I saw this at Smoothie and it’s so funny.

He says: “There Was Something About Melania …
… at inauguration. I cannot exactly put a finger on it. Hm.”

Hi D Unknown, by like-minded I mean people who are open to discussion, willing to listen and share, but of course can also stand by their own opinions or beliefs. If the gap is too wide, I tend to put less energy into it. Putting no or less energy into something also happens when I or the other person have no questions or the other person is not open to my suggestions and reflections.

Yes, we are all going through our own process and have to be very careful not to upset someone else’s process. And indeed we all have a very personal connection with God (nature, one consciousness or whatever) that cannot be disturbed by anyone (not even a prophet, let alone anyone from any church).

Religion is not invented by God. Discussing such a comment with someone who is very religious is possible if we are like minded. We do not have to agree with each other, but create satisfaction in meaningfully further shaping our own process and allow the other to do the same. At this moment in time, that is the best we can do.

I started on Percival’s book and made some notes during reading:

Comments Nico on Thinking and Destiny by Harold W Percival

Preface

Notes Percival, page xviii

“Then why, and on what authority, do I say they are true? The authority is in the reader. He should judge as to the truth of the statements herein by the truth that is in him.”

Nico: Truth is that which your consciousness is ready for in that moment.

Author’s forword

The special purpose of this book, page xxvi

“we failed a crucial test”

Nico: This is human thought and in consciousness there is not such thing as tests.

Nico: The problem is that humans put themselves at the center of evolution and the universe. This often creates a skewed view and presents us with half-truths. Consciousness is somewhat understood, but then it must fit into a worldview where humans play the main role in the fantastic play.

Introduction

The book explains, page 1

“The real purpose of life, the purpose that will satisfy both sense and reason, is this: that each one of us will be progressively conscious in ever higher degrees in being conscious; that is, conscious of nature, and in and through and beyond nature. By nature is meant all that one can be made conscious of through the senses.”

Nico: Agree, but this is not only about the life of humans but ALL life.

You are not your body, page 2

“You know how your body came into this world; but how you came into your body you do not know. You did not come into it until some time after it was born; a year, perhaps, or several years; but of this fact you know little or nothing, because your memory of your body began only after you had come into your body.”

Nico: Perhaps? Would there be differences between people? If consciousness is connected to the material world why would it enter a body after birth and not at conception or during pregnancy? The question is where consciousness materialize in the body and for me that’s in our DNA. Where DNA has it’s quantum component which links the material world to the universal consciousness. The personal DNA is formed at conception so for me that’s where consciousness materialize in the body and the person get’s it ‘soul’.

Then I came back to my first comment about truth. We all have our own truths and, moreover, they are always only temporarily valid until we have discovered and embraced new truths. Reading a book can help in that discovery of new truths through which we grow in consciousness. We read things that we recognize because we ourselves had discovered them before. We read new things that we explore and adopt. We read things that don’t fit us and thus disown us. It is a lifelong process and we are never done with it. Truth is always in flux for us. Hazrat Inayat Khan also said let us explore everything and be mindful not to get stuck when it no longer fits. I think it can be very useful to discuss issues with like-minded people because it can be enjoyable and bring awareness. The form in which we can do that depends on our personal preferences. My preference is a personal one-on-one conversation to really get to know each other and have fun together. On a forum and in writing it is very difficult to get to the core. Discussing an entire book is well nigh impossible. My preference then would be to take a topic and attach a question or statement to it. And even then it is very difficult because so many things are related and we literally and figuratively use different languages with our own definitions and background thoughts.

Thinking is not an isolated activity; it is a complex activity that is also influenced by the unseen world. Thinking uses acquired impressions, from the Earthly senses but also from spiritual senses. Inventions, for example, are made by the collective and an individual can make use of them and give effect to them. Looking at the past or the future can also be done precisely from feeling and the senses directed to the unseen world. So thinking is much more than you describe when you talk about the mechanism of thinking. A human being, unlike AI, has access to consciousness.

Our thinking has access to everything, but given the stage of evolution we are in, we are still limited to a narrow bandwidth. We are conditioned at birth by the past and are conditioned from birth into the present. We are born with a description that only thickens during our lifetime. Learning to detach from that description to become freer is the challenge. And we must do exactly that by learning to think better.

I wrote an essay on thinking and I don’t know if there are any open ends here in this discussion. Just let me know if there are any.

The funny thing is that you state that human beings do not change through the thought process, but at the same time you also state that you have changed by consciously engaging in these things. Aren’t you just a very good example of how much man can change by thinking about things?

It is not changing by either thinking or feeling either, is it? Surely these two traits are used integrally and mostly unconsciously. Anything we get to us intuitively, that has to materialize in our thinking in order for us to do anything with it. So we cannot do without thinking. Evolution gave us this thinking, so why would our thinking want to reject it? We see here a thinking process going on that is still immature, our thinking is still in the baby phase. It needs time.

When you are able to shift your thoughts from humanity to yourself, from how others behave to how you behave yourself, you are in the process of becoming more conscious. A next step can be to stop going along with the craziness of the masses by staying with yourself. In this way you also become freer and freer.

You cannot find freedom much if you are concerned with others, let alone humanity.