Finished reading "The Seat of the Soul"
Last time I posted notes on this book: http://www.livejournal.com/users/spencer_diehard/432613.html#cutid1
I am pleased to see it discusses the various aspects of addiction, including sex addiction, and regards relationship and commitment as necessary components of SOUL based sexual relationship. Regards impersonal sex as a form of addiction, something people do to replace core needs. (I agree completely on this one.)
(p. 163)
"...Our world reflects the basic thought form that there is no afterlife, that in this lifetime the only thing that insures power is what can be had and gained. Sometimes we speak of an afterlife, but we do not really believe that...or your choices would be very different...
"Our species is no longer humble. It has no reverence. It is arrogant & filled with its own technology..."
(p. 166)
"...you put your partnership most at risk by avoiding that which you are most afraid will destroy it... You learn that sharing your concerns with consideration & the intention to heal & trust in the process is the only appropriate avenue...
...the true human condition in its most perfect form has no secrets. It does not hide, but exists in clear love..."
P. 183-184
Talks about other dimensions --- goes from talking about Angels to "disincarnate spirits." (Ghosts.) "...Earthbound, within the Earth's auric field." [Not evil, but negative, encourages negativity] "...[by the] law of attraction... their own energy is drawn to like forces of energy, or like forces of weakness... these spirits can create additional negative karma by pursuing malevolence..."
(p. 184)
"The...Earth... is set up... with free will, choice, placed between faith & doubt, good & evil, between the... dualisms... our species has created..."
(p. 185)
"...There are numerous... realms of nonphysical life..."
I actually think I "know" what they're talking about. It seems to be one characteristic of Pagan culture to go in pursuit of relationship with non-physical beings. I occasionally pick up a 'how to' book that SOUNDS like a primer on becoming schizophrenic --- persuading the reader to a mental readiness to find and respond to other dimensions that, frankly, sounds like a means to ESCAPE one's life rather than master one. A great deal of arrogance goes into the accomplishment, but these non-physical beings don't seem to be helpful, really. I don't go there --- I have a brother in prison whose evolution has included periods when he seemed to be in relationship with unhelpful 'ghosts,' so I contemplate this without exploring it personally.
I feel I personally DO have a "Guardian Angel" or "Spirit Guides," and I feel they are NOT earthbound ghosts, or 'misery-seeking-misery' types. They fit the books description of beings of a much higher state of evolution, light-filled, etc. I tend to get significant results when I respond to guidance, when engaged in a kind of 'dialogue' with a helper...
(p. 193)
"...Psychology is the study of cognitions, perceptions... the PERSONALITY." (Caps are mine.) "...it is not able to recognize the soul.."
(p. 195)
"...The fears, [etc]... that deform the personality cannot be understood apart from the karmic circumstances... they serve... the experiences of your life are necessary to the balancing of the energy of your soul...
...by consciously serving the evolution of your soul you contribute the most that you can to your world... if you are negligent of yourself you will be that to others..."
(p. 196)
"Individuals [with] ... martyr attitude... the love... they give is contaminated because it is so filled with sorrow for themselves..."
I am not fond of the esteem we put on martyring in this culture. I feel like anything we do at our own expense, that essentially demoralizes us, or otherwise does us damage, just seems wrong. However, "pain" and suffering is often part of a GOOD thing, like mastering a new discipline, or giving birth. And actions/events have a short and long term effect. The labor of giving birth is horribly painful. And love-based relationships are full of tormented experiences, unearthing primitive feelings from primal wounds... I wouldn't judge either of them as 'negative' just because they are correlated with painful experiences.
I also don't like the value judgement the author repeatedly puts on different feelings, with tons of emphasis on 'light' and speed... The author seems especially intent on getting through the business of life with SPEED --- as though the key to maintaining 'goodness' is to run through as superficially and charismatically as possible.
I am grateful to my husband, even though he seems quite the 'martyr,' working to support this family at a job he hates, I hate watching how much he sacrifices. However, he is also NOT SHALLOW --- the "martyring" really does express the depth of his love and devotion. I am not so "in love" with happy/pleasant things I can't see the merits of really-really GIVING of oneself in service.
The book goes into describing the concept of SPIRITUAL PSYCHOLOGY. (Caps mine.)
(p. 197)
"... Re-incarnation & the role of karma in the developement of the soul will be central..."
(p. 199)
"...The exploration & understanding of intuition will be a central part of spiritual psychology... Intuition is the voice of the nonphysical world... it... releases the 5-sensory personality from the limitations of its 5-sensory system... the connection between the personality & its higher self & its guides and teachers..."
(p. 200)
"Spirituality will be at the core of spiritual psychology... and will trace... the functional relationships between Karma, reincarnation, intuition, & spirituality...
"Spiritual psychology is a disciplined & systematic study of what is necessary to the health of the soul. It will identify behaviors that operate in opposition to harmony & wholeness...[and] ... to the energy of the soul... [also identfying forms & effects of negativity.]
"Anything that increases separation within a person shatters the soul..."
"The soul cannot tolerate brutality... abundance of pain & irrationality... being lied to... non-forgiveness... jealousies & hatreds... These are contaminants, poisons for it..."
(p. 202)
"...Let us not run away from the unattractiveness of a shattered soul...
"...If you are unaware & deny... any level of higher wisdom... to your life, then the guidance must come through the density of physical event... through crisis..."
(p. 203)
Defines CRISIS and its function:
"...the awakening of the personality to the potential of the soul has come to require the loss of a mate, or... death of... a child, or... collapse of... business, or some situation that renders the individual powerless... the failure of external power... That, to the 5-sensory personality, is crisis..."
Okay, I take a certain issue with that line of thinking. On the one hand, I have been extremely frustrated with certain individuals close to me who make fear their main "God," making most decisions around the avoidance of pain, so there is an inevitability that PAIN HAS to be their teacher --- okay, in that regards, geeze it would help so very much if LOVE and VISION were the 'higher callings' of these people's lives.
On the one hand.
On the other hand, EXPERIENCE, to me, is the TRUEST teacher, and I don't feel like scorning those of us who esteem 'hard knock' know-how over 'lofty-looker' or 'ivory-tower' type "wisdom." I think we are on this earth with these BODIES OF FLESH, and PERSONALITIES that are vulnerable & self-conscious --- as our TOOLS. I think we're SUPPOSED to experiment around, and fumble --- some of our best lessons come through fumbling, and this implied 'superiority' for those so extremely 'intuitively advanced' they don't require crisis nor illness to teach them..... Ummmm.... I knew everything BEFORE I ever did it, too. I was superior to just about everyone I knew, ESPECIALLY my Mom, when I was 16 years old. My "intuition" told me so.
Sometimes "intuition" is just narcissistic wishful thinking.
I don't like this author's inclination to sorta "map" how to be superior. I see lots of tools for one 'follower' to use against another 'follower' to stratify each other's credibility, based on superficialities and words-words-words. And the "winner" seems to be the person most alone, wrapped up and nurtured primarily by thought or 'spiritually transcendant' analysis, using all these lovely concepts most eloquently.
I prefer reading Sam Keen or David Whyte. They give me pearls of insight while also letting me see them as mortal, dimensional, fallible fellow-beings, and NOT like they're talking out of a cloud and carving 'truth' with lightening bolts into stone. They offer notions and include examples that lend nicely to discussion.
I am afraid of discussing this book with anybody from the Shamanic class because I am afraid they are more inclined to take written things like this as gospel. It doesn't help the author himself treats these OPINIONS like 'gospel.'
So I am enjoying 'pearls' and feeling a 'trap' descending on me at the same time...
Okay, so can I summarize the book, in terms of what I liked, and didn't like?
What I liked:
---It had an immediate effect on me, like an alarm clock going off, the 'true' elements to this book are VERY true, VERY elemental to what I think, how I navigate the world.
---I do believe in putting my commitment to my soul growth ahead of my 'rank' in this mortal world, money-or-position-wise. And I DO regard a LOT of what is most esteemed in this world as being the ANTITHESIS of what a person really needs. And, in that context, I treat it like "illusion" or something so transient, it's not worth depending on or accomodating in permanent ways.
---I like the idea of being more mindful of the intentions I carry behind any action I take. However, ( and this is a 'negative' fault-finder), I don't feel I am singlehandedly responsible for the outcome of all relationships, or that I should infuse "love" in all contacts. I think obsessing on being "good," and under moral obligation to be "loving" is something others can detect, and cynically exploit. I also think being 'good' to become more evolved is selfishly motivated, lacks the substance of real compassion, and that selfish agenda will backfire. I do, however, (back to postive, after the modifier), think I could learn a lot about how to assert boundaries without passing my hurt or insult directly back to the source, punishing them in swift words and deeds. I tend to lose more than I realized, and to discover I cared more than I thought, and I would rather remember that I CARE first, and WATCH MY INTENTIONS contained in actions chosen.
---I agree that love IS the 'answer,' simply, and that prayer is an excellent and powerful way to access spiritual guideance, answers, etc. But I think 'prayer' takes many forms, and may be better known or experienced through music, art, dance... (Once again, the author made a statement, "only through prayer," that was too flat, too specific, and I need to add modifiers.)
What I didn't like:
---The book is laced with 'dos and don'ts and assorted stratifiers, plus some things that dutifully reverse what he's said/implied, so the value judgements he makes he also pointedly DOESN'T make, 'cause he validates the 'slow' way, but, geeze, it feels like he's really basically quite competitive --- more interested in dominance than relationship --- talks forgiveness and compassion, but I honestly don't FEEL anything but a ton of flat guidance and judgement from the tone.
---The book both inspires me, and heightens my paranoia, my inclination to want to master his language if only to 'cover my ass' (defend the credibility of my choices) in the face of some other 'enlightened' reader.
---The book talks of both destiny and free choice. We supposedly 'wrote' in a book of life, before birth, what we wanted to work on in this lifetime. But it also indicates we have lots of options on how to learn -- through hardship, or through proactive LOVE.
My problem with this has to do with how this kinda sets up blame, isolates the individual as though context of family, community, culture, etc. are a 'given' that is our karmic destiny, just deserts, and his premsies on 'how it all works' could serve for a lot of stuff sick people to convolute and pass accountibility on. I have heard some pretty convoluted thinking by 'mystic' types, especially when trying to integrate past life stories into making sense of current issues, destiny, etc. I really-really think we are accountible first to those who are alive and directly impacted by our actions here-and-now, no matter how mystified we or they are by past incarnation karmic baggage or whatever.
---The book also says we're not capable of understanding the cause, and therfore solution, to our hardships without knowing about our past lives... I disagree. I believe people can evolve without knowing much about how present circumstances correlate with past circumstances, and, in fact, too much "knowledge" will actually get in the way.
This is what I think, really, regarding the hardships we face:
Some of it may be karmic or 'energy field attraction,' some of it might be 'luck of the draw,' but the really important issue is: whatever bothers YOU becomes YOUR responsibility to change or heal, and to find meaning or the 'lesson' within.
I think that, while we are part of the 'infinite,' ONE task we have as individuals is to become conscious of ourselves as individuals, to find ways to observe, discipline, shield, and direct our energies or 'soul' center to improve, (strengthen, deepen) ourselves. (I said "one" task because I am naming only that one, but there are many others.)
OTHER tasks include some social responsibility to move our collective state of evolution forward, too. I think we are more than individuals with individual 'karma,' that we also have collective 'karma' work to do.
It is not fair to say "your attitudes and karma attract everything that happens to you." We are not, on this earth, all equally empowered, evolved, etc. There are inherent dependencies that oblige community, and offer 'tests,' that are NOT inevitable. Children are dependant on their caretakers. If someone abuses that trust, that is NOT the child's fault, and I take great offense at anyone saying the CHILD "wrote in his book of life" he CHOSE that experience. At WORST it might be speculated that the child was so devoted to that parent or other person in spirit, he/she was willing to TRUST.
Here's what I notice.
Premise: there is 'rational' 5-sensory perspective, and then there is "multi-sensory perspective. The significant difference is to include INTUITION and SPIRIT GUIDES as one source, or PRIMARY source.
The CHILD perspective is EXTEMELY intuitive, but it is also very self-centered, and 'magical' in its thinking. Children believe in things unseen they can imagine, like Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. They also believe themselves the center of the universe, and 'cause' of all things. Children are perfectly willing to believe they 'cause' their parents' divorce.
I think it ought to be possible to be "born again" or "become as a child" again without becoming narcissistically the source of all things, including hardship that hurts us.
I think it's natural and good we evolve from 'magic-minded' children into 'rational' 5-sensory perspective adults. I think it's a good coping strategy, if nothing else. Children are extremely abused because of their need and willingness to trust, to have the ongoing readiness to share other people's feelings, to have such thin boundaries... I think to stay like a child is to become overwhelmed with subconscious scripts, to be a landfill of emotional debris. We NEED to get rational and selective to survive, to evolve.
I think that "intuition" without rational thought is a dangerous thing for the individual.
I think, while we resolve to reclaim some of our original 'genius' intuition, we should also really respect RATIONAL thought.
When an author treats 'rational' thought as wrong, that we should believe the vision, what the mind can create, what the heart wants to attract --- to hold that above what we rationally know through sight, touch, first-hand experience memory... Well, it feels like the author is priming the public to be easily exploited. It feels like what a predator wolf does to sheep.
I like to follow my heart, but my heart is still interested in what my brain has to say. I believe in a PARTNERSHIP of perspectives. I disagree with a LOT of the value judgements the author puts on what is tangibly real, calling it ILLUSION.
I can summarize by saying the book is powerful, and valuable, but lacks balance, and could easily become a sourcebook for power-games to maneuver/pollute in spiritual realms with ego and personality as central 'gods,' not SOUL at all.
If I wrote this book, I would be revising it ASAP, for fear of what damage it may cause, in the 'wrong' hands.
I am pleased to see it discusses the various aspects of addiction, including sex addiction, and regards relationship and commitment as necessary components of SOUL based sexual relationship. Regards impersonal sex as a form of addiction, something people do to replace core needs. (I agree completely on this one.)
(p. 163)
"...Our world reflects the basic thought form that there is no afterlife, that in this lifetime the only thing that insures power is what can be had and gained. Sometimes we speak of an afterlife, but we do not really believe that...or your choices would be very different...
"Our species is no longer humble. It has no reverence. It is arrogant & filled with its own technology..."
(p. 166)
"...you put your partnership most at risk by avoiding that which you are most afraid will destroy it... You learn that sharing your concerns with consideration & the intention to heal & trust in the process is the only appropriate avenue...
...the true human condition in its most perfect form has no secrets. It does not hide, but exists in clear love..."
P. 183-184
Talks about other dimensions --- goes from talking about Angels to "disincarnate spirits." (Ghosts.) "...Earthbound, within the Earth's auric field." [Not evil, but negative, encourages negativity] "...[by the] law of attraction... their own energy is drawn to like forces of energy, or like forces of weakness... these spirits can create additional negative karma by pursuing malevolence..."
(p. 184)
"The...Earth... is set up... with free will, choice, placed between faith & doubt, good & evil, between the... dualisms... our species has created..."
(p. 185)
"...There are numerous... realms of nonphysical life..."
I actually think I "know" what they're talking about. It seems to be one characteristic of Pagan culture to go in pursuit of relationship with non-physical beings. I occasionally pick up a 'how to' book that SOUNDS like a primer on becoming schizophrenic --- persuading the reader to a mental readiness to find and respond to other dimensions that, frankly, sounds like a means to ESCAPE one's life rather than master one. A great deal of arrogance goes into the accomplishment, but these non-physical beings don't seem to be helpful, really. I don't go there --- I have a brother in prison whose evolution has included periods when he seemed to be in relationship with unhelpful 'ghosts,' so I contemplate this without exploring it personally.
I feel I personally DO have a "Guardian Angel" or "Spirit Guides," and I feel they are NOT earthbound ghosts, or 'misery-seeking-misery' types. They fit the books description of beings of a much higher state of evolution, light-filled, etc. I tend to get significant results when I respond to guidance, when engaged in a kind of 'dialogue' with a helper...
(p. 193)
"...Psychology is the study of cognitions, perceptions... the PERSONALITY." (Caps are mine.) "...it is not able to recognize the soul.."
(p. 195)
"...The fears, [etc]... that deform the personality cannot be understood apart from the karmic circumstances... they serve... the experiences of your life are necessary to the balancing of the energy of your soul...
...by consciously serving the evolution of your soul you contribute the most that you can to your world... if you are negligent of yourself you will be that to others..."
(p. 196)
"Individuals [with] ... martyr attitude... the love... they give is contaminated because it is so filled with sorrow for themselves..."
I am not fond of the esteem we put on martyring in this culture. I feel like anything we do at our own expense, that essentially demoralizes us, or otherwise does us damage, just seems wrong. However, "pain" and suffering is often part of a GOOD thing, like mastering a new discipline, or giving birth. And actions/events have a short and long term effect. The labor of giving birth is horribly painful. And love-based relationships are full of tormented experiences, unearthing primitive feelings from primal wounds... I wouldn't judge either of them as 'negative' just because they are correlated with painful experiences.
I also don't like the value judgement the author repeatedly puts on different feelings, with tons of emphasis on 'light' and speed... The author seems especially intent on getting through the business of life with SPEED --- as though the key to maintaining 'goodness' is to run through as superficially and charismatically as possible.
I am grateful to my husband, even though he seems quite the 'martyr,' working to support this family at a job he hates, I hate watching how much he sacrifices. However, he is also NOT SHALLOW --- the "martyring" really does express the depth of his love and devotion. I am not so "in love" with happy/pleasant things I can't see the merits of really-really GIVING of oneself in service.
The book goes into describing the concept of SPIRITUAL PSYCHOLOGY. (Caps mine.)
(p. 197)
"... Re-incarnation & the role of karma in the developement of the soul will be central..."
(p. 199)
"...The exploration & understanding of intuition will be a central part of spiritual psychology... Intuition is the voice of the nonphysical world... it... releases the 5-sensory personality from the limitations of its 5-sensory system... the connection between the personality & its higher self & its guides and teachers..."
(p. 200)
"Spirituality will be at the core of spiritual psychology... and will trace... the functional relationships between Karma, reincarnation, intuition, & spirituality...
"Spiritual psychology is a disciplined & systematic study of what is necessary to the health of the soul. It will identify behaviors that operate in opposition to harmony & wholeness...[and] ... to the energy of the soul... [also identfying forms & effects of negativity.]
"Anything that increases separation within a person shatters the soul..."
"The soul cannot tolerate brutality... abundance of pain & irrationality... being lied to... non-forgiveness... jealousies & hatreds... These are contaminants, poisons for it..."
(p. 202)
"...Let us not run away from the unattractiveness of a shattered soul...
"...If you are unaware & deny... any level of higher wisdom... to your life, then the guidance must come through the density of physical event... through crisis..."
(p. 203)
Defines CRISIS and its function:
"...the awakening of the personality to the potential of the soul has come to require the loss of a mate, or... death of... a child, or... collapse of... business, or some situation that renders the individual powerless... the failure of external power... That, to the 5-sensory personality, is crisis..."
Okay, I take a certain issue with that line of thinking. On the one hand, I have been extremely frustrated with certain individuals close to me who make fear their main "God," making most decisions around the avoidance of pain, so there is an inevitability that PAIN HAS to be their teacher --- okay, in that regards, geeze it would help so very much if LOVE and VISION were the 'higher callings' of these people's lives.
On the one hand.
On the other hand, EXPERIENCE, to me, is the TRUEST teacher, and I don't feel like scorning those of us who esteem 'hard knock' know-how over 'lofty-looker' or 'ivory-tower' type "wisdom." I think we are on this earth with these BODIES OF FLESH, and PERSONALITIES that are vulnerable & self-conscious --- as our TOOLS. I think we're SUPPOSED to experiment around, and fumble --- some of our best lessons come through fumbling, and this implied 'superiority' for those so extremely 'intuitively advanced' they don't require crisis nor illness to teach them..... Ummmm.... I knew everything BEFORE I ever did it, too. I was superior to just about everyone I knew, ESPECIALLY my Mom, when I was 16 years old. My "intuition" told me so.
Sometimes "intuition" is just narcissistic wishful thinking.
I don't like this author's inclination to sorta "map" how to be superior. I see lots of tools for one 'follower' to use against another 'follower' to stratify each other's credibility, based on superficialities and words-words-words. And the "winner" seems to be the person most alone, wrapped up and nurtured primarily by thought or 'spiritually transcendant' analysis, using all these lovely concepts most eloquently.
I prefer reading Sam Keen or David Whyte. They give me pearls of insight while also letting me see them as mortal, dimensional, fallible fellow-beings, and NOT like they're talking out of a cloud and carving 'truth' with lightening bolts into stone. They offer notions and include examples that lend nicely to discussion.
I am afraid of discussing this book with anybody from the Shamanic class because I am afraid they are more inclined to take written things like this as gospel. It doesn't help the author himself treats these OPINIONS like 'gospel.'
So I am enjoying 'pearls' and feeling a 'trap' descending on me at the same time...
Okay, so can I summarize the book, in terms of what I liked, and didn't like?
What I liked:
---It had an immediate effect on me, like an alarm clock going off, the 'true' elements to this book are VERY true, VERY elemental to what I think, how I navigate the world.
---I do believe in putting my commitment to my soul growth ahead of my 'rank' in this mortal world, money-or-position-wise. And I DO regard a LOT of what is most esteemed in this world as being the ANTITHESIS of what a person really needs. And, in that context, I treat it like "illusion" or something so transient, it's not worth depending on or accomodating in permanent ways.
---I like the idea of being more mindful of the intentions I carry behind any action I take. However, ( and this is a 'negative' fault-finder), I don't feel I am singlehandedly responsible for the outcome of all relationships, or that I should infuse "love" in all contacts. I think obsessing on being "good," and under moral obligation to be "loving" is something others can detect, and cynically exploit. I also think being 'good' to become more evolved is selfishly motivated, lacks the substance of real compassion, and that selfish agenda will backfire. I do, however, (back to postive, after the modifier), think I could learn a lot about how to assert boundaries without passing my hurt or insult directly back to the source, punishing them in swift words and deeds. I tend to lose more than I realized, and to discover I cared more than I thought, and I would rather remember that I CARE first, and WATCH MY INTENTIONS contained in actions chosen.
---I agree that love IS the 'answer,' simply, and that prayer is an excellent and powerful way to access spiritual guideance, answers, etc. But I think 'prayer' takes many forms, and may be better known or experienced through music, art, dance... (Once again, the author made a statement, "only through prayer," that was too flat, too specific, and I need to add modifiers.)
What I didn't like:
---The book is laced with 'dos and don'ts and assorted stratifiers, plus some things that dutifully reverse what he's said/implied, so the value judgements he makes he also pointedly DOESN'T make, 'cause he validates the 'slow' way, but, geeze, it feels like he's really basically quite competitive --- more interested in dominance than relationship --- talks forgiveness and compassion, but I honestly don't FEEL anything but a ton of flat guidance and judgement from the tone.
---The book both inspires me, and heightens my paranoia, my inclination to want to master his language if only to 'cover my ass' (defend the credibility of my choices) in the face of some other 'enlightened' reader.
---The book talks of both destiny and free choice. We supposedly 'wrote' in a book of life, before birth, what we wanted to work on in this lifetime. But it also indicates we have lots of options on how to learn -- through hardship, or through proactive LOVE.
My problem with this has to do with how this kinda sets up blame, isolates the individual as though context of family, community, culture, etc. are a 'given' that is our karmic destiny, just deserts, and his premsies on 'how it all works' could serve for a lot of stuff sick people to convolute and pass accountibility on. I have heard some pretty convoluted thinking by 'mystic' types, especially when trying to integrate past life stories into making sense of current issues, destiny, etc. I really-really think we are accountible first to those who are alive and directly impacted by our actions here-and-now, no matter how mystified we or they are by past incarnation karmic baggage or whatever.
---The book also says we're not capable of understanding the cause, and therfore solution, to our hardships without knowing about our past lives... I disagree. I believe people can evolve without knowing much about how present circumstances correlate with past circumstances, and, in fact, too much "knowledge" will actually get in the way.
This is what I think, really, regarding the hardships we face:
Some of it may be karmic or 'energy field attraction,' some of it might be 'luck of the draw,' but the really important issue is: whatever bothers YOU becomes YOUR responsibility to change or heal, and to find meaning or the 'lesson' within.
I think that, while we are part of the 'infinite,' ONE task we have as individuals is to become conscious of ourselves as individuals, to find ways to observe, discipline, shield, and direct our energies or 'soul' center to improve, (strengthen, deepen) ourselves. (I said "one" task because I am naming only that one, but there are many others.)
OTHER tasks include some social responsibility to move our collective state of evolution forward, too. I think we are more than individuals with individual 'karma,' that we also have collective 'karma' work to do.
It is not fair to say "your attitudes and karma attract everything that happens to you." We are not, on this earth, all equally empowered, evolved, etc. There are inherent dependencies that oblige community, and offer 'tests,' that are NOT inevitable. Children are dependant on their caretakers. If someone abuses that trust, that is NOT the child's fault, and I take great offense at anyone saying the CHILD "wrote in his book of life" he CHOSE that experience. At WORST it might be speculated that the child was so devoted to that parent or other person in spirit, he/she was willing to TRUST.
Here's what I notice.
Premise: there is 'rational' 5-sensory perspective, and then there is "multi-sensory perspective. The significant difference is to include INTUITION and SPIRIT GUIDES as one source, or PRIMARY source.
The CHILD perspective is EXTEMELY intuitive, but it is also very self-centered, and 'magical' in its thinking. Children believe in things unseen they can imagine, like Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. They also believe themselves the center of the universe, and 'cause' of all things. Children are perfectly willing to believe they 'cause' their parents' divorce.
I think it ought to be possible to be "born again" or "become as a child" again without becoming narcissistically the source of all things, including hardship that hurts us.
I think it's natural and good we evolve from 'magic-minded' children into 'rational' 5-sensory perspective adults. I think it's a good coping strategy, if nothing else. Children are extremely abused because of their need and willingness to trust, to have the ongoing readiness to share other people's feelings, to have such thin boundaries... I think to stay like a child is to become overwhelmed with subconscious scripts, to be a landfill of emotional debris. We NEED to get rational and selective to survive, to evolve.
I think that "intuition" without rational thought is a dangerous thing for the individual.
I think, while we resolve to reclaim some of our original 'genius' intuition, we should also really respect RATIONAL thought.
When an author treats 'rational' thought as wrong, that we should believe the vision, what the mind can create, what the heart wants to attract --- to hold that above what we rationally know through sight, touch, first-hand experience memory... Well, it feels like the author is priming the public to be easily exploited. It feels like what a predator wolf does to sheep.
I like to follow my heart, but my heart is still interested in what my brain has to say. I believe in a PARTNERSHIP of perspectives. I disagree with a LOT of the value judgements the author puts on what is tangibly real, calling it ILLUSION.
I can summarize by saying the book is powerful, and valuable, but lacks balance, and could easily become a sourcebook for power-games to maneuver/pollute in spiritual realms with ego and personality as central 'gods,' not SOUL at all.
If I wrote this book, I would be revising it ASAP, for fear of what damage it may cause, in the 'wrong' hands.