We all know that one of Gary’s important terms is Divine Intelligence. For example, while phrasing an equivalent form of the serenity prayer as in the last live call, Gary uses this term in place of God. (Very understandably, I think, since we see all the time the strong, cunning roles played by fp’s in the name of various religions and the so-called corresponding Gods – something that obviously needs to be addressed in some fashion during the efforts toward spiritual growth.)

The Divine Intelligence has designed this whole amazing thing we are all part of, which Gary explains so beautifully and wonderfully in his teachings. I believe this leads to some important questions that are probably relevant here in this discussion. Given their importance, I choose to raise them here.

Should one not attempt to understand initially at least a little of this Grand Design by the Divine Intelligence before starting any corresponding practice? How can one practice anything at all without some initial understanding at all? And, should not the practice only get better and better as the understanding grows? Thus, should there not be a continuing effort to understand this Grand Design and the associated terminology, ideas, etc. to allow the practice more and more efficient and more and more effective? If the answer is yes (which is what I assume the answer would be), how can one dub any attempt to ‘understand’ the Divine Intelligence’s Grand Design an fp?

Understanding has to do with intellect or intelligence. If one dubs it an fp, then substituting Intelligence with FP, Divine FP becomes an irony and an oxymoron. Doesn’t it?

And, the term Gary uses is not Divine Emotion, but Divine Intelligence.

I immediately want to share very emphatically that I am not in any way belittling the importance of emotion when I say the above. I know the importance of emotion as I have been practicing Gary’s teachings intently and have brought about significant changes in my life and hence in my environment (thanks so much to Gary) and intend to continue the practice.

All of the above I consider so important in this thread because I am told (by not one spiritual partner or two, but quite a few) that intellect is an fp. I am at a loss. I want to understand how it can be. In fact, a spiritual partner (who I believe has attended a number of Gary’s events) said recently while talking with me that she was talking TO an fp and not ABOUT an fp (if I understood correctly since this usage was totally new to me and I don’t remember reading it in any of Gary’s books) and thus, I think, preferred to leave rather than continue the conversation. I said something like ‘please don’t feel obliged to continue; please feel free to leave’. (But she chose to stay on the conversation for whatever reason.) I think that incident has made me think a lot along these lines. I completely trust the Universe. The fundamental question to me is: Does my first post in the vulnerability thread reveal an fp? If so, how? Which statement(s) of mine there reveal(s) it? What am I missing? Why am I not able to see it? Is any effort to understand what Gary’s terms vulnerability and vulnerable mean in the various contexts in which he has used them wrong, when the truth is that Gary and Linda designed the live call on vulnerability to eradicate any possible misunderstanding about these terms? In fact, I asked for help from the above spiritual partner and am waiting. If needed, I can give my personal email address or phone #. I am so bent upon learning and realizing how my first post in the vulnerability thread reveals an fp. (Of course, I realize that after a point I have to let all this go if there is no response at all from anyone concerned. Again, I completely trust the Universe and its amazing plans.)

With love and trust,
Sundar

Dear Doug,

You wrote: “Sometimes my thoughts are loving, patient, compassionate, accepting and other times my thoughts are judgemental, jealous, and even vindictive. It has been so perplexing and frustrating to me my whole life to live and experience this ‘splinteredness’.”

Given Gary’s wonderful contributions to the understanding of it all, I don’t see why it should be so perplexing and frustrating. One fundamental postulate of his is that my soul has brought with me certain lp’s and fp’s with the expectation that I challenge the fp’s and cultivate the lp’s so I can give the gifts that my soul wants me to give. The same is the case with everyone including you. In other words, that is the Design of the Divine Intelligence.

Although since young I read a number of books to understand it, it was Gary’s that finally helped me make sense of it all, especially through the above postulate. It is something I found only in Gary’s work, nowhere else, whether it is Bhagavad Gita or whatever. (Incidentally, a postulate is a statement that is assumed to be true without our actually knowing whether it is true or not, but the whole idea of such a statement is to help us make sense of, understand and explain facts that cannot be made sense of, understood and explained otherwise. Since I am unable to see my soul, I cannot consider it a true statement. But, to me, it is an extremely, extremely powerful postulate that explains it all.)

So, there is no need to feel perplexed because, by Design, there are going to be both kinds of thoughts. Much more importantly, it is probably dangerous to feel frustrated by this situation. This situation is not my fault. It is by Design. Instead of feeling frustrated by it, I need to remember that I am expected to challenge the fp’s and cultivate the lp’s. And, only by doing so, I can give the gifts that my soul wants me to.

With love and trust,
Sundar

Dear Doug,

I have been rereading the last two chapters in The Dancing Wu Li Masters and thinking about the contents in terms of their relationship to the topic of this thread. I like to share here the contents of the last but one chapter “More than both” (pp. 283-311), and my thoughts regarding this thread for further scrutiny and discussion.

“More than both” is about quantum logic as opposed to classical logic.

In classical logic it is always either “this” or “that” with nothing in between. As per quantum logic, there is always at least one alternative between every “this” and every “that”, and often there are an unlimited number of alternatives. The latter is a quality of experience and reflects the nature of experience, and its recognition is an integral part of quantum logic.

Quantum logic dictates that symbols and experience do not follow the same rules. For example, happiness is an experience and a state of being. The word “happiness” is the label, or symbol, which we pin on this indescribable state. Similarly, enlightenment is an experience and a state of being. The word “enlightenment” is the label, or symbol, which we pin on this indescribable state.

Generically speaking, a state of being is an experience and a description of that state is a symbol. Such a symbol and the corresponding experience do not follow the same rules. It is impossible to describe the state of happiness. “We can talk around it, we can describe the perspectives and actions that usually accompany a state of happiness, but we cannot describe happiness itself. Happiness and the description of happiness are two different things.” In 1932 von Neumann pointed out that the problem is in the language and in 1936 laid the foundations of quantum logic.

Quantum logic is based not upon the way that we “think” of things, but upon the way that we “experience” them. On the other hand, classical logic is based upon the way that we “think” of things. The most important difference between the two is that the distributive law, which is a foundation of classical logic, does NOT apply to quantum logic.

The distributive law says that
A, and B or C = A and B, or A and C
For example,
I flip a coin and it comes up heads or tails = I flip a coin and it comes up heads, or I flip a coin and it comes up tails

The above law is applicable only when it is either “this” or “that”. When it is not so, as in the case of real experiences, the law is not applicable.

I think that there is a connection between the idea of quantum logic and the topic of head vs heart. I will share my thoughts in the next post.

With love and trust,
Sundar

In his response to head vs heart, Gary presents a beautiful set of concepts that is very, very helpful in understanding the tools for developing authentic power:
1. The Universe is alive, wise and compassionate.
2. The personality is not one monolithic entity. It has destructive aspects that are painful to experience and create painful consequences. It also has constructive, healthy, good-feeling aspects that create constructive experiences.
3. The more I challenge the destructive aspect of my personality, the more it loses control over me, and eventually it loses its control over me all together. This is the process of creating authentic power.

He then gives a short-hand on all of the above:
Creating authentic power is distinguishing within myself between love and fear, and acting in love no matter what is happening inside of me or what is happening outside of me.

I think that the destructive and constructive aspects of personality are referred to in all religions by different names and they all give the common advice that I should continually work on eliminating the destructive aspects and cultivating the constructive ones. They all indicate in some or other fashion also that God is wise and loving.

As far as I am concerned, when I read Gary’s books, what really created an amazing “aha moment” for me is the following. For the very first time I got exposed to the concept or idea that my soul decided, in consultation with certain other souls in my soul group, some of whom are guides and Teachers, to bring with me in this lifetime some specific destructive aspects and some specific constructive aspects. And I am expected to challenge the destructive aspects and to cultivate the constructive aspects so that I can give the gifts that my soul wants me to give. The Universe is so wise and loving that It creates apt opportunities to help me in this process and I can totally trust the Universe. The same is the case with everyone on the earth without any exception.

The above concept answered, I should say, almost all my questions for which I could not find the answers by reading various religious books. After that I could tell myself: “Oh really! Okay. Let me start challenging my destructive aspect, shouting in anger.” What a transformation in life it has brought about! Amazing indeed. I am continuing to address the other destructive aspects also one by one and notice the corresponding changes.

I would very much like to request the other members of this community board to share the concept or idea of Gary’s which brought about an ‘aha moment’ in your life and motivated you forward toward creating authentic power. I believe this would help all of us in understanding his teachings and applying them more and more in our lives.

Thank you all in advance.

With love and trust,
Sundar Naga