Well, I rather felt unqualified to question or flesh-out these ideas as I hadn't read either of the books referenced. But what the heck, given the size of my reading list, it could be a while.
I've gone to your website and looked for specific aspects to reference with my questions (GiveitnoThought.com
From "My Awakening
"So I applied this principal to my ailments, I had a belief that heavy lifting caused my back problems, when in actual fact it was my belief that this was so, by not giving any thought and particularly not verbalizing the thought, I no longer have a problem with my back, the same as when I stopped giving thought and verbalizing the thought that I needed glasses to read with, now at the age of eighty I no longer need glasses to read with
To understand this, my first question is basic: At the risk of oversimplification, would you say that 1) Your back never really had any quantifiable damage at all; that it was only your "attention" to it that made the pain. 2) That there was probably some physical issue, but that your conscious "preoccupation" in some way empowered the pain at all. 3) That your attention somehow increased or egagerated the pain. Or, something completely else?
... realizing that what I was seeing was a clear reflection of my own consciousness.
I'd agree that we interpret all we perceive; and in so doing, put a "twist" or otherwise assign some meaning or significance. But in this quote, I get the impression that either 1) Nothing else but my reflection is truly there -or- 2) Although there is really something there, it is my reflection only that gives it any meaning. Could you clarify?
Knowing that every thing that is, is of every thing that is... where everything starts with self, and finishes with ones own self. there being no two things in the universe.
This feels cryptic, but I want to understand it. Is this along the same lines as the "all I see is my reflection therefore nothing else..."-concept or something completely different? The last phrase, "... there being no two things in the universe", also has me thrown. I'm trying to fit it into the context of the adjacent messages and somehow it's not working for me. Are we talking, "All I see is Me therefore?"
I've always believed there are untapped potentials in the mind; doors just ready to be opened. And in many of what you've said I get the sense this might be one of them; a personal, real empowerment past the silliness of mysticism and religion that one can really grab onto without compromising oneself. But in order to turn that subtle, hard-to-describe doorknob, I have to understand just "what it is".
Thanks very much in advance. We appreciate your sharing.