else on their behalf.

How do you manage that?

Of course, I must reveal that, as I read Aivanhov
and I read what you claim he wrote,
there is no match.

Remember parts out of context, are not whole.

Of course, I have no right to look away.




I would continue with others when get a chance.

[Sharing Lights]

Aksis: I am not the body. I am the Atman, the Soul & I have a body... Know thy Self.

As you know your Self, you know God for you are created in the Image and Likeness of God.

Nice words and we are created in the image of God/Nature anyway you look at it indeed.
Yet, many may hope that is not the only image and likeness, when logic is not followed; otherwise, others may perceive God as illogical.

I believe He/She and Universe/Nature are very logical!
I believe many others believe so too.
Too often the name of God is put next to arguments that do not appear too logical even though covered by number of phrases which appear to be so.

When true depth and wisdom from religious scriptures are quoted next to contradicting statements, many readers assume that the wisdom is contradicting by association.

It is not - both remain in their own world.

Afterwords, so many people become surprised why others stop reading anything that contains references to God.

Both (the "messengers" and readers, often, go to the extreme.
There is nothing wrong with the concept of God.

SL: It is the "messengers" who present God in such, confusing light instead of admitting that such is their perception of God and only!

I sincerely believe that most arguments in conversations and writings should not refer to the concept of God too much, as to not entangled God in the authors self-contradicting arguments and statements.
God deserves better, some may think.

Once a reasonable person can hear and/or read and see no obvious fallacies, then the NAME would only be strengthened.

I, truly, believe that I express an opinion of numbers of people - not all, of course but of many.

If any doubts, imagine that your arguments, the way they are "rushed" in my opinion, without pondering on them some more, are read by an average atheists, who is opening his/her mind on the issue of God.

Do you help him/her to open it some more?

After, reading such obvious fallacies as discussing the books that are admitted, as not read at all, as in the case of Aivanhov - and he is presented as, almost a confused, silly old man (Aivanhov) or fallacies concerning optics are presented as physical facts, such, potential "searcher" of truth, may be, quickly averted, from the notion of God once again and very quickly.

It has been said that the quickest way to avert some one from the search for God is to allow a person to read the "messengers" of God.

That is, precisely, why, under the freedom of expression, all the arguments should be expressed as they are, as we all learn and that is positive.

Yet, the God's name is not benefited when the "messengers" give him/her a wrong reputation whether they realize that or not.

SL: That is why I am so cautious when folks talk/write so much of God and Image, while presenting him/her as illogical and, in pride, believe they "bust balls" of others while, only, bust their "bubbles" of contradictions.

Since God provides the image of likeness and perfection and that is stressed by them, many of these folks do not, even, see their contradictions in their "representations", while others see the later right away and politely wait when the authors can discover them on their own or, some, stop listening/reading at all and move on.


Yet, when too much of fallacies are revealed, then, it's time to let the "messengers" read what they write themselves, as their "clinging" to the image and perfection may be premature and misleading many in the process.

That may be only fair and proper or stated as truth, when such is available, but, at least, a basic logic must be preserved at all times.

In addition to the above, what all, that has to do with the reality that how can one know His Self, if he can't, even, know BASIC rules of logic when argues over books, he admits he has not read?

What that has to do with trying to convince all that All spectrum of light come from white light but all spectrum do not combine into the white light?

Am I being unfair to those of you, who, yourself, contradict yourself?!

Is it a hobby to write the opposite of what others wrote just to prove that, you, proudly announced to the world that you ...

I probably appear a hyprocrate seeing as how I was busting sharing_lights balls to some degree...

Really?
I would, politely, allow you to judge yourself whose: Aivanhov's, mine or yours?



Is the "Self" of a person, can be, truly, known, then, when logic and its basics are not followed?

A Self is a Universe in, itself, and so much more complicated then the basic logic, which is failed; so how can the former be true?

When a step one is not passed, how can step 1,000 be achieved, so to say?

Aksis: He knew that all combined spectrum of light produce what appears as white light.

-Actually the reverse is more accurate: All spectrums of light come from white light. A simple prisim proves this.

They do not combine to produce white light as they are not the source of it... yet, it is the source of them.

You seem to try to be working from the outside, in. Were you to choose to trace every thing from the point of Origin, you will see the reality of how it came to be.

You contradict logic again.

For real, please look yourself, do not take my words for it.

Aksis: All spectrums of light come from white light

Then, below, as I quote, you deny that all spectrum of light combined produce white light.

On the contrary, they do produce; the laws of not, only, optics prove that but your statement.

If 1 + 2+ 3+ 4+ 5+ 6+ 7 = 28

(seven prime colors)

How can you deny that 28 can, in exact reverse order, be broken down in addition from 7 to 1 or subtraction in any combinations?

a + b = c that means that c = a+ b or c= b + a

Not according to you.
And you perceived your soul and thy Self already...

How is that possible?

Aksis: They do not combine to produce white light as they are not the source of it... yet, it is the source of them.

Sorry, they do!

Aksis: -Actualy the reverse is more accurate: All spectrums of light come from white light. A simple prisim proves this.

No, it is not more accurate!

SL: They are, equally, accurate as laws of optical physics and logic prove that.

Later, I would show you how you applied the same to the concept of the Sun.

[Sharing Lights]

Part VIII



I would love to see how long one would can survive without the Sun even praying to God as much as he/she likes.
I sense there is a crucial misunderstanding on the role of the Sun and rhetoric about God.


First of all, I respect the choices of those who do not wish to resort of the concept of God but wish to deal with the Nature, as such is visible for much of its parts and God is not.

I simply say to all, I consistently write the phrase God/Universe/Nature.

You choose whichever appeals to you more.

Both imply order, pattern, cause/effect, and intelligence - not chance.

For some reason, before trying to understand and waiting for the Article to be materialize not even be finished, some people assumed that I advocated that the Sun is above God and, thus, above Nature. (God/Universe/Nature – do you remember how I use the both sides of the coin?
Assumptions are, usually, wrong.

May be it is better to realize, than, to assume?

Before you, even, venture into a religious aspect of the discussion, it, can, clearly, be seen that the Sun, as one of the stars in Cosmos, among the vast numbers of them, can not be more than them or above them, as the Nature or Universe consist of everything that there is.

So is God for those who believe in Him and Her.

That should be self-evident as well as the fact that I rely on common sense, reason, and logic when write.
So, why would I deviate from such here and advocate that the Universe has the focal point – our Sun and it is the most important in the whole Universe?
Obviously, each Star (the Sun or whatever you may call it, is the central body in that Solar system and there are myriads of them.)

Our Sun may not have much influence in other Solar systems too remote from us to feel its influence.
We are talking basic science now and the facts are well known.

I wrote and meant that the Sun is the key to us - humans in our, Solar system, as it is indeed the central, luminous body in it.

We revolve around the Sun and not it around us!

I never said that Nature or whole Universe are the Sun.
I never said God is the Sun.
I never said the Sun is more than God is or above it?
I do not use fallacies, why do some people try to put them on my behalf is a mystery to me?

I began and I continue advocating that the Sun, to us, is the key factor in developing the Higher concsiosness in a powerful and more complete way than other techniques.

I would attempt to prove so in later Parts and share simple and effective technique.

It is for those who wish to try and not on their coach and argue over something they don’t even know about what?


Does any one here have the evidence contrary to that based on study and knowledge that the Sun ca not help us to develop our, Higher Consciousness?

I ask that question of all, including of those who argued over what was not argued i.e. the issue of God.

Try to explain that to those who do not see or feel God but can relate to the physical part of the Universe.

The atheists and agnostics are not any less important, to me, than those who see or feel God.
I preserve equality and would continue doing so, while some join opposing camps.
I refuse to join one camp as I believe in God/Universe/Nature equally and one is the other to me.

Not all believe in God but all, reasonable people, believe in existence of the Sun and feel its influence. That is a crucial point.

We have established a well-known fact that there are more stars in the Universe than just our Sun.

Now, I would address the issue of “God vs. Sun.”

In reality, some of the members turned the original issue into such.
In truth, I do not see it that way at all: God vs. Sun.





to be continued

[Sharing Lights]

Part IX



I, as Aivanhov, see it, as the Sun, while is not God and is not the whole Universe but, to us, is the best and closest representative of both in its Higher Aspects.

Why do I say so?
Because it is so.
Please read the statements below and not what some of you believe I wrote or meant.

There would be no us if there were no Sun.
Who can argue with that?
You can talk of God all you want; we still live in the Universe ruled not only by spiritual but also by the physical laws.
If there were no Sun, there would be no Earth, no life, no us.
Who can argue with that?

Why some of you have to jump so far, all the way to the God, when you have not taken the first steps before climbing the ladder to him or to the whole Universe?

That first step is our Earth, as we live on it.
The second step is our Sun, as the Earth and all life on it are nourished by the Sun.
If the Sun disappears, all life disappears.
Pray, no pray, that is a fact.


If you do not believe me, go any regions of cold temperatures not warmed up by the Sun adequately and stand there for a while.
You would freeze to death in a precise ratio of the warmth received from the Sun and retained by the Earth projected onto you.

The heat your body produces is governed by the rules of the inner/outer temperatures.

Prays can delay the process but not stop it.
If you claim, you receive the warmth from the Earth; I reply that the Earth receives the warmth/energy from the Sun.
I say the Earth is a cooled off chunk of the Sun and science proves that.
There is nothing to argue about there, as all planets are formed from the periphery of the central solar mass, with an exception if one can wonder of from depth of space. Yet, even that one was formed of one of the stars.

As Carl Sagan said in his TV Series: Cosmos, “we are, all, made of the stardust!”

God/Universe acted upon the stars, they - upon planets, and those upon life on them in one common flow.

God/Universe has never bypassed stars and what they mean to life and how they enable it.
House of warship are nice by “houses of science” are not any less important to say the least.



Therefore, the laws of physics prove that whether you believe in God or don’t, you would believe in the Sun as its warmth and energy is a reality without which you cannot survive or, even, exist.

We can look at the Sun, as a closest to us representative of God/Universe/Nature that gives us life.

It is a most complete Representative - not the Principal.
Even when and if we interact with the principal, it is done through its representative(s.)

In human life and Nature, we do not act through a principal directly.

We act through the representatives first.
Brain acts through body.
Digestive system through hands that put the food in the mouth.

We interact with the Sun through the Earth’ atmosphere.

Bosses at work interact with employees through mangers.

Al these are example of representatives leading to the principals but not directly.



There are numbers of representatives in different hierarchies but the Sun is the most crucial one as proved most of what we need i.e. life itself.
No sun – no life, pray or no pray.


You have your brain. That is crucial to your existence as a human being.
Yet, unless you reach out for food with your hands and put them in your mouth, your brain cannot even function.

Your hands provide the mean of feeding the brain via the mouth.
The Sun to us and other stars to others, provide the necessary tools for life to manifest itself, originally planned and unveiled by God/Universe.

Therefore the Sun, to us is as those hands that allow to connect to God/Universe/
Without the Sun/stars/hands, there can be no connection to God/Life.

That is self-evident.
I can repeat with the precise accuracy of the power of science that we live on the Earth, which is a cooled off part of the Sun, which continuously nourishes us.

I respect both: the physical and spiritual laws.
Those who only respect one, live in one-half of the reality in my opinion.


to be continued

Good morning, Sharing Lights and Aksis. Namaste!

Thank you, Sharing Lights, for your eloquent elaboration on your concept of reverence for the sun as the source of our very life on Earth.

Your unique use of the English language suggests to me that you are perhaps from Europe, or Eastern Europe, like Aivanhov. Oftentimes someone who was not brought up in the UK or America or Australia, and who learns English as a second language brings a fresh flavor to their writing and speaking - a different perspective on the use of phrasing and syntax. It is often quite lyrical and poetic. Do you mind letting us know in what nation you were born, Sharing Lights? However, if you prefer not to reveal anything so personal about yourself, I do respect that. I only asked - respectfully.

Aksis posted:

I like the idea of having the space & freedom to explore these things without being condemed...

Yes and amen. 8-)

I probably appear a hyprocrate seeing as how I was busting sharing_lights balls to some degree, yet I also enjoy sharing my perspective on such topics as well...

Call me arrogant if you must...

Well, I think any questions and differences of opinion can be handled with respect. And I don't think you busted Sharing Lights at all. He responded with dignity.


Quote:

Why exclude acknowledging it in the other 6 chakras?

Perhaps choosing the heart chakra is not truly excluding the other chakras, but focusing on the heart as representing compassion and love.

Why exclude seeing it in every atom and cell of your body?

You're right - I believe the Divine spark - the soul - does reside in every cel of our bodies.

Where is the Spark of Life not?

It is everywhere. In every cel, neuron, in every atom, electron, and down to the tiniest particle of matter. I believe that every particle of matter is part of the Divine intelligence - the spark of life.

I like the whole Namastee concept as well.

Wonderful. 8-) So as we discuss spiritual concepts, we would do best to always acknowledge and remain aware of the divine spark of life in one another.

Namaste; peace; shalom.

I have been enjoying some research and reading pertaining to another element without which we could not live - water. Not only does water sustain our life, but it responds to our very emotions, our very thoughts. Some amazing and revolutionary research has been done by a Japanese Doctor, Masaru Emoto:

http://www.cymaticsource.com/water.html

Emoto discovered that water was extremely sensitive to vibrations, and not only physical vibrations such as music and speech. He devoted several years to photographing the formation of ice crystals from water which had been "treated" in various ways. He had monks recite prayers over the water, played music for it, even taped words on the outside of small vials of water, all with remarkably distinctive effect. Since water constitutes some 70% of both the human body and of the earth, his thesis is that these experiments demonstrate empirically the direct physical impact that thoughts, speech and emotions have, not only on water, but on these larger, more complex systems which are largely comprised of water.

http://www.whatthebleep.com/crystals/


This is a water crystal which formed in water that was exposed to the thoughts and words: "Love and Gratitude".

Impure water, and water exposed to hateful emotions and thoughts cannot form crystals!


This water was exposed to the thoughts and words: "You make me sick".

Dr. Masaru Emoto discovered that crystals formed in frozen water reveal changes when specific, concentrated thoughts are directed toward them. He found that water from clear springs and water that has been exposed to loving words shows brilliant, complex, and colorful snowflake patterns. In contrast, polluted water, or water exposed to negative thoughts, forms incomplete, asymmetrical patterns with dull colors.

The implications of this research create a new awareness of how we can positively impact the earth and our personal health. The success of his books outside Japan has been remarkable. Dr. Emoto has been called to lecture around the world as a result and has conducted live experiments both in Japan and Europe as well as in the US to show how indeed our thoughts, attitudes, and emotions as humans deeply impact the environment.

We are part of nature/universe/"God". Everything in it's unsullied state is truly "God's" image - but we must realize that our thoughts and actions can affect everything we encounter, either positively or negatively.

The sun itself is probably too distant, too intensely powerful and dynamic to be affected by our thoughts and actions here on Earth... but our Earth is certainly affected by everything we do.