Conference hydra::dejavu

    Keeping theology out of it (else this turns into a "free-will-versus-
    predestination" argument), I'd put it this way:
    
    Over some things, we have no control (e.g., the physical characteristics
    of the Cosmos), over some things we have something approaching absolute
    control (e.g., deciding when we'll get out of bed [barring something
    like a fire]), and over some things we have partial control (e.g.,
    one might decide to dine out at one's favorite restaurant, only
    to discover it's nearly closing when you get there: you could stay and
    eat sandwiches, or go to another restaurant for a full meal).
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    
    At one time or another we are all faced with
    making an important desicion that will have
    a major impact on our future.  But I don't
    really believe we have control over the outcome.
    
    We all have a free will and have options, but
    I think no matter what we do, whatever is meant
    to happen will happen.  And I think we get put
    in circumstances that will lead us to the outcome
    that was meant to be.  Does any of this make sense?
    
    J

    re: .0 and .1
    
         I have to admit, I was hit with a sudden (although mild) 
    "anger attack" when I read Steve's reply.  I disagree with him 
    as I have always disagreed with him over what we have control over.
    Please refer to note 358 and you'll see what I'm talking about.
    I further dislike his characterization of "fact" versus "opinion."
         To have made his reply more accurate, he could have said
    "I believe" OR could have said "no *CONSCIOUS* control" and the
    statements would have been more truthful to me.
         This issue is one that has been discussed, bantered and argued
    for a couple of years here throughout this conference.  Most of
    the notes in this conference would, in fact, never have appeared
    had agreement ever been held by those who hold different views of
    "control."  To .0, control is a word with several meanings, some
    more positive than others.  What you refer to is "creating your
    own reality" (seen often as YCYOR or CYOR) versus the ancient view
    held to by many, including Steve, which allows for only partial
    control (or even no control.)  I suggest rereading notes in this
    file with those headings (YCYOR, etc.) and you will find lots
    of answers people have already expressed.
    
    Frederick
    

    Re .3 (Fredrick):
    
    When someone asks if people will put in their "ideas" about the
    matter, and I respons with "I'd put it this way," I would think
    that any reader would assume I'm expressing an opinion.
    
    On the general matter of "reality," we operate under different models.
    We do disagree, and there's nothing wrong with that.
    
    >I further dislike his characterization of "fact" versus "opinion."
    
    Well, so be it: I wouldn't characterize a difference of opinion
    as "like or dislike."
    
    To put this into something approximating perspective, most everybody
    in this Conference knows I'm a Christian.  Some of my compatriots
    and friends are Wiccans.  Our religious beliefs are different, but
    that doesn't mean I "dislike" them; I just don't subscribe to them.
    
    So be it with reality models.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    re: .4 (Steve)
    
         Well, then, what *would* you like or dislike?  How can you sit
    there (I assume you aren't standing ;-) ) and say you have a different
    opinion and that it isn't disliking?  True, I agree that you don't
    have to dislike someone because *they* have different opinions,
    but it's the principals or ideas or beliefs, etc. that they hold that
    are not liked, regardless of opinion.  
         Do I dislike Christians?  It would be difficult to survive in 
    my reality if I did...all my family, except one uncle whom I believe
    is atheist, is Christian.  My son is Christian, most people I know
    also pretend to be Christian.  I don't dislike them, but I certainly
    dislike the ideas they cling to, ideas which I hold responsible for
    much of my screwed-up-beliefs-past.  To suddenly undo Christianity 
    in this world would probably be chaotic and I don't recommend it,
    for without beliefs of some kind, many would go crazy.  But I will
    continue to live out my life promoting ideas that aren't so limited
    and destructive, as most religious views are to me.  As long as people
    run around thinking that there is some sort of father-God there
    able to forgive them, it absolves them of responsibility for the
    messes they create; similarly it deprives people of their own sense
    of real power, unbelievable power, to hold to concepts of a God that
    does everything over poor, helpless them.  To hold to beliefs that
    their power is limited is limiting their power to that extent.
         Incidentally, to say "I'd put it this way," *could* be read
    as cynical or condescending, not that you did but a first-time
    entrant into notes (which .0 appears to be) might see it that way.
    
    Frederick
    

    ...p.s. to my note .5
    
         And one more thing, while I remember it:
    
         "Cool down, Frederick" is the sort of demand that is responsible
    for many of the physical maladies we see around us.  You see, it
    is imperative that we express our emotions.  It *benefits* us, usually,
    in being appropriate with that expression, I will not argue with
    that.  What I WILL argue with is those who command us to show only
    bland or colorless feelings, somehow.  Who does this?  Try MOST
    PARENTS out for size.  Boys can only show anger or agression; girls
    can cry.  Let a girl show anger and she's castigated...let a boy
    show compassion or tears and he's told he's a sissy.  How far do you
    have to look?  Not very far.  I doubt that there are more than 
    a handful, if that in here, that grew up being fully able to express
    there emotions.  "You've got to keep those emotions in control",
    meaning don't let them show.  NO, if I have an emotion to express,
    whether it's hate or love or jealousy or hurt, I will do so.  To
    the extent that I can learn how to do so more appropriately or
    how to release them more quickly is something I have to learn to
    do better than I have...but all of us need to take care not to
    tell people to not show their emotions, for the meaning is/has been
    usually taken to be "don't *HAVE* any emotions."  (Isn't it
    interesting that most people who develop cancer, e.g., are people
    who seem to be gentle or kind to most others?  Whatever do you think
    happened to their feelings of anger?  Do you really think they never
    felt it in some sort of saintly manner or could it be that they took
    it, stuffed it, and had it manifest in a horrible way?)
    
    Frederick
    

    Re .5 (Fredrick):
        
    >     Well, then, what *would* you like or dislike?
    
    I like pumpkin pie; I dislike seafood.
    
    >.................................................   How can you sit
    >there (I assume you aren't standing ;-) ) and say you have a different
    >opinion and that it isn't disliking?
     
    Easy.  Disagreeing isn't disliking.  I disagree with the geocentric
    model of the Solar System (though a geocentric universe-model, as
    I've pointed out more than once, is useful in celestial navigation),
    that doesn't mean I _dislike_ it.  The geocentric system suggested
    by the Medievalists of the Pythagorean persuasion is very pretty
    (see Robert Fludd's drawings for one of the most aesthetic examples
    of that, though he wasn't Medieval).   
    
    Anent religious differences: my point in bringing that up was to
    illustrate that one can hold different (unprovable) belief systems
    and yet live in harmony [various holy wars illustrate that the reverse
    is also true].  Apparently, your previous religious belief system
    caused you trauma; thus, you might dislike the results of that belief
    system or its concepts.  That doesn't mean everyone who doesn't
    subscribe to the same belief system as I do _necessarily_ dislikes
    mine; they may just not accept it.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    Frederick,
    
    RE: your first reply to Steve, I seem to remember that a long time ago
    Dejavu participants went down a big rathole over people stating things 
    as fact vs. people prefacing everything with "I believe" or "In my
    opinion."  If I remember correctly (and this was a couple years ago, so
    I could have it backwards), the general consensus was that everything
    we state in this conference is "In my opinion" and that there was no
    need to state that in every note/reply/etc. 
    
    So keep the flame down, or it could get too warm in here! ;-)
    
    Mary

     
    Hi,
    
      I believe that we can make our own choices,and,that,the outcome is
    not already determined. Whatever we choose to do interacts with both
    the physical reality,and,the spiritual. The end result will be
    determined by the many factors in play at the time. 
    
    Peace
    Michael
    

    Unless and until human being ascend through spirit awareness of his/her
    own inner state of collective consciousness, we will be controlled by the
    false sense of Ego and Superego and eventually lead into the never-never-
    land of darkness.  For thousand of years, we are still rolling in the
    deep mud of artificial religion organizations, it is true that theology
    religion may help us in line with certain divine dharma principle 
    (e.g. Ten Commandments) but to be a good person is simply not good 
    enough to reach spirit ascension.
    Steve K. is right that we should not get into the rathole of religious
    discussion here, nor should we give up our desire of seeking in this life.

    The control is still ours which begin with your freedom of choice.  The 
    matter of recognition is a reality ahead of all human being. The 
    recognition of Inner Self, the Divine energy within our body needs to be
    awakening from its dormant state is our first goal.  When you reach that
    goal, you will reach a whole new dimension.  This is not an empty talk,
    you have to become, to transform and union with the Energy in you.
    In that state, you develop collectivity within yourself, you become
    microcosmic - "Love thy neighbor as thy self" is not a mere talk anymore.
 
    The total control is the state of Non-control.  And you are that
    powerful!
    

    IMHO, it is all fixed *and* it is all choice.  One can pick a movie.
    The scenes are fixed in this recording.  One can choose to leave
    any time and enter into the larger theater.
    
    L.

    
    
    re: .0
    
         I tend to subscribe to the YCYOR philosophy, which to me is an
    extension of my Buddhist beliefs. Through whatever means, we ourselves
    create 100% the reality system that we live in. This isn't in any
    way obvious from a day-to-day life perspective but nowadays even
    the physicists say that the observer and the observed are one. This
    idea implies that we ARE our environments/realities and from this
    one could say that there is no qualitative distinction between,
    say, the act of lifting my hand and the eruption of some volcano
    or the formation of a rainbow. Over the past few months I have come
    to the belief that the way to see this in action is to sort of center
    oneself in the faith that each of us is an embodiment of highest
    truth. As a philosophy of living, this has helped me in dealing
    with the great and limitless challenge of sorting through human
    existence. Even the chant that I repeat over and over each day is
    an expression of this--"Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo" which is an affirmation
    that translates to 'devotion of oneself to the realization of
    highest truth called the Mystic Law'.  Such an affirmation is sort
    of like a mental/spiritual image that allows me, at all levels,
    to begin to more consciously and creatively work with the elements
    that make up my/the world but in a way that most closely aligns
    with the Ideal Path for me to follow. 
         The truth in this life, the true joy that it seems  like we
    are here to experience lies in being able to have that 'control'
    alluded to in note .0; Not control in an egotistical sense, but being
    able to fully self-express and to therefore know, by experiencing,
    what is really at the core of human experience, which I've felt
    as a fundamental sense of pure joy. So, yes, we do have a say in the
    structure of our worlds but the realization of this will necessarily
    begin when we consciously align ourselves with the highest Truth...
                     
    
    
    
    
                                                   
    
    
                     
    
    
    
    ...thus i heard...
    
                                                        
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
       
    
    Roy
    (a_lot_of_words_but_they_sound_pretty_good_together)

[Checking back in on DEJAVU again...to see what all of you DEJAVUIANS are
up to!]

I don't actually think of myself as controlling, but my state of mind 
seems to inspire the flow of reality.  And if that flow feels a little 
rough at times, then my state of mind, of course can also help me to accept 
it.  In that way, goals of control, such as comfort and peace, are realized 
-- without the struggle of control.

Control can be very frustrating, because even if you succeed, you may not 
be happy with how much of your energy it took. (Maybe because on a spiritual 
level you have the sense that it's not as important as your controlling 
efforts make it.)  Trying to control seems to be just another use of 
energy...and so far for me, being aware of my state of mind has been the 
most beneficial use of energy.

So I think, yes, we can probably control a great deal (if that's where we
put our energy)...but we're probably too unaware to do it comfortably and
productively.

As for controlling the way I am influenced by others -- I tend not to 
think of that as a controlling ability, but rather as a creative ability.  
I believe that I have a great scope for creativity in my reactions to 
influences...so I do not believe that outside influences (such as my 
childhood war stories) dictate the quality of my life.

Maybe "out of control" = "out of creativity"  :-)

Jerri

    
    I believe that control is merely an illusion, whether you look at it
    from a human (us) perspective or a divine (God/Goddess/All-That-Is) 
    perspective.
    
    Neither divine nor human perspectives have total control over each
    other, and that is the beauty of it all.
    
    Recommended reading - "Tao - The Watercourse Way", by Alan Watts.
    
    Cindy                                                            

    
    	I've heard recently that one way to a spiritual awakening begins
    with a personal acceptance that we have no control and are powerless
    over certain things. They are by definition uncontrollable, yet
    some of us are stuck in the illusion that these things *can* be
    controlled; by the very power of our wills alone. I've heard that
    inmense relief can come from simply surrendering to the idea that
    we have no "control" and that is, at best, an illusion we merely
    keep insisting on.
    
    	Joe Jasniewski
    
    
    	
    	

    And of course, there is the very famous prayer, that goes something
    like:
    
    God grant me the strength to change the things that can be changed,
    the serenity to accept things that cannot be changed,
    and the wisdom to know the difference.
    
    Mary

    
    
    	We are where we are because it is where we want to be, whether
    it seems that wayat the time, or not.
    
    (Where is the reality in a world of illusions ?)
    
    We are all that is, within and without, infinitely. Everything that
    is interacts and reacts in a constant interplay of change. 
    
    	Each instant presents uswith an infinite number of choices to
    pick and choose from. We have influence overour decisions from 
    moment to moment. The choices remain the same , at every instant.
    ( Infinite things are funny that way. ) There is no end to the
    choices present for us.
    
    	Control implies a certain negativity and the suggestion of 
    forced issues. Influence is more voluntary in its nature and, to
    me, is more in tune with the harmony surrounding our lives.
    
    	I would say that we can influence any aspect of our lives if
    we feel the need. ( I would prefer to influence your decisions ,
    rather than control them , if you see what I mean. )
    
    	The choice is always there for each of us.
    
    			Peace,
    
    			Robert
    
    
     

    Re: .17
    
    I don't really see "control" as an automatically negative thing...but 
    I can see that it can be -- just like I can see that "influence" can
    be a negative thing too.  To me, it seems to depend on what you do.
    
    Re: general discussion
    
    I definitely feel like a part of a greater whole, so I think I can and
    do influence, impact, "control", and affect certain parts.  But there 
    also seems to be a more powerful current in which I flow.  If I *TRY* to 
    do certain things, it often is much more difficult and fails.  However, 
    if it is just a natural rhythm in me, my desire to do it is enough...and 
    it usually works.  I'm not finding this easy to explain...but it's like 
    typing, or juggling, or something else that you just do...you don't 
    really think about doing it, or you'll screw it up.  However, you can 
    still do it...in a natural, automatic sort of way.  That's the way I 
    feel I influence, impact, "control", and affect.
    
    I don't think it's a "yes, you can", or "no, you can't" answer.  Is 
    anything?
    
    Jerri

    re: 0 through 18.
    
    Nice discussion!! I have resonated to parts of what everyone has
    said here. I was born into Christianity, have experienced Buddhism,
    Taoism, Hinduism, Quantum Physics, et al. I've found grains of truth
    in all. So, I am one who will be tolerant of your perspective, and
    attempt to listen for the truth that comes from that perspective.
    I am only sure that I don't have *ALL* of the Truth.
    
    My point of view is that Determinism vs Freedom is resolvable with
    the points of view usually elucidated from Quantum Physics. In
    particular, Heisenberg's "Uncertainty Principle" seems most relevant
    here. Bohr's "Complementarity", or Shrodinger's "Wave Collapse..."
    are just as appropriate. A rather gross summary is: "At any moment
    in time it is not possible to determine a priori whether one has
    control over the ensuing moment. One "collapses the wave function"
    and you find out by acting, by doing something. So, my guidepost
    is that I find out what is determined for me by developing an
    intention. An intention is simply something I dream up (think of)
    which I intend to accomplish. I find out whether "it was determined
    for me" after the "doing". I cannot know before the doing. By the
    way, one can find out his/her intentions by looking retrospectively
    at what you have actually done. Your history, and its associated
    habit patterns, friendships, contacts, education, credentials,
    enmities, friendships, etc. then, largely (but not entirely) determine
    ones future. There is some element of "free play". See the work
    of Ilya Prigogine (Nobel Laureate, Chemistry), and David Bohm
    (Theoretical Physicist.) for further explication.
    
    So, this morning I found out that I did not win $53 Million in the
    California lottery. I bought another ticket for the next lottery.