A Voice in the Wilderness…

Editor’s Note: For the next several months this space will be used to explore — one-by-one — the messages, metaphysical principles, and spiritual meaning of the material found in the 3,000+ pages of the Conversations with God dialogues. This series of observations and interpretations is offered with my continuing disclaimer: I could be wrong about all of this.



CWG Explored/Installment #2: The one idea that slows our evolution
I believe that the idea that everything in separate from everything else is the greatest obstacle to the rapid expansion of human potential and the rapid forward movement of human evolution.

Right now most people who believe in God — and that is by far the largest number of people on this planet — still embrace a Separation Theology. This is a way of looking at God which declares that we are “over here” and God is “over there.”

This would not matter if it began and ended there, but the problem with a Separation Theology is that it produces too often in too many people a Separation Cosmology. That is, a way of looking at all of life that says that everything is separate from everything else.

This wouldn’t be so bad if it was just a point of view, but the problem is that a Separation Cosmology produces too often in too many people a Separation Psychology. That is, a psychological viewpoint that says that I am over here and you are over there.

This would also be something we could live with if that was all there was to it, but the problem is that a Separation Psychology produces too often in too many people a Separation Sociology. That is, a way of socializing with each other that encourages everyone within human society to act as separate entities serving their own separate interests.

Now we’ve entered into truly dangerous territory, because a Separation Sociology envitably produces too often in too many people a Separation Pathology. That is, pathological behaviors of self-destruction, engaged in individually and collectively, and producing suffering, conflict, violence, and death by our own hands—evidenced everywhere on our planet throughout human history.

I believe that only when our Separation Theology is replaced by a Oneness Theology will our pathology be healed. A Oneness Theology recognizes that we have been differentiated from God, but not separated from God, even as the fingers on our hand are differentiated but not separated from the hand itself.

We are being invited to understand that all of Life is One Thing. This is the first step. It is the jumping-off point. It is the beginning of the end of how things now are. It is the start of a new creation, of a new tomorrow. It is the New Cultural Story of Humanity.

It is my thought that oneness is not a characteristic of life. Life is a characteristic of oneness. I believe that this is what we have not understood about our existence on Earth, the understanding of which would change everything. Life is the expression of oneness Itself. God is the expression of Life Itself. God and Life are one. You are a part of Life. You do not and cannot stand outside of it. Therefore you are a part of God. It is a circle. It cannot be broken.

I believe that when we begin acting in harmony with this truth, our entire experience of Life will be altered forever. There will, in fact, be war no more. Violence in all forms will disappear. Depravity and insufficiency will end. Abject suffering and poverty will vanish. Cruelty will become unthinkable, insufficiency insupportable, indignity unacceptable, starvation impossible, and intolerance intolerable. We will have civilized civilization at last.


Please Note: The mission of The Global Conversation website is to generate an ongoing sharing of thoughts, ideas, and opinions at this internet location in an interchange that we hope will produce an ongoing and expanding conversation ultimately generating wider benefit for our world. For this reason, links that draw people away from this site will be removed from our Comments Section, a process which may delay publication of your post. If you wish to include in your Comment the point of view of someone other than yourself, please feel free to report those views in full (and even reprint them) here.
Click here to acknowledge and remove this note:
  • mewabe

    This is an interesting theory, and I do not necessarily disagree with it, and certainly not with the overall idea.

    But…could it also be that we are part animals, and like our animal relatives are somewhat driven to territorial conflicts and contests of dominance?

    After all, as in the animal kingdom, it can be observed that males are the principal players in these never ending conflicts.

    The noticeable and ironic difference is that. unlike our animal relatives, we strive to give our conflicts greater meaning than what could transpire from pure animal instincts…we oppress, persecute and kill in the names of our flags and ideologies, our religions, of various concepts and ideas that we believe reveal our superiority to animals, while behaving more destructively than they could ever do.

    • A true friend

      “we oppress, persecute and kill in the names of our flags and ideologies, our religions, of various concepts and ideas that we believe reveal our superiority to animal”
      I can speak only for myself but my younger version would have wanted to convert unbelievers to my former religion (Christianity) because I considered myself to have the right “stuff” and wished to offer all those “blind” people my “superior sight”.
      Thank me, I had the brain power to question my former beliefs..

      • mewabe

        Mind development is about the only thing that can truly differentiate us from our animal cousins. Humanity is slow in that regard.

        • A true friend

          “Humanity is slow in that regard.”
          You can say that again. Something always felt off about the Christian version of God in comparison with my idea of God but I never questioned until around 2005-2006.

          Here is another good question for God. If she is that great how come she never made people faster in their though process.
          I would have benefited if my mind was 2x faster so maybe I would have questioned my belief around 2000 instead of 2005. That’s a 5 years improvement.

          • mewabe

            How old were you when you questioned the Christian version?

          • A true friend

            14 years old although when I did my calculations I made it for 5 years improvement since I toked other factors in consideration.

          • mewabe

            That’s not bad at all, give yourself a pat on the back!

          • A true friend

            Perhaps but I reached that place only because everything I chose to be, do and have had crumbled.

          • mewabe

            That’s called learning the hard way…but I least you learned. Other fall and still hang on to their delusions.

          • A true friend

            Still I would have preferred to have my current mind by the time I was 12 years old.

          • AKA Patrick

            It’s been said: “There is no right; there is no wrong–there is only God.” This is one way to break out of the mold of either/or duality thinking. An extremely useful learning tool for me was James F. Twyman’s “The Art of Spiritual Peacemaking” The book was a series of lessons, which he claims Jesus channeled through him. It was designed to serve as an annual daily reference, with a lesson a day for an entire year. Twyman was a Jesuit priest for a long-time. Like many, he was a rather reluctant “savior”. In fact, his wife was murdered by some thieves who broke into her apartment, He spent a long time depressed by that, which was quite understandable, as he loved her very much.

          • A true friend

            What’s your point?

          • Jethro

            Here is an explanation for duality thinking I copied and pasted to give explanation…. “Zen, The Buddha, and Science have promoted a form of thinking which many call Non-duality. The idea is that ALL is ONE and if we ignore the dualities of life (right/wrong, good/evil, matter/mind, self/other, physical/metaphysical, etc.) then We can achieve peace, wholeness, oneness, and a healthy mind/brain. Separation and distinction must be eliminated so We can be ONE with everyone and at peace with the world. Today, many are attempting to achieve contentment, peace, happiness, and a relationship with everyone based upon acceptance and non-judgmental thinking. Accept all lifestyles, behavior, and beliefs as being ‘equal’ and ‘right’ so everyone can think that they are normal, healthy, mindful, and without any ‘mental’ illness!  All this thinking is supposed to lead to a healthy brain/mind (says neuroscience) and eventually to peace and happiness for all who adopt this mindset.”

            I would like to think that in all of this acceptance, we are not ignoring and just accepting people who are violent to themselves and others. I do believe these people are mentally ill and in need of help. So I would propose treatment facilities over prisons. Though, if we could achieve kindness, there may be fewer people being so abusive. To achieve that kindness we would first have to lose that fear we may not have what we are supposed to have to be happy.

            It’s been my experience that everyone is needing more time. They don’t have enough of it and are not willing to give it. It makes perfect sense that you wish to have speed, without any drawbacks. Most people I encounter these days are requiring the same thing.

          • AKA Patrick

            Numerous points! For one, Life is much simpler than we realize. Attorneys and the law have made life much more complicated than it needs to be. The MAJOR point is simply that we ARE. HAVING and DOING are secondary. You (me, I, we), none of us can do or have unless and until we ARE! That’s basic, fundamental, quintessential! That’s why it’s said that God had the one original thought (duplicating Himself)!

    • “Can humanity actually live without any conflicts and any adversaries? Can males in particular do so?”

      I think eventually we will outgrow negativity in general. Before hand, I think we can collectively create a lot more peace & prosperity for everyone even while we still have adversaries & conflicts. They just don’t or won’t have to be solved violently.

  • A true friend

    Everything is made out of the same stuff so in a sense everything is the same and has the potential to be the same thing. What CwG proposes differently from general science is that energy has consciousness. Now Neale correct me if I’m wrong but if that is true that means that my life is exactly the way is supposed to be because energy and it’s other manifestations (dark matter, matter, antimatter) have created my life just as they willed it. Well sorry folks but my life isn’t a perfect reflection of my will. Show does your God come in this picture, Neale? Is he incompetent, powerless of just malefic?

    • NealeDonaldWalsch

      It is not my understanding, Friend, that God, or the Essential Essence and the Pure Energy that is Life Itself, creates your life or mine “just as they willed it.” In fact, my understanding in exactly the opposite. My understanding is that God has no will in particular for you, but simply desires to supply you with the power (i.e., the energy) to create your life as you would desire. Even this (according to my understanding) does not guarantee that your life is a perfect reflection of your will, but it does guarantee that the Foundational Energy of your life and mine can be used toward that end. And my understanding (as well as my experience) suggests that the more we discover and learn how to use this Pure Energy — both as individuals and as a species — the more successful we can be in having our individual and collective lives reflect our will.

      The challenge we face right now, as I observe and understand it, is that the Collective Will of our species in many, many cases impacts our individual will such that are individual lives far too often do not reflect our individual desires, but more frequently demonstrate the collective consciousness of humanity.

      Our opportunity — presented to us by the process we call evolution — is to help to awaken our species by individually modeling our highest understanding of Who We Really Are (individuations of The Divine) to the degree that we have the ability, the strength, and the courage to do so in every golden moment of Now.

      It occurs to me that this is what every spiritual master has ever done.

      It is not my awareness that God is incompetent, powerless, or malefic, but it is my observation that, as a very young species, very often humanity is.

      Why does God not stop us from our own blunderings? It is my understanding that God’s desire is not to direct or control our behaviors, but rather, give us the freedom to direct or control our own, that we might know our True Identity not by having it bestowed upon us, but by having it chosen by us as a matter of personal selection and deliberate creation. Thus, we become and experience ourselves as the creator of our own reality, which is the highest desire of Divinity.

      This is my understanding. i could, of course, be wrong about all of this.

      • A true friend

        Just because I cannot transplant my entire mind into your own I feel obligated to mention this one thing.
        God being all powerful can in the blink of a eye give me the tools I chose so that I might experience life on my new terms rather the ones imposed by my birth.
        So now tell me how does your awareness live peacefully with the fact that God has remained inactive in rectifying that what my soul has chosen.
        Just to make things clear. I don’t care about my souls agenda! I couldn’t care less even if I wanted to. I don’t care about my souls intention here. Now what does God say about that? Where are my tools to explore my own experiences chosen by me.

      • Patrick Gannon

        Neale, you don’t use the term “evolution” correctly, as defined by science. Perhaps that should be one of the words you capitalize (Evolution, rather than evolution) in order to give it a different meaning than what was intended, although it always gives me a sharp pain when you do so! Evolution has no goal of bettering any life form. Evolution has no goals at all. It is simply a mechanism that permits organisms to survive within a particular environment because of a fitness for that environment, as determined by natural selection. Humanity could very easily evolve into a species of idiots if it was beneficial to do so within a particular environment.

        Indeed if there are individuals who possess a capability to manipulate consciousness, this should provide a competitive advantage for fitness which should be passed on to the next generation, with those so endowed ending up with a strategic advantage over their peers and eventually squeezing them out. I’m aware of no evidence that this sort of evolution is taking place.

  • Jethro

    Yes, oneness. It’s the thought that possibly saved my life. The energy in me flows through all that is. How much more wonderful could it be!? The true spirit of god, the energy of life, in all things in the universe, or in the spec of dust made small only by perspective. Possibly the one bit of magic that still glimmers in my thoughts. Could every human possibly imagine every other human as being equally in need of love and kindness and respect, even the animals, the plants, the soil and water. What healing would occur? How much would the conversations in just this site change in giving kindness and respect to all ideas? Being the “one” that we all are, accepting individual differences. After all, it’s thought that separates anything from anything that thinks. I’m beginning to understand that even thought “doesn’t always” have to be argued when flexible. When we realize always that our beliefs could be wrong we don’t always need to argue them either. This has been my experience and the basis of my current journey in life, it’s working. Humans are not so different from each other nor are we extremely different from the animals that are with us on this earth. All existing things desire to exist and move towards that desire. It’s very sad that the one unit on earth that recognizes self is so determined to destroy in the name of it.

  • NealeDonaldWalsch

    A regular reader/contributor to this forum, signing in as Patrick, has invited me to one last exchange with him as he seeks to better understand some of my points of view on things. He posted the following Commentary under an earlier Entry I had made here, and I have moved the discussion over here, so that it does not have to exist as one in a long thread of comments under that previous entry.

    Here is what Patrick had to say. I have taken the liberty of breaking down his lengthy commentary into small tidbits, so that I might respond to him in “dialogue” style, which I personally find easier to do.

    PATRICK: I know you want to end the discussion, but if you’re willing to extend just a little bit, I have trouble understanding how lack of a belief in the supernatural is non-beneficial. What does it hurt?

    NEALE: It is not what it hurts, Patrick, but what it doesn’t help. I think it’s fair to observe that in some cases certain ideas don’t, in and of themselves, “hurt” anything, but the holding of those ideas also doesn’t “help” things. And to me, that which fails to “help” us in our evolutionary advance, slows that advance.

    PATRICK: It just means living by the physical rules that are all we have evidence for in the first place. It doesn’t eliminate morality or ethics, and in my experience the atheist/agnostic folk are not creating the problems in our society that we both decry, and many are working to stop them.

    NEALE: First of all, let me agree with your last statement. Many atheist/agnostic folk ARE working to bring an end to the problems facing us as a collective called humanity. I wouldn’t dispute that for a moment. I think what I am trying to say is that while atheist/agnostic folk “are not creating the problems in our society,” the more human beings we have on board who believe in a benign and unconditionally loving higher power, and who work together to use it by jointly harnessing it and directing it, the more opportunity we have to advance more rapidly in the solving of those problems as a natural outcome of our more rapid advance in the evolution of our species.

    I agree with you wholeheartedly when you say that lack of a belief in a higher power “does not eliminate morality or ethics.” I just happen to think that belief in, and active use of, a benign and unconditionally loving higher power can produce a quantum increase in humanity’s willingness to live within higher and higher expressions of morality and ethics. I could, of course, be wrong about this. I can only attest to what this belief has produced in my own life, and the lives of many people who have made their experience known to me over the years.

    PATRICK: A great many of the people who believe in God in this country (a wholly inaccurate Yahweh, right?), are, for example, the racist, sexist, bigots that we all agree are “damaging” and non-beneficial.

    NEALE: I have made the same observation. This is not universally true, but it is, as you state, my observation regarding “many” of the people.

    PATRICK: Atheists and agnostics, as best I can tell, make up a miniscule fragment of those attempting to limit personal liberties. I personally know of only one. I have an agnostic friend who has a gay son, and he’s a homophobe, but every other atheist or agnostic I know supports these personal liberties and many other social causes like combatting climate change.

    NEALE: Again, I have had the same experience.

    PATRICK: My fundy friends on FB aren’t posting about oil and Indians in N. Dakota, but my atheist/agnostic friends are. I can’t figure out how you can see them as the bad guys. They don’t need a god to do the moral or ethical thing.

    NEALE: I don’t see atheists and agnostics “as the bad guys,” Patrick. I see them simply as people now standing on the sidelines, in a manner of speaking, as opposed to joining with — and increasing the numbers of — those who believe in a benign and unconditionally loving higher power, thereby increasing the magnification of that power, and multiplying both its uses and its effect as our species struggles to find a way to be human that honors the Oneness of all of Creation, and thus ignores the pain or plight of no one.

    PATRICK: You know I don’t buy that, “Ours is not the only way, ours is just another way” thing (why bother with another way if it isn’t better – and you clearly believe your way is better), but this may be a case where it fits. Your way, through a supernatural deity and the atheist/agnostic way through logic, reason and evidence, both want the same thing when it comes to a better world for everyone.

    NEALE: I think in general that your statement is true, but I think (to endlessly repeat myself…sorry…) that it is a case of “the more the merrier” when it comes to the number of humans who hold a point of view about life that asserts the existence of an Essential Essence, or a Foundational Energy (which I call “God”), that both exists and is conscious of itself, and that can be used with ever increasing effectiveness as it is applied with ever increasing focus through the multiplier effect of ever increasing applications.

    As to your “not buying” the CWG statement: “ours is not a better way, ours is merely another way,” the point that the statement seeks to make is that there is more than one way to the mountaintop; that there is more than one way to achieve an objective. The statement is meant to challenge dogmatic religions and no-coloring-outside-the-lines political doctrines and human philosophies that insist that their way is the only way — and, indeed, it’s “their way or the highway.”

    I do not “clearly believe” that the CWG messages offer a “better” way to be human, Patrick. In fact, just the opposite is true. I say at every possible turn (and do so yet once again here) that I could be wrong about all of this. I could be completely mistaken regarding the benefits that I feel are available to us if people were to embrace and live by the messages in Conversations with God. What I have done is simply invite people to explore those messages, and possibly even try them out in their daily lives, and then make a personal assessment on their own as to their viability, workability, and beneficiality.

    PATRICK: Forging alliances with the Pope and Billy Graham to combat the conditions their religions were responsible for creating in the first place, does not seem to make as much sense as forging an alliance with those who want the same thing you do.

    NEALE: I’m not sure that I am willing to make an assertion that the religions of the Pope and Billy Graham and others are responsible for creating all the conditions on the Earth that every compassionate and caring person wishes could be eliminated. But if saying that many of the tenets of many of our religions have in some cases improved the lives of many people is what you mean by “forging alliances” — if saying that their religions are “another way” to the mountaintop is what you are referring to — I am okay with that.

    I am not willing to assert that a sincere and humble and gentle and loving Christian (or Jew or Hindu or Muslim or Buddhist, for that matter) is somehow less capable of good and honorable deeds, exemplary behavior, and evolutionary advancement than one who embraces the ideas in CWG…or no ideas about God at all. I don’t know that Christians, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, etc. automatically fall outside of the category of people who want the same things that I do. I would depend on how they apply their beliefs; on how they live them.

    PATRICK: Atheists and agnostics have to hold New Agers to account when they dabble in quantum fields and other pseudo-science woo that spreads misinformation and leverages the ignorance of the sheeple, but for the most part, I see more of a live and let live attitude from this side, when it comes to New Age God. Don’t mess with science, and they will mostly leave you alone. (I’m an exception – I am concerned that we’ve overlooked the core problem – beliefs themselves, and atheists can hold beliefs).

    NEALE: I am not sure that the sharing of metaphysical ideas (many of which, by their nature, cannot be “proven”) is, ipso facto, the “spreading of misinformation” and the leveraging of peoples’ ignorance. If one could only share thoughts and ideas of which one can in that instant offer proof, half of the advances that we call “science” today would never have come about. What we call “science” today was “theory” on some yesterday — and I see that, as in the present situation, many people called the sharing of those theories “the spreading of misinformation.”

    We all know the story of Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis who, while working at the Vienna General Hospital’s maternity clinic on a 3-year contract from 1846-1849, made a remarkable and, no doubt, scary observation: At least one way that medicine was being practiced was actually killing people.

    In Vienna, as elsewhere in European and North American hospitals, puerperal fever (or childbed fever) was rampant, sometimes climbing to 40 percent of admitted patients. Dr. Semmelweis was disturbed by these mortality rates, and eventually developed a theory of infection, in which he suggested that decaying matter on the hands of doctors, who had recently conducted autopsies, was brought into contact with the genitals of birth-giving women during the medical examinations at the maternity clinic. He proposed a radical hand washing theory using chlorinated lime, now a known disinfectant.

    Dr. Semmelweis’ thoughts ran contrary to key medical beliefs and practices (the germ theory of infection had not yet been developed), and so his ideas were rejected and ridiculed.

    Worse, in what was very unusual, his contract at the hospital was not renewed, effectively expelling him from the medical community in Vienna. He died an outcast in a mental institution in 1865.

    It was not until the 20th Century that his ideas were accepted, with untold numbers of babies’ lives having been saved since.

    Is it possible that is some future century some of the ideas about Essential Essence and Foundational Energy and metaphysics and Highly Evolved Beings found in CWG might be found to have not been all “misinformation” after all? Should the fact that we cannot prove these assertions today mean that we should reject them out of hand? I do not think so, and what I reject out of hand is the notion that sharing the ideas found in CWG is somehow preying on the “ignorance of sheeple.”

    I am wiling to give the largest number of people the benefit of the doubt, seeing them as being perfectly capable of making their own considered and good judgments about what CWG has brought to the table. I do not automatically consider people utterly incapable of making such assessments, thus categorizing them as “sheeple,” simply because they may find agreement with some or most of the ideas in CWG.

    PATRICK: I just don’t get the practical, or even the “spiritual” objection that may lie behind that position. You no longer believe in the Yahweh of the bible, as I understand it. That means you don’t believe in the god of a whole lot of people. Is it non-beneficial for you to hold this belief about their god? Yeah, I suppose it is non-beneficial to them – but you can’t argue that it’s non-beneficial to society, because your lack of belief in their god led you to your own. So, I’ll accept that atheists/agnostics are non-beneficial to NAG (New Age God), but you’re going to have to explain why they are bad for our society.

    NEALE: I’m trying to make clear that I don’t hold that the views of atheists/agnostics are, per se, “bad for our society.” I am hoping to get across the idea that it might be more beneficial for more people to hold the idea that there is such a thing as a Foundational Energy in the universe than can be used to produce practical outcomes in physical life. And, as CWG itself says, it does not matter what name we give to that phenomenon. We can call it Essential Essence, we can call it The Force, we can call it God.

    I also believe that if more people held the idea that a higher power exists — an essence that has the quality of self-consciousness and willful intent — our entire species, if it learned to engage with that consciousness and harness that power, would be better off in the bargain. But I could be wrong about that. I can only point to my own experience.

    PATRICK: I went through the same process of questioning NAG as both of us did in questioning Yahweh, but that was OK, and this is not? Surely you can see my difficulty with this…

    NEALE: I do, indeed. And I have never said that questioning what you call New Age God is “not okay.” In fact (he keeps reiterating over and over again) CWG invites and encourages such questioning time and time again.

    PATRICK: And I do acknowledge that we’re speaking of your personal views and not about the position of the CwG material to the best of my knowledge and memory.

    NEALE: Great. I’m glad we’re clear on that. Yet even I have never said that it is “not okay” to question NAG. I would hardly have put up this website if I thought that way.

    PATRICK: From a spiritual standpoint, I suppose you could argue that we need everyone pushing consciousness in a particular direction in order to manifest the reality we want.

    NEALE: Now we are getting to it, Patrick. That is closer to what I have been trying to communicate than anything you have offered so far.

    PATRICK: Obviously, this force or energy, if it exists, is exceptionally weak and requires the cooperation of huge numbers of people, or assistance from HEBs with supernatural powers, (but for whose existence we have no evidence) in order to change, influence, or manifest something.

    NEALE: I think the assumption here is inaccurate. This “force or energy” is not, in my experience and understanding, “exceptionally weak.” Does that mean that with more people focusing it and using it with intention, it cannot be manifest to be even stronger?

    Few people would assert that the direct rays of the sun are exceptionally weak. They can burn your skin and, if looked at directly, damage your eye. That does not mean that, by focusing them through a magnifying glass, we cannot make them even stronger.

    That which is powerful can be made even more powerful depending upon how it is used. Atomic energy is an obvious example. CWG tells us that all energy is an element of life that impacts upon itself. That is, it can be made to increase its effect as it, in a sense, “folds over” on itself. (I am using simple terms here to make a point.)

    One person can indeed use the Essential Essence and the Foundational Energy of the universe (what I call “God”) “to change, influence, or manifest something.” Single individuals have done so with considerable effect throughout human history. This does not mean that if 20 individuals — or 200, or 2,000 — lend their energies to the same undertaking, they cannot increase the impact of The Whole. One point does not negate the other.

    PATRICK: But if these atheists and agnostics are actively thinking, writing, working to help ensure personal liberties, or a clean earth, or whatever the case may be, then if your conjecture is correct, they must be actively manipulating that same consciousness in the same direction, lacking only a belief that this consciousness exists — and why would that matter? You insist this consciousness exists and they are all a part of it, so there’s no escaping that they are actively engaged and actively moving consciousness toward the same goals you want – with the exception of not believing in your god. That shouldn’t really be damaging to a God who insists you don’t have to believe in her…

    NEALE: My own thought is that a belief in this consciousness existing, and a deliberate and intentioned and highly focused use of its inherent energy, could create a multiplier effect in the manipulations of people of that same consciousness. I could be wrong about this…but I notice that it is the one thing that we haven’t yet tried on a massive scale.

    Let me point to some information from Dr. John Hagelin on this. A renowned quantum physicist, science and public policy expert, educator, and author, Dr. Hagelin offers us this from his online writings:

    “Most people don’t know how deeply their own consciousness is connected to the collective fate of the planet—or how they can use a powerful, scientifically tested technology of consciousness to help create world peace on Earth virtually overnight.

    “More than fifty demonstration projects and twenty-three studies published in leading peer-reviewed journals have shown that this new consciousness-based approach to world peace neutralizes the ethnic, political, and religious tensions in society that give rise to crime, violence, terrorism, and war.

    “The approach has been tested on the local, state, national, and international levels, and it has worked every time, resulting in highly significant drops in negative social trends and improvements in positive trends.

    “Large groups of peace-creating experts, practicing these technologies of consciousness together, dive deep within themselves to the most fundamental level of mind and matter, which physics calls the unified field.

    “From that level of life they create a tidal wave of harmony and coherence that can permanently alter society for the better, as the research confirms. And this consciousness-based approach is holistic, easy to implement, non-invasive, and cost effective.”

    (See http://www.PermanentPeace.org for more information.)

    So the question is, what would it take for us to use this . . . can I call it, “spiritual technology?” And my answer is, nothing more than an awakening. Even just a beginning awareness of these things could get things started on a larger scale. I was struck by one of the video programs that John Hagelin made about all this, which ends with this quote:

    “There is far more evidence that group meditation can turn off war like a light switch than there is evidence that aspirin reduces headache pain.”

    (The above is an excerpt from Conversations with God – Book 4: Awaken the Species, to be released from Rainbow Ridge Books in March.)

    PATRICK: …so I am really struggling to understand why you feel that atheists and agnostics are not actually closer to you, than, for example, the Pope and Billy Graham whom you have referred to in articles in the past, suggesting they shared your views on Hell (they don’t!).

    NEALE: I think the point I have been seeking to make about atheists and agnostics is that by holding no belief in God at all (or saying that they can’t know one way of the other), they may be one tiny step further from my own personal position than a person who may believe in God, but hold beliefs about God that are antithetical to my own. But truly, I place both groups in pretty much the same camp. I do not believe it is beneficial to our evolutionary advancement as a species if large numbers of us either (a) do not believe in God, or (b) believe in a God that is judgmental, condemning, and punishing. I believe that if every human being believed in God and believed that God was a benign and unconditionally loving Deity who would never judge us or punish us, our species would be move more rapidly in its evolutionary process. We would eliminate much of the “sacred” basis for our own judgments and punishments of others — and that alone would be a huge forward leap for humankind.

    PATRICK: I would suggest that atheists and agnostics are closer to your point of view than Catholics and Baptists.

    NEALE: That could be entirely possible.

    PATRICK: Many atheists and agnostics like to entertain the idea pantheism, which is quite similar to NAG except that it’s not a personal god. The word deity is not used. I think you have more in common with us, than with the legacy religions you are stealing converts from! I guess the problem is that atheists then steal them from you.

    NEALE: I know you’re saying this half-kiddingly, but of course I do not see myself as “stealing” people from any belief system, but simply offering an alternative that millions have apparently found to be more in line with their internal experience. Nor do I care about or have any concern over atheists “stealing” people who at one point found something of value in CWG. I’m not in a competition here. It is true that some religions may be, but it is clear to anyone who has read Conversations with God that it is not a religion, but simply a message that people may embrace or ignore as they see suitable.

    PATRICK: By the time they get to you, they’ve learned to think and question beliefs enough to get out from under the yoke of Yahweh or Allah, but not quite ready to take that full step that requires admitting that we do not know, and that this may be all we get. Even if atheists carve off some of your converts from time to time, because they’ve learned how to question their beliefs and to challenge authority, both very important tools for enlightenment, there could never be a First Church of the New Atheism, unless one is capable of herding cats!

    NEALE: Ha. You bring a wry smile to my lips, Patrick. And while I know that there are some things on which we may never agree, I have enjoyed my exchanges with you. This is what the forum that I have created here is all about. Off I go now to my other projects, and you to yours…


    • A true friend

      “NEALE: I think the assumption here is inaccurate. This “force or energy” is not, in my experience and understanding, “exceptionally weak.” Does that mean that with more people focusing it and using it with intention, it cannot be manifest to be even stronger?”

      So God created a system that she isn’t capable of controlling. How brilliant (I’m being sarcastic) !
      How can I put this in words so that I might be understood completely.
      God being all powerful can in the blink of a eye give me the tools I chose so that I might experience life the way I chose too.
      So how does God manifests that in the spacetime continuum? We wouldn’t be having this conversation if my soul had chosen my agenda rather than his whatever that might be.

      • NealeDonaldWalsch

        I don’t wish to get into a debate on this, where one of us feels “right” and therefore vindicated in their views, and the other feels “wrong” and defeated. It is perfectly okay with me if you hold a view other than my own.

        Here is my own: In my understanding, God did not create a system that God isn’t capable of controlling. God created a system that humanity has an opportunity of controlling, if we wish to, and as we grow into our true identity. In my understanding, it is a matter of evolution. As we evolve into greater and larger versions of ourselves, we become more and more efficient and effective at using the Process of Life to express ourselves and experience ourselves, both individually and collectively, as peace and joy and love.

        We can have these experiences regardless of exterior conditions and circumstances, and the more we choose to express ourselves in these ways, the more impact we have on the effect that exterior conditions and circumstances produce in us.

        Each time I read your entries, Friend, I get the impression that something has happened in, or with regard to, your life that you are angry about. I don’t know if this is true or not, but your string of comments seems to suggest it to me. I am sorry if something has occurred in your experience that causes you to feel that you are living out an agenda that your soul has not chosen, and that God has foisted upon you.

        My understanding is that God does not have a specific and individual Will that God manifests separately and specifically in the Space/Time Continuum for every sentient being in the universe. Rather, God is the Essential Essence and the Foundational Energy of which every sentient being and everything in the universe is made, and this energy is being used by those beings — collectively and freely, consciously and, in some cases, unconsciously — to produce individual interior experiences of collaboratively produced exterior events and conditions. Our desire and intention as souls (as I understand it) is to evolve into ever more complete experiences of Divinity.

        As noted earlier, it is my understanding that we can do this regardless of exterior circumstances — and, indeed, often do so as a result of them. In other words, we may experience life the way we choose to, no matter what our condition or circumstance. And often it is one’s condition or circumstance which creates the precise context within which a wonderful and even blissful experience of Divinity becomes possible.

        God, being all powerful, not only can, but has, in the blink of an eye, given all sentient beings the tools with which to experience any and all outward circumstances with inward peace, joy, and love. It is my understanding that this is what all spiritual masters of whom we have heard through the ages have done — whether we’re talking about Lao Tzu or Buddha, Moses or Jesus, Mother Mary or Mohammed, Beatrice of Nazareth, Catherine of Genoa, Hildegard of Bingen, Julian of Norwich, Teresa of Avila or any of the Great Masters, male or female, ancient or contemporary.

        Let me make it clear that I know that I could have misunderstood all of this. I could be wrong about this, from top to bottom. This is merely the awareness I have come to as a result of my conversations with God experience. That awareness has changed my life. But I can only speak from my experience.

        As I ponder these ideas I realize that there is little to be gained by being angry if someone else holds a different point of view, or by responding to other ideas in vitriolic tones. It is possible, I believe, to disagree agreeably. And I hope that, as a true friend, I will always demonstrate that.

        • A true friend

          “you to feel that you are living out an agenda that your soul has not chosen”
          You misunderstood. By reading CwG I suspect my soul has been dumb enough to chose this particular life but I chose a new life right in this one and a new agenda. In layman’s terms “burn the old contract and here is the new contract”.

          The God of your understanding and the God of my understanding are two completely different things.

          You see, they way I have perceived God from my early childhood was as a all loving, all capable and all knowing God.

          The God of my heart would never go around saying: Only inward experience is possible. If there ever was a restriction on the God of my understating that would be only on never being capable of inflicting misfortune or pain upon others. My God isn’t real because if she was this conversation wouldn’t even take place.
          She wouldn’t be limited by my belief about her.
          Let’s say that you have the absolute truth. God isn’t capable of doing 1 thing right. Of course right is a relative term and I find it amusing that CwG finds my choices “imperfect”. Here is a message for you God. Spare me your perfection and do your job. Heck I would do it all myself just give me the tools. You know that a cheetah has a different anatomy from a snail. They are different tools. Now give me my tools set in which I can paint my masterpiece.

          • Jethro

            Hi ATF, what tools are you missing that you believe any god can provide that you don’t already have?

          • A true friend

            Speed and everything that nullifies any possible drawbacks.

          • Jethro

            That sounds pretty useful actually, what would you do with those tools?

          • Mateia Andrei (A true friend)

            Read all the books in the world. Build stuff. Time travel. Discover new scientific theories. Draw billions of pictures. Those sort of stuff.

          • Gross Prophet

            God is not limited by your beliefs about him/her/it — you are limited by your beliefs about him/her/it, and your ‘working’ relationship, as it were.

          • A true friend

            If you had read my previous comments I have given God a workaround my beliefs about God or any other belief.

          • Gross Prophet

            What I am saying is that it is possible you are looking at the problem from the wrong angle…assigning blame where it doesn’t belong.

            As to your original complaint, could you have designed an entire universe, possibly even multi-verses, have it all self-correcting and self-sustaining, in perfect harmony (among itself), to be enjoyed and explored and experienced as we are, or become, able?

            Do you feel that a star going supernova and destroying thousands of other worlds, possibly with sentient life, would be a bad thing? It simply is. Were it not for some of those supernovae, we would have no gold for jewelry, or other metals for computers, etc.

            It could be that you getting everything you would like right now would be the equivalent of giving a child control of the nuclear launch codes. Just sayin’…

          • A true friend

            “It could be that you getting everything you would like right now would be the equivalent of giving a child control of the nuclear launch codes.” Let entertain the idea that I would destroy the entire. Do you think that God couldn’t reset the universe in perfect harmony again. It’s you who is imposing limits on God.

          • Gross Prophet

            Even though god could very well ‘reset’ everything, why do you believe that he/she/it should do that, just for li’l ole you, particularly when it would serve no useful purpose whatsoever?

            I can see that you simply wish to be argumentative. Not my intent, so I’ll just sign out for tonight.

          • A true friend

            Read CwG.
            “You mean the universe will contract?

            Y”es. Everything will, quite literally, “fall into place”! And you’ll have paradise again. No matter. Pure energy. In other words—Me!

            In the end, it’ll all come back to Me. That is the origin of your phrase: “It all comes down to this.”

            That means that we will no longer exist!

            Not in physical form. But you will always exist. You cannot not exist. You are that which Is.

            What will happen after the universe “collapses”?

            The whole process will start over again! There will be another so-called Big Bang, and another universe will be born.

            It will expand and contract. And then it will do the same thing all over again. And again. And again. Forever and ever. World without end.

            This is the breathing in and breathing out of God.”
            This other paragraph was about going without. So apparently God can’t build anything right
            “There is nothing you cannot be, there is nothing you cannot do. There is nothing you cannot have.

            That sounds like a pie-in-the-sky promise.

            What other kind of promise would you have God make? Would you believe Me if I promised you less?

            For thousands of years people have disbelieved the promises of God for the most extraordinary reason: they were too good to be true. So you have chosen a lesser promise—a lesser love. For the highest promise of God proceeds from the highest love. Yet you cannot conceive of a perfect love, and so a perfect promise is also inconceivable. As is a perfect person. Therefore you cannot believe even in your Self.

            Failing to believe in any of this means failure to believe in God. For belief in God produces belief in God’s greatest gift—unconditional love—and God’s greatest promise—unlimited potential.”
            “I can see that you simply wish to be argumentative” I think I have given you enough proof to see that this is not the case.

          • Gross Prophet

            Well, no, you haven’t, actually. You regurgitated a bunch of CwG material, but you seem to have interpreted it to mean something like a vending-machine, where you will instantaneously receive whatever you believe you should get. I’m guessing you never watched ‘Bruce, Almighty’.

            Life, in all its grand glory across the entire universe, is a lot more complex and intertwined than would render your vision possible. The fact that you keep resorting to such infantile assertions shows that, indeed, you simply wish to be argumentative. Be my guest, but don’t expect me to help you.

          • Mateia Andrei (A true friend)

            “I’m guessing you never watched ‘Bruce, Almighty’ “. Are you referring to the butterfly effect? Then excuse me if I haven’t expressed myself perfectly.
            This current life your refer to as your present reality was in fact selected by our inter-wind choices.
            When I was a child I was afraid of doing some things I desired because I was afraid. If I only send back in time a small glimpse of what fear has made me regret then perhaps my past self could change his future. Good then be against that. You think I’m being argumentative? You don’t understand me at all.

          • Gross Prophet

            Perhaps it is a language barrier. I am guessing that English is not your native language…? Bald words on a page are horribly bad at conveying nuance and inflection even in the best of circumstances. Add in a rough translation between different languages, and the true meaning will almost never make it through.

            I confess that I am unable to understand just what point(s) you are trying to make.

          • Mateia Andrei (A true friend)

            “I confess that I am unable to understand just what point(s) you are trying to make.”
            God is all loving, all knowing and all powerful so if what CwG is saying is correct (that we live in a multitude of universes where our souls can inhabit more than 1 body and we’re different versions of ourselves exist) then God in effect can merge me with a different version of myself.
            This could be viewed as time traveling since every moment in time is in actuality a different universe. So the version of me in the year 2016 could mind merge with a version of me in the year 2006 or 1996.

          • Gross Prophet

            But ‘god’ set up the universe (multi-verses, if you wish) to be a coherent, self-sustaining mechanism. How do you know the ramifications of what you propose? How do you know that, at this particular point in time, that what you seek would not do you more harm than good?

            Do you really mean to suggest that you can plumb the depths of the mind of ‘god’?

          • Mateia Andrei (A true friend)

            ” How do you know that, at this particular point in time, that what you seek would not do you more harm than good?”
            So be it.
            “Do you really mean to suggest that you can plumb the depths of the mind of ‘god’?”
            Neale has done it I don’t see why anybody else couldn’t.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Good answer! Note that he “claims” to have plumbed the mind of God, but as the bible says, “some doubted.” (Mat 28:17).

          • Spiritual_Annie

            It is a good answer as Neale points out we all have access to the same connection with Divinity that he did, in our own individual way.

          • Patrick Gannon

            A better choice of words than “points out” would be “claims” (and does so without objective evidence). As Neale himself now, and much more frequently, admits, Neale’s pointing it out, does not make it true.

            In a way, this is true though. Neale’s god almost certainly emerged from within his brain as a product of all his knowledge, memories, emotions, experiences, beliefs, etc. and not because some personal deity manipulated the particles in his brain in order for him to have his revelation. We know all the ways particles can be manipulated and there’s nothing left that we need to explain that requires a magical and supernatural explanation. If we define divinity as being our own knowledge, memories, emotions, experiences, and beliefs, then the statement becomes much more valid.

          • Spiritual_Annie

            I’m sorry, but I can’t pass this one up.

            “We know all the ways particles can be manipulated and there’s nothing left that we need to explain…”

            However can anyone, including any scientist, say this with absolute certainty? Science makes new discoveries all the time, in part because the technology for detection progresses all the time. We can’t know with the kind of certainty you’re using that everything has already been discovered regarding particles or anything else.

          • Patrick Gannon

            That’s a fair question, Annie. It’s actually a great question. I’ll do the best I can to explain it as I understand it with my limited knowledge.

            Indeed, we once thought that the sun went around the earth. It is extremely dangerous for a scientist to make such a prediction, but many of them are. They are confident that certain core theories will not be overturned. We’ve done the hard work, made the mistakes, corrected our theories, discovered objective evidence, made predictions that were found to be true, and so on. We know what it takes to affect a particle in rather excruciating detail, well beyond my understanding.

            Newton gave us classic physics, and this was superseded by Einstein’s relativity, which in turn was superseded by quantum field theory. The thing is – Newtonian theory didn’t change. It’s still accurate. It still works. Relativity emerged from it and took the explanation further. The same is true with the other emergent physics. Quantum theory didn’t do away with either Newtonian theory or relativity. These things are “core.” Particles exist at a level where the “core” science is solid, understood, unchanging, and always right. If changes were happening to particles that we could not explain, then there would be something to talk about – but we’re well past this, and that’s why mainstream science insists that paranormal stuff is simply not possible. Such things require intervention with particles in our PMR that can’t be explained – and that simply doesn’t happen. We see no such unexplained behavior. Particles always act in perfect accordance with the laws of nature in our PMR, according to scientists who specialize in particle physics.

            I’ll confess that I took this level of certainty from Sean Carroll [Sean Michael Carroll is a cosmologist and physics professor specializing in dark energy and general relativity. He is a research professor in the Department of Physics at the California Institute of Technology] in his book, “The Big Picture” which I am reading for a second time. Annie, I know from talking to you that you have enough science background to follow his book, and I think that you might enjoy it.

            Carroll explains quite convincingly that we do know all that can be known about how particles in our PMR operate. We will continue to discover and learn more about the things that particles emerge from, the sub-atomic and quantum fields from which they emerge, but at the particle level, the core principles, the core rules of nature are quite thoroughly known and understood, and Carroll is quite willing to go out on that limb and say that if there was any other way for particles to be affected, we would know about it by now. He says he (he implies that most scientists agree with him) is absolutely certain. Not knowing what he does, I’d still leave that window open a crack, but not much. We would have seen behavior on the part of particles that we could not explain, but we can explain everything that a particle can do and how it can be affected with extremely high confidence, and there is no evidence for unknown forces working on them.

            Explaining that Neale produced CwG as a result of his memories, knowledge, emotions, experiences, and beliefs is rather simple. Explaining that the particles in his brain were somehow affected by some force in order to fire the neurons that resulted in CwG is far, far more difficult to explain – indeed Carroll would say it’s not possible.

          • Spiritual_Annie

            OK, Patrick. I have followed your logic and I understand the concepts on which it is based.

            For your information, and not meant in any means to be bragging, I was a Mensa member with an eidetic memory, although decades of medications have taken their toll on those gifts.

            I took two years each of biology, chemistry and physics in High School, as well as an historical course on medicine, then a year of college biography that’s hardly worth mentioning as it was so basic I could have tested out of it, but it wasn’t allowed. All of it piqued my interest, as did my courses in psychology, abnormal psychology, sociology and philosophy.

            When I was able to work, I was quite well paid and enjoyed buying and reading books on all those subjects in addition to the sacred texts of most of the major religions, including the “banned” books, new finds, critical works, archaeological findings especially in Egypt and the Middle East, as well as self-help, psychology and science. Unfortunately, since I began living on a disability income in 2001, I could no longer afford to purchase books. I currently have no means to access the public library as I used to before moving to Florida and becoming homeless. Any current information I come across is from the Internet. I will Google Sean Michael Carroll and his book “The Big Picture” at a later time as there are other, more pressing matters I need to attend to.

            However, based on the information you have provided, I can see where you draw your conclusions. My interest has always been on energy more than it has been on particles, except as pertains to their origin and organization. If there are “strings” or other basic building blocks of matter beyond which there is nothing smaller, they must still have an origin. In your language, “string theory” (or whatever it turns out to be) will emerge from what we have learned about subquantum particles. What I propose is that there will be yet another emergent study that will conclude that the basic building blocks of matter emerge from a transformation of energy.

            I base this on what I have learned about relativity. Einstein’s famous equation that predicted the amount of energy that would be produced from matter is one of the most accepted tenets of his theories. As it is an equation that solves for energy through mathematical multiplication, which is transmutable (it doesn’t matter whether an equation is a x b =c or b x a =c), one can also use his equation to solve for how much energy it takes to create matter. The algebraic means to do so are also basic (I made it through Trigonometry).

            This says to me that the source of matter is energy, probably at the level of “strings” or whatever the basic building blocks of matter are found to be. In your way of thinking, the study of the basic building blocks will be emergent from what we have learned about subquantum particles (whatever science chooses to call that study), and the study of the energy that is transformed into the basic building blocks of matter will emerge from the study of those basic building blocks.

            As we do not yet have an understanding of the basic building blocks of matter, we cannot yet study or understand how they are created. I would suspect that light is involved as it is one of the few constants in our universe, but I have no proof of this. I do not think that “something comes from nothing,” so there must be a source for these basic building blocks of matter.

            It is this energy, which is creative, that I call Divinity. I consider the possibility that this energy is somehow intelligent because of its organization into the basic building blocks of matter. It is also this energy that I consider when I talk of the Oneness of all. Because of my own subjective experiences, I believe that it is this creative energy that I have encountered. I believe there are means by which this energy can be tapped into, leading to what I call “knowings” that have no other explanation.

            I know that this is not objective proof. However, because I hold this theory, I have no cognitive dissonance between what I know from science and what I know from my own subjective experiences.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Hi Annie. Nobody disputes that matter is energy, but what would be required to manifest paranormal effects is interaction with particles. In the case of something like Neale’s so-called conversation with God, something would have to manipulate the electrons and chemicals in his brain that are responsible for firing the neurons that lead to what comes out of his fingers and onto the paper. It doesn’t really matter what happens below the level of particles.

            This is much easier to see when one speaks of telekinesis, for example. Take Uri Geller and his old scam bending spoons. Those spoons are made of particles. The action being taken deals with those particles, not the components they emerged from. We know Uri faked it (and we know how), because there are only so many forces that can move particles and we’ve never seen anything that can’t be explained by the natural laws of our PMR.

            It doesn’t matter that a car is made of bolts and screws and wires and brackets and so forth. Details about the components that make up the car are moot when it comes to what the car itself can do and how it will behave when acted upon. Admittedly this is a very rough metaphor, but that’s the general idea.

            Psychic healing would be like telekinesis, since it requires the manipulation of particles. If this god-force people speak of existed and could really manipulate particles such that Neale could think his heart back into shape (or prevent it from ever going out of shape), then scientists would be actively working to fine-tune the process. However they know all of the ways our particles can be affected, and there are no mysteries we haven’t solved. There are no actions by particles that we can’t explain. You don’t heal a heart or cure cancer or grow back an amputated limb without manipulating particles. Oops – why is it that manipulating particles for faith-healing never, ever works for amputees? There isn’t a god or god-force ever, that has been able to do that, or maybe the gods just don’t like amputees! LOL

            Again to use a really lousy metaphor, would we call the nuts, bolts and brackets of a car “intelligent” because they can be organized into the basic building blocks of a car (the engine, transmission, etc.)? Probably not. Even if there is an intelligence at or below the ‘string’ level – if such is proven to exist, it doesn’t matter, because you can’t make a particle do something it’s never done before. If there is a god or a force or energy or whatever, it’s completely moot in our universe since it has no effect on the particles in our PMR, and that’s the level where we exist.

            I sometimes think that people who have “knowings” as you put it, are actually denigrating themselves by assigning this ability to some imaginary force outside themselves. I think some people are more empathetic, and aware, intuitive, and better able to read the feelings and emotions of others, and these people are simply using their own brains to have these “knowings” as you put it. I think people like Mewabe, who claim to do this, should (quietly and privately) take credit for their own abilities, rather than assign them to some external force that is not necessary to explain why they are better than many other people in this regard.

            Are you still in FL? What part? I’m a former Florida boy. I was born there, but was a military brat and left when young. When I returned, I went to college then lived on the east and west coasts till being transferred to VA. I still have sisters and parents down there. I go to the beach at St. Augustine every year with a camper. That’s my annual spiritual experience!

          • Spiritual_Annie

            Hey, Patrick. I understand that it is thought with a high degree of certainty that we (or, at least scientists) know all of the forces that can affect particles. I have yet to do my Internet research, but will posit that this is true with one caveat. I have yet to find an explanation for the quantum effect whereby quantum particles that used to belong to the same atom change to match instantaneously if one of their charges is changed, even though they may be separated by miles. It is the basis for those who look to create quantum computers. And I freely admit that I don’t have any references, nor have I studied the matter in depth.

            I do have a problem with your example as there is an intelligence that puts the nuts and bolts together to form a transmission or engine or carburetor (or whatever). It’s the human being who does the assembling. The nuts and bolts don’t arrange themselves. (The cars don’t drive themselves, either.) I get the gist of what you’re saying, though.

            I’m not well versed on telekinesis, either. I do believe that healing can be achieved through intention and prayer, if only through the placebo effect. I think there’s more there to learn, though.

            I’m not sure I can agree that the only energies or forces that aren’t moot are those that affect particles, though.

            What do you make of the fMRI’s that are different when monks are thinking compared to when they are meditating, or nuns who are thinking compared to when they are praying? Does science understand the forces at work that change the firing of different neurons in different states of mind (or being, as I would say)?

            For that matter, have you ever felt the difference in the energy coming from a person who is angry and one who is peaceful? Do scientists understand those energies completely? They certainly have an affect on any person they come into contact with, even without speaking. Are those also not energies and forces important in our PMR, as you call it?

            I also understand that there are probably instances where people have sensitivities or skills of which they are unaware that leads to information they can’t explain. That doesn’t, however, explain my long distance experiences of knowing my mother had passed when I didn’t know she was critically ill, or when my sister was rear-ended three times in a short period, or when I knew my grandmother was sick. I had knowledge of what happened in my mother’s hospital room that no one had told me but which I confirmed from someone present. I had knowledge of the streets my sister was on when she was hit each time, each one a different street and one nowhere near her home or work. With my grandmother, there was no specific information, but it was found she was housebound and eating spoiled food. How do you explain those kinds of knowings?

            I started out in St. Pete, but have been all over Pinellas County while homeless (though I couldn’t actually see it). Christie, my best friend who passed, was born and raised in Clearwater (and absolutely hated that Scientologists took it over). I’m near Clearwater in the small city of Largo, literally minutes from the causeway and not far from Indian Rocks Beach. Once I get my daily living and medical needs taken care of (I’m fairly certain there’s a surgery in my near future), I want to go to the beach, now that I finally have glasses and can appreciate it. When I was much younger, I lived in northern California for about five years, near the cliffs and redwoods. Nature does much for me on many levels.

            I have family here in Florida, too, but they don’t even know I’m here because I’ve been shunned by all but one sibling for breaking the silence and telling the family secrets. My sister lives somewhere on the other coast of Florida, somewhere near Orlando, as do her adult children and their families. Christie was a bit prejudiced about living on the Gulf coast rather than “that other coast.” I’ve so recently gotten my glasses (last week) that I haven’t yet looked at a map to figure out where I’ve been, much less where anywhere else is.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Annie, another good question, which Sean Carroll answers far more elegantly than I can. I can perfectly understand the science when I’m listening to it, but confess I lack the full knowledge necessary to adequately relate it in terms most people can understand. That’s part of what I do for a living – make technical things understandable to people who make decisions based on what the technology can do for them. I can do a good job of that with the technology I understand, but I don’t pretend to understand quantum mechanics.

            Essentially the answer is that quantum mechanics itself predicts that if there were other forces that existed that could affect particles, we would know it. That flighting idea some years back, that a “consciousness” was somehow needed to ‘collapse the wave function’ has been discarded by almost all scientists, in favor of what is called the ‘many worlds’ hypothesis.

            Ugh… I’ve sat here and started, deleted, started and deleted several attempts to explain this as I understand it, and I can’t understand my own explanation. I’m going to have to read 3 chapters a few more times and then try again. Basically, this weird stuff, like entanglement, happens because we’re all part of a single wave function – the whole universe, and when we observe a small part of it, we can get probabilities that are accurate to amazing degrees of accuracy for particular events, but because we’re viewing only a tiny part of the entire wave function, we’re not seeing the whole thing, and how the part of the wave function we are viewing is associated with the entire thing – and that’s essentially where this entanglement process comes in (as I barely understand it).

            I knew the car was not the best analogy, but it was the best I could come up with at the time. Even if the bolts and nuts were created by an intelligent force, it doesn’t matter to the car itself. The car is going to behave as cars behave, and that’s just all there is to it. What it emerged from is important in understanding the full picture of the car – but what it is capable of doing as a car can be known and documented, and there are no unknown forces that can cause it to do something a car wouldn’t or couldn’t do.

            Everything we do is based on particles. Whether it’s trying to bend spoons, or manipulating electrons and neurons in our brain so that we hear voices in our head – it’s all particles. It doesn’t matter what the particles emerged from. We know what particles can and can’t do – and one thing they can’t do is be influenced by forces without us knowing about them – or at least that these forces exist – and apparently quantum field theory tells us with amazing predictive accuracy, that they don’t or we would have found them by now.

            Sure we’re influenced by the energy put off by others, because it is manifest in voice, emotions, body language, facial expressions, etc. and we react to that. We’re observing what the anger-energy, or whatever, does to them, and reacting based on how that affects us emotionally.

            Your questions are telling me I need to read some more and try to get a better handle on how to explain this stuff better. I’ve been hearing the same thing in different ways from other sources, but Carroll is the first to put it all in terms that are starting to make sense to me, or maybe I’ve heard it enough that it’s finally starting to sink in a little, and hopefully putting me on a path to being able to better explain it to others. I think a big problem in our society is information overload and we stop putting in the effort to really learn something in favor of short sound-bites that don’t really teach us anything. I think if intelligent people really understood the “state of the art” in science today, they would be more inclined to question the old beliefs. Carroll does a good job of bringing us up to date.

            I’m sorry to hear of all your difficulties and hope things improve this next year. I know the general area where you are very well. I lived in Indian Rocks Beach, for over a decade if my memory is right. This would have been back in the 80s. I don’t recall the Scientologists being a big issue then. I was part owner in a small boat and used to go through Clearwater pass all the time. My friend and I would stop on the intercoastal for bait and beer, head out through the pass and fish in the Gulf for a while, circle back to the beach and pick up our wives to go water skiing or whatever they wanted, then drop them off on the beach, and back out for more fishing, then back through the pass, trailer the boat home, and pass out from exhaustion, after some fresh grouper! Ah, how youth is wasted on the young. One of my favorite memories is of a restaurant that used to deliver seafood on the beach: U-peel shrimp, grouper fingers, fried fish, hush puppies, oh yeah…

            Well, Merry Christmas. I’ve enjoyed this conversation. Maybe we’re getting better at this…

          • Spiritual_Annie

            Patrick, I think we are communicating better because we are both making an attempt to understand–each other, our differing viewpoints and “how it all works.” I much prefer it this way.

            One of the first things I thought of when you mentioned that the universe is all a wave while what we have been discussing is particles, was light. As you surely know, light can appear as a wave or as particles. It makes me wonder if the entire universe as we know it consists (on some level) of only light. Maybe that ties in with the hologram theory. Or maybe “strings” consist of light, or the quantum and subquantum particles that make up light. But that’s just where my mind went. It wanders and wonders at times.

            I think I understand what you’re saying about us only seeing a part of the whole as a way to explain entanglement. That also got me thinking about my long-distance “knowings.” It sounds to me as if I may be “tapping into” a different part of that “wave” when I know about something that’s happening thousands of miles away. That would mean that the “wave” must at least carry information. Something to ponder. I vaguely remember a theory that the only thing that cannot pass through a black hole is information, but that was a while back. If the “wave” does carry information, it could explain what people call the Akashik Records, which are said to contain all of the information of existence, past, present and future. Something else to ponder.

            I still need to do my internet search on Sean Carroll. I think I may have to read his works because my mind just can’t wrap itself around the idea that what happens at the most basic of levels, be that the matter of “strings” or energy, doesn’t affect us, or that there aren’t forces that could act on those basic building blocks that we’re as yet unaware that might also affect us.

            When I was talking about the energies of emotion, I meant those that aren’t given off by visual cues. Maybe a better example would be the pets we have and our relationship with them. I inherited my best friend’s dog, but I watched them together for a year. Biscuit always knew if Christie had actually left the abandoned building we were in, or if she were farther away. The building was large enough he couldn’t have heard her if she were at the other end. And he would start reacting to her returning from somewhere when she was about a block away. I feel people’s energies, too, even if they don’t match the visual cues that are being shown. This is most obvious in a therapist or doctor’s office, people who are trained to hide those cues. It’s like gays and lesbians having what they call “gaydar.” I can feel if someone is a perpetrator of sexual or physical assault just by their energy. I knew when my father was in town for a visit and when he left, without being told.

            I’m sorry… this is as far as I got when I heard the news that Carrie Fisher passed over. 1977 was a big year for me. Rebellion, state swim meet, high school graduation, my last summer as a lifeguard, going away to college… Star Wars was a part of it. I don’t even know how many times I saw it.

            Love and Blessings Always,

          • Patrick Gannon

            I still have much to learn as well. I’m not sure that light is both a wave and a particle or if it just acts like a wave. Once measured, it is forevermore a particle; it’s just that till it’s measured, it could be in any of a gazillion different places, though the quantum field theory tells us with amazing accuracy where it will most probably be. I’m intrigued by your idea that one could somehow “tap” into another part of the universal wave that makes up our universe, but we’re still talking about affecting the particles in your brain in order to have you “think” of something that is happening elsewhere – and there doesn’t seem to be any way for that to be happening without us knowing about it.

            By the way, Carroll is not putting forth any new theories with his book. He is reporting on the “state of the science” so to speak, bringing us up to date on the basic physical and biological sciences, as well as exploring consciousness and the brain. He is reporting the views of mainstream science based on our state of knowledge, but isn’t proposing anything new per se. I’ve read similar books by Michio Kaku, for example, but Carroll has done the best job of helping me to understand where quantum mechanics fits and what it tells us about the other aspects of physics. I found it very interesting that the thing many New Agers relied on (quantum woo) turns out to be the thing that predicts that they are wrong.

            I think there are material explanations for the things you’ve mentioned. I have thoughts from time to time of my parents dying since they are both old and in poor shape. The thing is, I’ll remember it when one of them dies right after I have such a thought, and won’t remember all the other times I had such thoughts, but when no death occurred.

            We also know that we can inadvertently manufacture memories that never really happened. My sister is pretty good at this, though you would never convince her that she has manufactured some of her memories.

            Dogs have senses that are very different from ours. A dog would easily be able to tell if another dog was gone, by virtue of the scent missing. They may have better ears and pick up toenail clicks on the sidewalk, or something like that. They also have very good internal clocks and would know when it’s about time for a regular visitor. We have to search out the most likely explanation based on our material universe. We know that by definition, miracles or psi effects rarely (if ever) occur, and therefore are the least likely possibility and should be left for last when all other possibilities have been exhausted, and that still doesn’t prove the miracle or psi effect. There could still be something we haven’t uncovered to explain the event.

          • Spiritual_Annie

            Patrick, I think we are communicating better because we are both making an attempt to understand–each other, our differing viewpoints and “how it all works.” I much prefer it this way.

            One of the first things I thought of when you mentioned that the universe is all a wave while what we have been discussing is particles, was light. As you surely know, light can appear as a wave or as particles. It makes me wonder if the entire universe as we know it consists (on some level) of only light. Maybe that ties in with the hologram theory. Or maybe “strings” consist of light, or the quantum and subquantum particles that make up light. But that’s just where my mind went. It wanders and wonders at times.

            I think I understand what you’re saying about us only seeing a part of the whole as a way to explain entanglement. That also got me thinking about my long-distance “knowings.” It sounds to me as if I may be “tapping into” a different part of that “wave” when I know about something that’s happening thousands of miles away. That would mean that the “wave” must at least carry information. Something to ponder. I vaguely remember a theory that the only thing that cannot pass through a black hole is information, but that was a while back. If the “wave” does carry information, it could explain what people call the Akashik Records, which are said to contain all of the information of existence, past, present and future. Something else to ponder.

            I still need to do my internet search on Sean Carroll. I think I may have to read his works because my mind just can’t wrap itself around the idea that what happens at the most basic of levels, be that the matter of “strings” or energy, doesn’t affect us, or that there aren’t forces that could act on those basic building blocks that we’re as yet unaware that might also affect us.

            When I was talking about the energies of emotion, I meant those that aren’t given off by visual cues. Maybe a better example would be the pets we have and our relationship with them. I inherited my best friend’s dog, but I watched them together for a year. Biscuit always knew if Christie had actually left the abandoned building we were in, or if she were farther away. The building was large enough he couldn’t have heard her if she were at the other end. And he would start reacting to her returning from somewhere when she was about a block away. I feel people’s energies, too, even if they don’t match the visual cues that are being shown. This is most obvious in a therapist or doctor’s office, people who are trained to hide those cues. It’s like gays and lesbians having what they call “gaydar.” I can feel if someone is a perpetrator of sexual or physical assault just by their energy. I knew when my father was in town for a visit and when he left, without being told.

            I’m sorry… this is as far as I got when I heard the news that Carrie Fisher passed over. 1977 was a big year for me. Rebellion, state swim meet, high school graduation, my last summer as a lifeguard, going away to college… Star Wars was a part of it. I don’t even know how many times I saw it. Now I can’t concentrate.

            Love and Blessings Always,

          • Patrick Gannon

            Interestingly, most scientists today say that the evidence indicates a big freeze, rather than a big crunch. They say that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate and there is nothing to indicate that this will ever stop.

            The thing is, back in the mid-90s when Neale was writing his first book, the big crunch was the favored point of view, but science is moving rapidly. “Starting in 1998, observations of supernovas in distant galaxies have been interpreted as consistent with a universe whose expansion is accelerating.” (Wikipedia) The former viewpoint has fallen out of favor, and if Neale were writing his book today, perhaps God would have a more updated viewpoint???

          • Mateia Andrei (A true friend)

            Correct me if I’m wrong but the big freeze will happen when the Hydrogen will fully burn out? Isn’t that right?

          • Patrick Gannon

            You might be referring to the death of the sun, which will turn into a Red Giant when the hydrogen runs out. The universe will go into a big freeze as everything continues to move further and further away from everything else until the whole universe is a widely distributed cloud of vaporous particles.

            “stars are expected to form normally for (1–100 trillion) years, but eventually the supply of gas needed for star formation will be exhausted. As existing stars run out of fuel and cease to shine, the universe will slowly and inexorably grow darker. Eventually black holes will dominate the universe, which themselves will disappear over time as they emit Hawking radiation.”

          • A true friend

            One more thing to add. If this is how God wants to play she can keep whatever she used to make my free will I don’t need to exist.

    • Patrick Gannon

      Neale, I thank you for that in-depth response. I would love to respond to it inline as you have done, but most of the points both of us have made, have been made before.

      If I understand what you mean about atheism and agnosticism being as damaging and non-beneficial, as those who hold belief in a god of wrath and fear, then I still have to question why you waste time questioning atheists and agnostics, who represent 14% of the world’s population, when the bulk of the remaining humans believe in one or more wrathful, vengeful gods, and who do not share many of your concerns for the personal rights and liberties of all humans, as well as concern over the state of our planet earth. At least they are not actively working against many of the issues you would like to see mankind address.

      As for the power of this universal consciousness you believe in, I too would like to see it tested on a large scale. I’ve mentioned that in this blog on more than one occasion, suggesting you get together with your New Age buddies and come up with a video that puts people into a meditative state, and then at a given time, get tens, hundreds of thousands or even millions of people to all focus on changing a random number generator or stopping a clock. If this could be made to happen, then we would have something real to talk about. When it comes to your buddy John Hagelin, it must be noted that he has not convinced his peers that his theories hold any weight: “Robert L. Park, research professor and former chair of the Physics Department at the University of Maryland, called the study a “clinic in data distortion”.[35]
      In 1994 a science satire magazine, Annals of Improbable Research, “awarded” Hagelin the Ig Nobel Prize for Peace, for the 1993 project.[36]” Wikipedia. However, the scientific process exists so that Hagelin can publish his papers, seek peer-review and attempt to provide evidence to support his assertions. If his work has value, we’ll know it in time. I’m more than happy to be patient and see what happens rather than believe things for which we have disputed evidence. He needs more evidence, taken with great care, so as to gain acceptance as is inevitable if the scientific process yields results that change our view of how the world works. When you fall off a boat, you swim to the life buoy, not to the straw! Guys like Dean Radin have been working on this for decades. The results of their experiments are always “in the noise” within the realm of statistical probability. They are unconvincing, and certainly not compelling, otherwise there would be greater acceptance in the scientific community.

      To clear up a possible misconception, you said you rejected the idea that “sharing the ideas found in CWG is somehow preying on the “ignorance of sheeple.” I love many of the ideas in CwG, and don’t mean to insinuate that, although I stopped being a sheeple when I realized that after some number of books, you were saying the same thing over and over in slightly different ways – which to me is similar to the indoctrination we both received as young Catholics. Repetition is powerful. Neurologists tell us that when neurons fire, the brain is wired. You are wiring people’s brains in this fashion.

      What is preying on the ignorance of the sheeple, for example, is pretending to understand quantum mechanics and suggesting, without support from the scientific community who developed the theory in the first place, that quantum theory somehow proves universal consciousness. That is indeed leveraging the ignorance of the sheeple. Deepak had his lunch handed to him on this issue, and as best I can tell, he doesn’t dabble in quantum woo like he used to. It’s a New Age version of the “god of the gaps” argument. We don’t understand it, so god must be responsible.

      Your comparison of consciousness to the suns rays is clever, but we have all sorts of evidence for the existence of the sun’s rays. We can explain this light in quite some detail. We know how it is generated, how fast it travels and what happens when it gets where it’s going. We know none of that with regard to universal consciousness. It’s an apples and oranges comparison. It’s nice that you believe that there could be a multiplier for this force if it exists, but first you have to prove it exists. I’ve read of a couple large scale prayer tests – all failed. If the force exists, I reiterate that it must be very weak; otherwise, like photons, we would know it exists through observation and measurement.

      You’ve said that you don’t think atheists and agnostics are “bad” for society or mankind, but, we must remember that even though you walked the words back a little bit, you still said they were damaging and non-beneficial. I can’t look at the long lists of atheists and agnostics, or the scientists trying to solve physical matter reality problems are somehow failing to advance mankind because they don’t believe in this force for which we have no objective evidence. The people who are raising our attention to the plight of our warming world, are largely atheist and agnostic scientists.

      I’ll note that in recent months you have been much more consistent in pointing out that people don’t need to believe you or the CwG material. You write authoritatively and usually in absolute terms, not using many caveats or provisos, so it is good that you are now ending your articles, or inserting in the body, the reminder that one need not believe what you have said. It certainly does provide a different twist on a faith doctrine that is in most other ways, very religious as far as I’m concerned.

      Obviously you aren’t going to support my hypothesis that holding unsupported beliefs might actually be bad for us, creating internal cognitive conflict, since you believe that the failure to hold these unsupported beliefs, holds back our advancement. We will have to disagree on this primary point – but how do you explain the hostility I experience here and in other forums when unsupported beliefs are questioned? Where does that hostility come from? Why is it that those who participate here, who seem to have the most open minds (from my perspective), are the ones who are the least hostile?

  • Spiritual_Annie

    This may come out a little convoluted, but some of it is from my earliest memories, which can be difficult to form into words. It’s also about some of the most impactful experiences I’ve had, which are also hard to find language for. Please bear with me as I try.

    I have always been sensitive to energies, I think even in the womb. I know for certain I was sensitive by the age of two when I began reacting to my father abusing my sisters while I was in the room, even though they made no sound (one of his common demands/threats). I started standing in my crib, shaking it for all it was worth until he’d stop. Living with a sadistic narcissist honed those abilities, but it wasn’t just my family or people I felt energy from. It was everywhere.

    I can hold a rock, or stand in the wind, or float in the water, or sense a nearby animal, or pass by a tree and feel the energy of them all. It was obvious to me that energy is the foundation of existence because it is the one thing I could feel from everything, everywhere. I’m not sure I ever questioned it, though I questioned many other things.

    In “Sunday school,” I questioned why my devoutly Jewish friends who loved the same God were condemned to eternal damnation. I questioned why I was told not to make friends with the new girl at school, and when I was told it was because she was black, I questioned why that mattered. I became the one on the playground who would approach and befriend the ones others ignored or dismissed.

    My science teachers didn’t appreciate my questions any more than the nuns had. For me, I saw that all things physical are structures made from atoms, but I focused on the movement and empty space within atoms rather than the molecules they formed. I wanted to understand the energy that made electrons both spin and rotate around the nucleus. I wanted to know if it truly was empty space, or if it contained energy that held the whole thing together. I wanted to know the same thing about outer space.

    For me, everything in existence, seen and unseen, starts first with energy. Being raised Catholic, I related this foundational energy to the “ineffable Light” that pre-existed creation. As that “ineffable Light” was all that there was, then everything was connected to, part of, and created by it, and therefore all things are connected.

    Over the years, I have only become more certain of those thoughts and feelings. I have meditated and become one with the floor I sat on and the wall I leaned against. I have had more than one near death experience where I have come to know that all is connected. I have long expressed it in the only language I knew: I see God everywhere, in everything. As my definition of Divinity developed into that of a creative energy that exists everywhere and in everything, I now consider all of existence, whether known or unknown, proven or unproven or unprovable, as Divine.

    On a more practical note, I also see more commonalities in humans than I see differences. Every human being faces challenges that cause some form of suffering. Every human being strives to meet basic survival needs like shelter, food, water, connection with others, and love. We all feel gratitude when someone reaches out to us with compassion and understanding. We all feel grief when someone we love is no longer present in our lives.

    It’s the commonalities I choose to focus on, rather than the differences. I do this not just with human beings, but with animals and plants and earth and water and air and fire and the “empty” space in atoms and in the cosmos. I agree with mewabe when he states it as “All is One” as all things are created by the same One. It is part of us, and we are part of it. There is no separation anywhere, except those we human beings devise and decide.

    For me to even try to wrap my brain around how it is we see each other as so different that we believe we are separate takes me going outside of my own experiences and walking in “the other’s” shoes. It’s a difficult thing to do, but for me it creates more compassion when I try to understand those who believe they are different from me. Our experiences are different, to be sure, but only in the details. The underlying emotions–our thought energies, if you will–are the same. And understanding another leads me only to more love and compassion because, regardless of the experiment of being “the other,” I still feel the commonalities.

    One of the best meditation exercises I’ve found for myself is about feeling unconditional love and compassion. First, on centering, I feel it for myself. This was a very difficult step for me, and took considerable practice as my “critical thinker” often wanted to get in the way. Once I could feel unconditional love and compassion for myself, I expanded it to include my inner circle and my family. In my particular family, that was another difficult step as my father was not only abusive but used the rule of “divide and conquer” so we all held resentments against each other and regarded some even as enemies. Once I was able to do this, I expanded it to include my neighborhood, including those I don’t personally know and everything that existed within it. Then I expanded it to my city, then my state, then my country, then my continenet, then the world, then the universe, then all of creation. The sheer joy of it still brings me to tears every time.

    It’s a dangerous thing to do, though–to consider loving all–because so many of us are suffering. Every time Neale mentions the number of children starving, or I see the news about the bombing of Aleppo, or I meet homeless people on the street, it causes me emotional pain. It’s both the price I pay and what motivates most of my interactions with others–love tinged with pain.

    Oneness makes us responsible for all. In the connection, we become aware of the suffering of “all our relatives,” as Native Americans put it. It’s an awesome responsibility to see the suffering, and an awe-filling experience to help relieve it, even if it’s through the simple act of listening to another or picking up a piece of trash on the side of the road or re-burying a lizard egg while weeding the garden or caring for the dog left behind when a beloved friend passes over. And I’ve learned that what we call death doesn’t sever the connection any more than miles do.

    Those are the best words that I can find to express my own thoughts and feelings about the Oneness that we are.

    Love and Blessings Always,

    • NealeDonaldWalsch

      And those are wonderful words, indeed, Annie. Thank you for sharing them. I am nurtured by them, and inspired.

      Lovingly, Neale.

    • Gross Prophet

      Outstanding! Thank you for taking the time to arrange and express those thoughts.

  • I would be interested in hearing about anyones experience who feels oneness with the world & interconnectedness with it on a ongoing basis.

    I understand that some, perhaps many, have experienced oneness for short periods of time, maybe a short flash of it & a spontaneous moment or so, maybe even for a few days or more.

    Yet is there anyone walking around who has connected to this Life Energy & feels it all the time, or most of the time?

    If such people are among us, then, I think they would be those who could shed light on how they view & move in the world having and experiencing such interconnectedness.

    • mewabe

      Although it may sound presumptuous, I did have such an experience twice in my life. I didn’t look for it, I simply followed my inner guidance and sought a truer way of being than what is commonly experience in ordinary life,

      The first was when I was 16 years old. It lasted many years but was eventually interrupted by a stint in the military (not my choice, drafted, and locked up for deserting to be with my girlfriend, and then locked up again for deserting again just for the principle of it).

      The second was in 2004, and has lasted to this day, but not with the same intensity.

      I am aiming for a third one in a couple of years, after I take care of some practical issues.

      Everyone is different and I know that my experiences are unique, because I have a different mindset than most (not better or worse, just different). So will relate my experience very succinctly as no one will be able to relate to it here.

      For me, things are easy and simple. The energy of which you speak is, in my experience, most powerfully felt in the natural world. The key, again for me not anyone else here, is to connect with this energy or “magnetism”, which carries within itself an uncommon sort of knowledge (spiritual “revelations”), within the untamed, untouched natural world. And what this first requires is a new understanding of time, not linear but cyclical time, and let time be a partner in this endeavor rather than an adversary. In other words, infinite patience, stillness!

      What this also require is to not chase after any experience, but empty oneself so to speak, so as to let whatever is there fill you up like a a sponge. This takes days, weeks, months spent in close contact with the ground, the air, with natural elements.

      This is not a conceptual process. It requires no ideas, so it can scarcely be understood by those who think the world is a concept. It only require your actual presence, in the infinity of here and the eternity of now.

      My second experience was different, and came like a thunderstorm, followed by many months of actual bliss, and perceiving a golden light in everything and around everything, as well as a feeling of physical lightness, as if I was weightless..

      The following short text was written when I was 18 after my first experience of oneness with all life, and it kind of portrays some of its aspects and what I wrote above:

      As the earth absorbs the rain
      the energies of the sun, of the storms
      absorb these foods

      Be transformed by the seasons
      as the earth changes
      reacquaint yourself with time

      Stand still in heart and mind
      and draw power from the soil itself
      like a tree, rooted in mystery

      (I wish to retain the copyright on this text though, as it will be part of a book)

      • Thank you Mewabe for sharing this. I wondered if you’d respond & I’m glad you did. You certainly experienced this much longer than many & it appears you still do only in a quieter sense.

        I think most people feel better in nature. I’m currently more home bound simply because of winter snow & very cold temps. I do live in an area that has a lot of trees & very close to lake Michigan, which seems more like an ocean such is its size.

        My own 3 day inner peace experience as I’ve mentioned before came spontaneously after walking out of a movie. I hope to live in that space daily asap. Yet it’s not so much a requirement but a preference & desire. A state of being.

        “I am peace, I am enlightened” are my frequent mantras along with working & playing toward chronic wellbeingness. I do know that I experience more peace in artistic & orderly environments. It’s not required but it’s highly desired & sometimes I think it might be a requirement, but at any rate, I move to love & be at peace where ever I’m at & let that move me no matter how imperfect it’s carried out. Practice makes possible that which one desire.

        • mewabe

          Artists may have an advantage in such pursuit, as we tend to have a different thinking process, one that is not “pedestrian” but inspired, that can jump from A to Z and back to E without passing through each successful letter in perfect logical succession, and still, we find our way effortlessly.

          I hope you find what you are looking for…it is, of course, already within you, as you know, you simply have to awaken to your true nature, and then, in the words of a Chinese Zen master, “Nothing is left to you at this moment but to have a good laugh!”

          As James Broughton put it:
          “This is It
          and I am It
          and You are It
          and so is That
          and He is It
          and She is It
          and It is It
          and That is That.”

          • Creativity has it’s advantages for sure!

          • mewabe

            The only good advice I may be able to give anyone would be this: no matter which spiritual path you choose, follow you intuition, your instinct, faithfully. Do not doubt yourself, do not even let what would seem to you to be reasonable stop you, and certainly do not let other’s conditioned thoughts and learnt behaviors stop you either. The “light” is within you, follow it “blindly”.

            Inner spiritual power has nothing whatsoever to do with what or how the world thinks or behave…it is so far beyond it that it can’t be compared. Next to it the world we know is merely a shadow. Make this inner light your beacon, and never doubt it. This light is your “genius”, literally.

          • Yes Mewabe very good advice indeed! 🙂

          • mewabe

            Thank you Marko 🙂

    • Jethro

      Well my friend, that’s not me. But I’ve had the feeling to the best of my understanding. What it changed was how I viewed all life, not just humans or the organic. I’m talking about everything, Neale mentioned in his book not damaging a rock unless it would serve the grandest, greatest thought. I don’t run around protecting rocks, but I find myself in service when I can be. I complain about it too. So no not an ongoing basis. But I’m trying. It feels wonderful quite honestly. But no perfection.

      • Thank you, I wonder if everything we do “has” to serve our grandest thought? That seems too much pressure for me. However, being of service is certainly a grand call of many a spiritual person.

        • Jethro

          Not everything I do has anything to do with the grandest idea I have. As I’m a bad comedian and a bit of a dork, a lot of my actions are quite frivolous, life should not be so serious that we eliminate giving others the ability to laugh at us. When we are in service on the other hand, we should hold the highest respect, give the best of who we are and what we may offer. Just a little extra time and an ear for the elderly, ask that person at the side of the road if they need help, respect another persons beliefs however crazy they sound. I don’t believe in perfection, but moving towards it never hurt. Maybe these little actions and a few well placed words will raise awareness to a need for kindness, to humanity, and call a little attention to how much trouble our earth is in. The grandest thought doesn’t seem like too much pressure after all really. Agreed though, not ALL the time.

        • Jethro

          Hi Marko, I was setting here thinking about the question, I wonder if everything we do “has” to serve our grandest thought? the answer is yes. Truth is we don’t always give things our best thought if we don’t find something important enough. With that said, we still give it the best thought we were willing to give. I can’t say I ever do anything based on my worst thought, I may decide later that I could’ve made a better choice, but I always give my grandest thought based on the information I have at the time. Thank you for reminding me.

  • Patrick Gannon

    Why does this ONEness have to be a universal consciousness for which we have no compelling evidence? Why can’t we be excited about the fact that all of us are made of, and part of, the cosmos? We are all made of stardust. We all share biological and chemical ties with each other. All of us experience ONEness by being part of the human genome. All of us shares DNA with every other living thing, and of course every other human. There are many scientists who try to excite us about this ONEness that is real, and tangible – guys like Neil DeGrasse Tyson, for example.

    I like the idea of ONEness, but why can’t we stick to what we know truly unifies us? There was a time, when we had full ONEness of beliefs in the west. There was the one and only Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church and that was it. Perfect ONEness of belief. How did that work out?

    • Spiritual_Annie

      I have a question. It’s not being asked facetiously, or sarcastically, or with any other emotion or hidden agenda. I’m simply curious.

      It sounds like your idea of Oneness involves mostly human beings, although you mention a connection through DNA with every other living thing. But all things are also connected through compounds consisting of the same elements of the periodic table. All those elements consist of atoms made up of the same particles, like electrons, protons and neutrons. Those atomic particles are made of the same subatomic and quantum and subquantum particles.

      Do you not feel or acknowledge that there is a connection, or a Oneness, with those things we share with other parts of what you call our PMR, or is it only to the point of the human genome and DNA?

      • Patrick Gannon

        I’m happy to clarify, Annie. When I said, “We are all made of stardust.,” that was intended to illustrate a ONEness with everything. We’re all made of the same stuff, exactly as you pointed out. Those strings(?), quarks, protons, atoms, chemicals, molecules, each of which is an emergent property of the other, are what our genome is made of. Yes, I see us as connected to everything.

        I even hold out the thin possibility – a very small possibility – that consciousness connects us, but I certainly don’t believe this, given the lack of objective evidence that consciousness can survive the death of a brain. One day we may be able to transplant consciousness to a machine, but that consciousness will still be an emergent property of the brain, just as atoms emerge from subatomic particles, molecules emerge from atoms, cells emerge from molecules, and so on up the line.

    • Jethro

      Patrick, this is where we started I think,

      “There was a time, when we had full ONEness of beliefs in the west. There was the one and only Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church and that was it. Perfect ONEness of belief. How did that work out?”

      When it was working… it worked. I think that’s the point. I said a while back that I would like the old small town ways to come back. It was common even in the big cities That neighbors even helped raise each others kids. I’ll accept anything anyone wants to believe without arguement (not that I’ll argue anyway) if it would bring back the caring and kindness we all (anyone over 40-50) use to see. These days we’ve taken everything to the extreme, even independence. I’ll pray to a brick and claim it was the key to evolution, if it would help people accept each other again and calm down the anger towards one another, and ultimately care for each other…. again. I know it wasn’t perfect but it was better.

      • Patrick Gannon

        When it was working, the west – Europe – was going through the Dark Ages. The clergy were the only ones allowed to read the bible and the sheeple were dependent on what they were told. The clergy ripped the sheeple off and worked with the ruling class to keep them as peasants. The Church sold indulgences that you had to buy if you wanted your loved ones to get to heaven. The clergy sold them a story of a better life after this one, so shut up, do your job, live miserably and deal with it, as an imaginary, invisible man who lives in the sky will reward you after you are dead. The Church invaded other countries and other religions. The Church burned people like Bruno Giordano at the stake, among other things, for proposing that the stars in the sky were actually other suns and that they might have planets going around them. It was a time of abject ignorance, where indeed “ignorance was blessed.” The Church amassed great fortunes while the sheeple struggled to stay alive. Sorry, Jethro, but that’s not how I would define a good way to work. I’m not convinced that it was better. Besides, I like indoor plumbing, particularly in the winter!

        When we think of Trump’s “make America great again” slogan, we have this idealized view of the 40’s, 50’s, 60’s, 70s depending on our ages; but that was a time of segregation, abject racism, sexism, violent protests, burning ghettos, and kids dying in Vietnam, etc. Corporal punishment was the rule of the day for kids. Gay people were deep in the closet. Society was segregated. It wasn’t as “great” as we like to pretend it was.

        Even with all our struggles, we are still much better off today than they were back in the post Roman Empire period, up and through the 1400s when everyone was Catholic. I’d much rather be sitting at this keyboard debating than starving to death while attempting to till a field for some rich lord, or watching mobs of Catholics torturing and burning heretics and witches to death. If I had lived then and was as outspoken as I am now, I would have died a horrible death after being tortured till I confessed whatever they wanted me to confess. You should look up some of the instruments of torture endorsed by the Church, which is easy to understand since these are the people who gave us belief in Hell.

        One thing that was definitely different is that the human population was evolving under much more difficult circumstances. Population growth was flat or very low because many kids died in or near childbirth, and the average lifespan was perhaps 35 or so. Evolution selected those best able to survive and procreate in their difficult environment, but today, almost everybody survives thanks to germ theory. That has created an entirely new environment based on runaway population growth.

        Humans are still competing and evolving, but the means of doing so may be changing. I find it difficult to predict a gradual evolution that gets us back to a sustainable future, so I expect some sort of catastrophic conflagration in the not too distant future, but who knows… We must compete. Evolution insists on it. Today we do it with sharp words and scathing posts, but maybe that’s better than sharp spears and swords. Maybe today, what happens is that the angry people don’t get mates, and don’t reproduce at the same rate as others who are more altruistic. It would take many generations for this to make changes to us, but something like this will keep the process of evolution active. Or we may wipe ourselves out. It could be with the inevitability of a virus set loose in a petri dish that expands till it consumes all the nutrients then dramatically collapses in a pool of its own poisons. (This is partly why Elon Musk wants to get our genome off this planet) so our genome has some redundancy).

        I don’t see where everyone holding one belief – a belief dictated by the Catholic Church – was a “better” life than what we enjoy today.

        A thought occurs to me that – going back to the time of Trump’s “great America,” however one dates that, we all held common goals. We held the common goal of defeating the Soviets, and winning the space race, among other things. What overarching common goals of that sort have we had since then? To find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? I think not.

        Perhaps we need common goals, rather than common beliefs, to bring back some calmness and decency. I suspect that time will present us with one, whether we like it or not, at some point in the not too distant future. We may all have a common goal of simply surviving.

        • Jethro

          Well Sir, you totally screwed up MY painting! But it was deserved after your explanation is understood. I use to concentrate on the evils of the dark ages and so on. I once wondered if anyone was ever happy up 1960 something. The atrocities never stopped, they are just hidden better. Television is desensitizing us to a major amount of violence… why?

          I said it wasn’t perfect for a reason. But we weren’t giving people weird ideas on television, at the theaters, and the news three times a day either.

          Common goals! Maybe that’s it. Of course common goals would require common beliefs, maybe not spiritual beliefs, but a shared belief in something that creates a common goal. Maybe making America great again? I know that doesn’t work for readers elsewhere… I’m American and a little partial. How about making anyplace great again? My trust in humanity is low, I’m preparing to simply survive at the moment. If I die before the fit hits the Shan, my kids and their families will be ok. Not that they won’t be if I’m not dead. I have enough salt to preserve a heard of cattle through many winters. The common goal of simply surviving could work well. It’s probably what held us together to begin with. I’m not selfish, bring it on!