Although the human mind likes to believe that it is of course dedicated to truth, in reality, what it really seeks is confirmation of what it already believes. The ego is innately prideful and does not welcome the revelation that much of its beliefs are merely perceptual illusions. From: “Truth vs. Falsehood: How to Tell the Difference” (2005), Foreword, p. xiv ---------------------------------- With Additional Context: ---------------------------------- The discovery of any new information of real significance has always provoked query and doubt and is to be expected. Data that are in conflict with personal beliefs are best handled by viewing such information as a ‘possible alternative’ rather than as ‘make wrong’, which automatically summons up ego protest or even indignation. Oddly, protest is often confirmation that a nail has been hit on the head. Although the human mind likes to believe that it is ‘of course’ dedicated to truth, in reality, what it really seeks is confirmation of what it already believes. The ego is innately prideful and does not welcome the revelation that much of its beliefs are merely perceptual illusions. By research analysis, actually only thirty-five percent of the public is really interested in truth for its own sake. The discoveries and the work itself do not spring from a personal source but are a consequence of the advancement of human consciousness, i.e., the overall climate. In general, the calibrated numbers are rounded off to the nearest integer of 5, for example, 63 is reported as 65, 242 is reported as 240, etc. The real significance is to locate a level of consciousness relative to the overall Scale of Consciousness. More specific numbers are significant only when doing detailed research. Some variation in numerical specifics is to be expected among different investigators and groups, but they are inherently consistent, and the variation is due to personal differences of technique (described in Appendix C). It is comparable to adjusting a barometer to different altitudes. The primary thrust of the overall approach is to know how to tell truth from falsehood, i.e., the absence of truth. Reliability depends primarily on the integrity of the questioner and the intention for asking the question. Dedication to truth itself is the rapid road to its discovery. The first doubt block to be overcome is the startling discovery that the truth about anything whatsoever is readily available in a few seconds, just for the asking. The normal response to this discovery is disbelief, followed by paradigm shock, but then curiosity prevails. The whole universe awaits discovery on a new level of understanding, out of which arise compassion and wisdom. The purpose of the work is long term, and the information is best assimilated by reflection, which summons forth comprehension. The numerous doubts and questions that arise have already been extensively examined, sorted, discussed, and resolved by virtue of collective intention, because if mankind really did not want to know truth, the means to its discovery would not have arisen and revealed itself on the radar screen of human discovery. From: “Truth vs. Falsehood: How to Tell the Difference” (2005), Foreword, pp. xiv–xv ------------------------------ Related Teachings: ------------------------------ From “Power vs. Force: The Hidden Determinants of Human Behavior”, Chapter 20: The Evolution of Consciousness, pp. 265–266 (2012 edition) pp. 203–204 (1995 edition): We all inherit the human condition of mind in our seemingly unasked-for birth. To transcend the limitations of the mind, it is necessary to dethrone it from its tyranny as sole arbiter of reality. The mind’s vanity confers its imprimatur of authenticity on the movie of life that it happens to view; the mind’s very nature is to convince us that its unique view of experience is the genuine article. Each individual secretly feels that their experience of the world is the only true and accurate one. In our discussion of the levels of consciousness, we noted that one of the downsides of Pride is denial. Every mind engages in denial in order to protect its supposed “correctness.” This begets the fixity and resistance to change that prevents the average consciousness from advancing much more than five points in a lifetime. Great leaps in level of consciousness are always preceded by surrender of the illusion that “I know.” Frequently, the only way one can reach this willingness to change is when one “hits bottom,” that is, by running out a course of action to its end in the defeat of a futile belief system. Light cannot enter a closed box; the upside of catastrophe can be an opening to a higher level of awareness. If life is viewed as a teacher, it then becomes just that. Unless the painful lessons of life with which we deal are transformed through humility into gateways of growth and development, they are wasted. We witness, we observe, we record apparent processions of experiences. But even in awareness itself, nothing actually happens. Awareness merely registers what is being experienced; it has no effect on it. Awareness is the all-encompassing attractor field of unlimited power identical with life itself. There is nothing the mind believes that is not fallacious at a higher level of awareness. -- Gloria in Excelsis Deo! Along the Path Daily Reflections are compiled from the teachings of David R. Hawkins, M.D., Ph.D., by a group of students of the teachings of Dr. Hawkins. This group is not affiliated with Dr. Hawkins or Veritas Publishing.
Posted on: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 17:26:07 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015