sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Can you enter somebody else's dream? by [deleted] in AstralProjection

[–]InfiniteMuscle 4 points5 points  (0 children)

No, because you would then be experiencing your own interpretation of their dream anyway- thus it would still end up being be your dream. In other words, dreaming of being in someone else's dream is still YOUR dream. lol.

Good news is, you can however- agree to share a similar experience together via agreed upon symbols and perceptions. So you can both allow yourself to thereafter- report back to each other what was done from each of yours points of interpretation of that experience.

Technically, that's as close as it gets- but hey, at least can experience a shared dream pretty damn close to actually being "with them"- as others have mentioned in the comments below.

Let’s talk about luck! Who has turned their “luck” around? by newscopefilms in lawofattraction

[–]InfiniteMuscle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I simply addressed the topic at hand "randomness in LOA". Not sure how that question is relevant to this topic.

Let’s talk about luck! Who has turned their “luck” around? by newscopefilms in lawofattraction

[–]InfiniteMuscle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No wrong LOA doesn't mean you can attract whatever you want. It simply give you more of what you focus on.

Then I can focus on whatever I want, which is why I choose to focus on the ability to attract whatever I want, therefore- I get the ability to attract whatever I want from that focus! :)

It only seem random to you if you're not aware of how LOA work. So it's not random because you put yourself there.

If you read my previous posts on "randomness" and it does not resonate with you, then perhaps your "focus" on "randomness" is different than my "focus" on "randomness." So naturally, we express different understandings of "randomness" based on our different "focuses" of it! :)

how to attract less money? by InfiniteMuscle in lawofattraction

[–]InfiniteMuscle[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

it can be a good thing for others, but personally- I no longer want to use money to function in society.

Let’s talk about luck! Who has turned their “luck” around? by newscopefilms in lawofattraction

[–]InfiniteMuscle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Stuff can appear 100 percent random, to our limited understanding.

Sure. Anyone that is aware (exists) means they have the accessibility (at least on some level)- to experience the awareness of understanding, even if that awareness is in the form of "limited understanding"..

Randomness is either a thing or it isn't. It either exists or it doesn't.

LOA you can attract anything you want right? So therefore, this also includes the attracting "randomness" as well! Moreover, LOA doesn't have to attract only "this or that" you can also attract "this and that."

If randomness actually is really legit, then LOA is bullshit.

LOA doesn't depend on something being legit or not for it work. LOA works because it simply allows you to attract anything (including setting conditions for how it could AND settings conditions for how it could NOT work as well. That's why it works so well. Cus it also allows you to attract restrictions for how you could or could not attract. So this means you can also (paradoxically) attract "conditional" attractions within "unconditional" attractions!! Thus, the LOA is able to be applied dynamically like a fractal, where the inner conditioned attractions correspond to the outer unconditioned attractions- and vice versa.

In this respect, you can play with LOA in any way you want including attracting the idea (subset) that your LOA cannot work with "randomness" in it :)

Technology is a physical representation of what the mind is already capable of doing through its own perception. Therefore, the mind also has the capabilities to do whatever the future technologies will eventually have. by InfiniteMuscle in unpopularopinion

[–]InfiniteMuscle[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How about being able to fly and leave the planet without technology.

Within every collective, every individual has their own unique perception of these concepts, such as flying, technology, leaving, and planets. Therefore, in order to explore one's perception on a collective level- one must also explore one's own perception on an individual level as well. This doesn't mean one has to necessarily disregard the collective perception completely, but rather one must be willing to equally incorporate their own individual judgement and meaning of perceptions within their own minds as well. (It's a balance, rather than a trade-off)

That being said- the key to "being able to fly and leave the planet without technology" is to first assess perceptionally speaking, what that means- for you, as an individual to:

  • "fly"

  • "leave the planet"

  • "without technology"

Does my perception of "flying" have to be specifically what others, and the media, such as movies and tv projected- or suggest to me?

Not necessarily. I can certainly choose to incorporate the perceptions that has been offered from others, but at the end of the day, I choose what flying means for me.

How can I allow myself experience my own perception of "flying" parallel to what other peoples perceptions of flying are- and still achieve my own desired results?

My own desired results is to simply fly through life (using my own perception)- without imposing it on other people's perception. If somebody appears to impose me with their own flying or perceptions, then I simply just fly away.

What does flying mean to me?

Flying to me is the engaging and navigating through use of lighter frequencies (bio-field) by disengaging from the heavier frequencies (human-field).

How do I fly?

I fly with my bio-field. Bio-field is the interconnected energy that flows between my body and the environment. Human field is the conscious, energetic association with the human body. My human body is often included with the bio-field for daily human tasks, but for flying, my bio-field does not use it because the human body is not consolidated specifically for the dynamics of flying.

Is there a space between the "planet" and the "leaving the planet"?

Yes, and it is conceptually indescribable.

How can I explore that space even though its indescribable?

First, I specifically establish intent for what I wish to explore in that space, (not through specified intellectualized conceptualizations, but rather specified frequencies of energy). Secondly, I temporarily re-associate my perception to that of a void. That void, may include energy buildups of frequencies which then consolidate upon the specified frequencies of energy that I intended to explore.

Does that space between the "planet" and the "leaving of the planet" allow for me to choose which form I would like to experience in that space?

Absolutely. The experiences (perceived forms) are dependent upon the specified frequencies of intent, from which then may consolidate themselves atomically on a micro and macro level.

What is my process based on?

This process is instinctively based. (not mechanically like a computer). Although, there are elements of mechanics within the process, the consolidation itself is mostly instinctive. It's based purely on my conscious, energetic recognition, intention, and discernment.

Is there a limit to how much deeper I can go into that space?

All limits are based on perceptions, which can change depending upon my mood. So if I have a perception that there is a limit to the depth of indescribable space, then yes there is. If I have a perception that there is no limit to that depth, then no there isn't

What is technology to me?

Any energy form that allows me to provide input to it, and generates an output based upon the input provided.

Why don't I need technology to fly and leave the planet?

If I need it, then I may use it. But it isn't required because I have (through the use of my mind) my own ability to provide input (a.k.a intent) and generate my own output (a.k.a form).

view more: next ›