What if What You Believe is Wrong and You Learned That Was Okay?

Abstract:

We form belief based on perceptions as we live our lives day and and day out.  These beliefs form the filters through which we view each other, the world and ourselves in the Quantum Whole of consciousness existence.  Our tiny little “c” consciousness via the ego doesn’t always know fact from reality, truth from illusion or belief from untested hypothesis and that’s really okay.  We learn though our beliefs and we must start somewhere in order to move in any direction or arrive at any destination no matter if it is even a temporary one.  So, we start with what we come to understand from the outside world and then we begin to learn what our beliefs are for.

Key Words

Belief, Continuum, God, Source, Truth

Background

Belief is an untested hypothesis.  That might sound bad but it isn’t really.  It’s actually perfect. You see, we all must begin with a premise as we explore and experience this dimensional experience in which we currently find ourselves.  We must agree that it exists, maybe that it was created and that it had a Creator outside of us, we must agree that we are individuals, we must agree that we are within creation and then everything else sort of falls into a rhythm or vibration to which we respond to in kind with vibration in reaction to what we experience stemming from our beliefs.  This article explores the concept of Source or God from the perspective of belief with the highlighted focus on belief itself as the main point.  Too many philosophical arguments have been put forth for and against the existence of God and I will not add to that body of work with my own at this time.   Instead, I wish to touch on belief, the mainstay of any God, Goddess or Diety hypothesis or considered reality.  My hypothesis is that with belief, something is unreal unless you believe it is real.  I will explore a few works that delve into belief in order to bring the reader a certain context with which individualized belief may be carefully considered and understood to be very powerful. I assert that it is the holder of the belief that has the Source power to create and that the Source is a continuum of consciousness of which we are part.

In researching works to address this concept without writing a book, I naturally gravitated towards the informative work of Dr. David Hawkins.  Coming from a psycho-spiritual perspective, coupled with an educated biological background lent much credibility to the concepts presented by Dr. Hawkins.  If you are well-read in the area of metaphysics and spirituality or even philosophy and psychology, you may come to realize that many of his ideas, were not new but were ancient in origin but just very well described in current times by Dr. Hawkins.  The ancients understood much concerning belief it seems until the season of forgetting began for reasons only the Creators of Source existence know.  Much of what was presented by anyone from any discipline that slightly seemed to delve into any area not acknowledged and accepted by Western science was considered, well, “woo woo” as my Step-Father used to say.  I understand this perspective but I also realize that it is antiquated speak for anything the mind cannot comprehend that seems magical or even illogical.  This prevalent concept of cold hard scientific fact only and only scientific fact had it’s time but isn’t it time we start to support new ideas? Even some of our beloved scientists admitted to making discoveries while in a meditative of relaxed state in which their intuition could come through (e.g., Einstein, Edison, etc.) Even the discipline of physics dictates there must first be a premise and then from there equations are created to balance out the theory and voila, the newest theory of the universe is born and no one looks back.  Research Dr. Nassim Haramein and his wonderful work with The Resonance Project to understand more about his work defining the New World View.  I bring this up because this is the perfect example of what happens with belief, why we need it, what we can do with it and why at times we need to be wrong with our beliefs and learn to be okay with our seeming errors.  Our beliefs are the starting point to our discoveries in life.

Dr. David Hawkins spoke much in his works about positionality and that our perceptions were mere positionalities on the same continuum.  This is a very unique perspective worthy of deeper digging.  To explain, within his work I, Reality and Subjectivity, Dr. Hawkins explains various gradations from the perspective of both light and goodness.  After outlining the gradations on each of these continuums, Dr. Hawkins states:

The gradations are all on the same continuum, not on two opposing ones.  There is merely one continuous quality track.  One will see that there is no ‘good’ that is the opposite of ‘bad.’ The scale on the left indicates the presence or absence of Love and is therefor only about Love, just as the scale on the right indicates degrees of light and not opposites of light versus darkness.  Apparent ‘facts’ are illusions of truth, and it is obvious to see that such denotation actually depends totally on context.  On an absolute level, total context would include comprehension of every contribution to an event throughout eternity, plus an equal knowledge of all karmic history of everything and everyone involved.  This accounts for the spiritual declarations of ‘judge not’ and “judgment is mine,” sayeth the Lord.” It isn’t that the ego is incorrect, it is just incapable of arriving at an accurate comprehension of any seeming event. (47)

Further Consideration

When we think of belief, we humans in the West seem to turn instantly to morals and religions as if the words were all one and the same in reference to a biblicaly defined God.  Interestingly,  Laurence Gardner (The Origin of God, Dash House 2010, Brockenhurst, UK) in his work The Origin of God deals with the specific belief in this context by outlining the ways in which the manner of ‘knowledge’ most have come by in the description of God is actually refuted by the bible and other texts written around the same time.  Rather than see this narrowly as blasphemy, I see it as a disruptive concept worthy of merit.  Disrupting theories give us pause to stop whatever it is that we are doing and consider what it is we believe about something and whether or not that belief is true. Further, we then have the distinct opportunity to decide whether or not we’re going to take it (whatever “it” is) on faith and continue believing or seek the truth if there is one.  In an excerpt from this referenced work Mr. Gardner states:

In pursuing the evolutionary story of the Judaeo-Christian God to this point, we have considered the biblical text of the Old Testament by way of a flowing précis of its chronological contents. There is actually no other way to learn how the God Yahweh came to exist as a venerated cultural entity, since the Bible is the recognized document of record from which  all related teachings are drawn.  God, in the way he is religiously understood, was primarily featured in the Bible, which remains the base reference work for all theistic writings that have emanated in the millennia since its composition.  As we have seen, however, the Old Testament is not actually a book about God; it is a generational account of a patriarchal strain which became the Israelite nation.  It is a story of individuals, families and kings, of hardships and successes.  In the course of this narrative, God plays a major role at the outset, making a few personal and semi-personal appearances down to the post-Abrahamic era (c.1750 BC).  He then moves into physical obscurity and, from around 1350 BC, becomes almost incidental to the plot from the time of Moses.  What the Bible does not do, neither does it attempt at any state, is to prove the existence of God.  His reality is taken as read from the outset. (312)

In order to take this in without becoming upset or losing track of the main point, step back from the subject matter for a moment and return to the basic premise we started with that belief is something we work with until we have more details to either confirm it as fact or refute it as untested hypothesis or proven falsehood in the face of finding definitive truth.  For some interesting reading, speaking of beliefs, read the work from the philosopher Manly P. Hall, The Secret Teachings of All Ages for some interesting alleged occurrences about the time the bible was canonized. Elaine Pagels also has some interesting things to say about that time period in her work on Beyond Belief:  the Secret Gospel of Thomas.  I mention these two works because within them, some of the things we have been given as a belief purported to equate to definitive truth begins to falter a bit in the light of truth which makes certain former beliefs fall to the category of untested hypothesis rather than definitive truth.  But while I can say that, I have to come back for a moment to Dr. Hawkins discussion on positionalities and continuums.  I’m left contemplating the consciousness of the universe for my own reasons and seeing everything in existence as part of one massive continuum I’ll call Consciousness with a very big “C” and from the Source of it to the heart of us, I see nothing but positionalities, stages and variations of beliefs and testing via the process of experience.

Conclusion:

Some of the things I’ve mentioned above may seem a bit harsh to some if I have seemed to insensitively trample upon their belief.  To be quite frank, my intent was not to commit any personal insult or injury but rather to point out that belief is a great place to start.  I think where we falter as the whole of humanity is when we either individually or collectively hold a belief blindly as definitive truth without question or testing and shut down our minds and hearts to all other possibilities that we may need to continue searching for the truth whether it is with or outside of us seemingly.  If we find one belief doesn’t bear out as truth in the light of day, it could be troubling or disappointing for a time.  Unfortunately, some individuals are willing to fight for their beliefs.  That is very sad to me.  Would that they could instead simply assert their right to speak their opinion while allowing others to seek their own understanding, there may be less conflict in this place we co-exist within.  However, this can also be the impetus for the creation of much growth through the exploration of the path to truth of a matter.  I am beginning to love the disruptors that show up in our lives challenging our beliefs because it is their benevolent existence that has allowed me to graciously and some times very clumsily set aside those things that are illusory in order to better enable myself to begin to open my heart and soul to grasping what could quite possibly be the greatest truths in existence.  Maybe none of us have found them yet.  Maybe some of us have.  It’s all beautiful and perfect regardless.  In a way, in my conclusion I find acceptance for things as they are, beliefs as they are, truth seekers as they are and disruptors as they are.  All serve purpose.  As for Source, I believe in a Source but my belief is based on my experience and connection to that Source.  I treasure the moment and all thereafter and every position on THE continuum that is this Quantum Whole of our Consciousness.

Sources:

The Origin of God  Gardener, Laurence, Dash House 2010 Brockenhurst, UK print.

The Secret Teachings of ALL AGES Hall, Manly P. Penguin Group, 2003 NY, print.

I, Reality and Subjectivity Hawkins, David R. Veritas Publishing, 2003 AZ, print.

Beyond Belief: The Secret Gospel of Thomas, Pagels, Elaine.  Random House Publishers, NY 2003, print.

Rev. J.L. Harter, PhD, M.Msc., B.Msc., Author, Blogger, Teacher,  Spiritual Counselor and Founder/Editor of the JMCC.  See Bio section for more information.

Experiential Reality

 

What precisely is the basis of your experiential reality?  Do you know? As I consider my own experiential reality, I have to consider what comprises its component parts:

The 5 Physical Senses:  What I see, hear, smell, touch and taste.

    The 6^th Partially Physical Sense:  What I instinctively know (auto-biological, genetic and intuition).

    The 7^th Sense:  This is really a refined aspect of 1. And 2. Above but it comprises the less tangible but no less important concepts of sensing energy and vibration.

The 8^th Sense:  This is a further refinement of all of the above but can be compartmentalized in alternate states of consciousness and is more dimensionally oriented and not necessarily just in the physical.  I consider this sense more in tune with the level of the Spirit which is closer to the One Consciousness or Cosmic Consciousness (or 9^th Sense and there are more).

So, all of the above “senses” are part of my experiential reality but based on how I perceive what my senses are taking in and then further how I objectively or subjectively label or judge what I perceive what my senses are taking in, I have established my Experiential Reality.  Is everyone’s experiential reality the same, you might wonder?  Well, the way we humans sometimes act, it seems at some level we must believe that everyone’s experiential reality is in fact the same because we are very quick to attack someone who slights us in some way for not acting or behaving as kindly or thoughtfully as we do.  But, as you can begin to see (or will see shortly), the truth is we don’t all perceive everything exactly the same way because we can’t.  We can share some perceptions and observations but part of the way we experience the world comes from our senses and how we filter and store the data.  We sense or open to receiving data and then the mind runs its processes to look throughout our experience here in this lifetime (or even others) to find something similar with which it may come to know what it is sensing.  Based on a person’s very individualized experience, the sensory data that comes in will be compared to data taken in at some point in our past.  Simulations of the mind are then run as a result of the comparison processes in order to determine what something is that we have sensed in our experience.  This means that we can have the same inputs but our resulting findings based on our experience won’t always be the same.

I find this an interesting series of thought particularly in light of the conflict of human interactions.  We assume because hubby didn’t take out the trash that hubby doesn’t think very much of us.  We also might assume based on our mind’s findings post-simulation and analysis of data, memories, etc. that when Suzie doesn’t call us when we want her too, she doesn’t like us any more.  Okay, you get the basic idea here, right?  Not everyone comes to the same conclusion after taking in the same data sets.  What further complicates the comparison process from one human being to another is that our senses are different at various levels.  If you just take the first sense, sight.  Not everyone can see 20/20 or see with color.  So, how do you determine the same data taken in but different outputs in thought results?

You see, the data we take in is first filtered by our senses and then further filtered by our memories, perceptions, judgments and beliefs and then we determine the outcome of the data set, (e.g., because of “x” in my memory banks, this is what “this” is).  Now, to further my point lets take Vera, Chuck and Dave.  Vera’s hearing isn’t perfect  but her vision is 20/20.  Chuck is color blind but has exceptional hearing.  Dave is neither color blind nor hard of hearing.  All 3 are standing on the sidewalk at a parade.  Marching directly in front of them a brightly costumed float followed by a band is playing some kind of song loud enough for the crowd to hear.  Later, all 3 of my imaginary friends get together and compare notes on the marching band and parade.  An argument ensues about how loud the music was, how drab the costumes seemed, etc.  Each asserts his or her perception is right.  But, consider, who is really right and who is wrong?  Each can argue from their perspective just on the first physical sense alone.  But what if each also has another trigger-filter inside.  The last parade Vera attended, the man next to her had a heart-attack and died leaving her her a bit apprehensive of parades.  The last parade Dave was at, he was with his friends having the time of his life.  The last parade Chuck was at, someone launched a bag of popcorn that landed squarely on his head leaving him a bit annoyed.  How might these experiences further shape their perceptions of the parade and marching band?  Again, who would be right and who would be wrong in their experience?

Now, take this concept and look at life.  Through the first 5 senses and the mind’s operating processes, we’ve already run data through multiple filters, first physical and then mental.  We can argue on the labels that result from these filters but who is right and who is wrong?  How can you tell?  Well, the 6^th and 7^th senses can help if you are attuned to them but what if you are not?  How could you tell who is right and who is wrong?  What if the 8^th sense kicks in for one of the three and leaves one of them with a knowing that the whole event, parade, music, costumes, being there together watching it and then arguing it afterwards was just a way in which folks might better learn to understand how we take in information and experience this world? What if the 8^th sense, residing more at the level of the Spirit is very in tune with all that is and sees things not in terms of right and wrong but rather in what is beneficial and what is not to a particular person’s life path?

The more you dig into this and analyze it, the more questions arise for the careful and open observer.  When you dig in you start to realize the common conflicts humanity suffers is all based on the same data taken in but sensed and then filtered differently forming individuals aspects of experiential reality.  But, if our experiential reality is not the whole truth then what is the truth?  THAT is THE Million Dollar question and one worth asking, not others, but of the self and only the self.  For only in the still and quiet moments of reflection and understanding can we ever hope to comprehend that there exists a truth of reality beyond the limits of our Experiential Reality.  Arguing for the rightness of our Experiential Reality and, therefore, negating someone else’s Experiential Reality comes down to a choice of how much energy one is willing to expend on something potentially irrelevant and illusory.  On the other hand, through the sharing of the various Experiential Realities with the understanding of the various filters and perceptions, we could stand to gain much knowledge rather than belief based on perception alone.  This theme is key to awareness of our larger conscious existence.  It takes effort but is by far more worthy of our efforts to seek understanding that to fight to be right.

 

© 2014 J.L. Harter

Rev. J.L. Harter, PhD, M.Msc., B.Msc., Author, Blogger, and Spiritual Counselor, Editor of the JMCC.  See Bio section for more information.