Freedom of Choice Book

[Terry B]

quote:The bit about the probability of a house building itself being zero is wrong IMO. A cave could be a house, there are a lot of them around, they are natural, and some of them are more servicable than a lot of human built homes. therefore a house can build itself..

That bit of argument is not very sound IMHO. You could class a cave as a house, or you could class it as part of nature which I think is more in line with the original argument of house creating itself. The argument of a house building itself is based on the logic, like the house, the universe (including but not limited to a cave) must also be created. Although this argument can go on and on like who created the one creating this universe? Which is not very productive IMHO. Very confusing and I lay my case to rest.[|)]

BTW, I believe that there is a creator of the universe which is very different from us and to use our 3D logic here to the creator would not give us a very good understanding. Sort of a fish trying to figure out the world outside of the ponds it lives in.

[bomohwkl]

""nonsense in my humble opinion. I think those cavemen knew a lot more about energy work and so on and living in harmony with nature.""

I cannot say that cavemen knew a lot more energy work.From much I have read, 'shaman' among cavemen uses drug to induce spiritual experience and the life span of them are short compared to morden men!! However, in the past people has very long life-span compared with modern men now and they are NO 'cavemen' and they posses advanced technology.
The so called knowledge we have is used to create  MATERIAL TECHNOLOGY. The wise Thiaooubians once said,"Material technology, without spiritual knowledge, is leading us to inevitable global catastrophe on Earth. Technology should ASSIST in the spiritual development and not be used (as it is used now) to enslave people within a monetary system and materialistic world, which are both temporary anyway."
Anyway, the examples given the previous post is just an ANALOG since human can easily grasp the meaning from analog. The main message is KNOWLEDE is required to build something fucntional for a given purposes.
Knowledge is knowledge , technology is technology. Knowledge is still required to build a large building using anti-gravity too.Anti-gravity is still an intellectual knowledge.However, scientists have been mystified by anti-gravity due to the LACK of understanding, although experimentally, it does point the existence of it.Unfortunately, such research is classified becuase of the huge PROFIT it can be generated!

[J-Man]

another question:

it says in the book that we need CONTRAST to learn. nature was MADE so we could be curious. if there is NOTHING, how could the Supreme Intellect learn anything? if you were born without ears, a nose, mouth, brain, eyes, feeling, or any body at all, how would you know to walk? or even crawl? or talk, or know anything? you would be in complete darkness.

one possibility is that hes WRONG: theres more than one Supreme Intellect. hear me out:

he said that in the beginning there was nothing. he said that there could only be ONe nothing, because if there was more than one, it would be two or more different SOMETHINGS. so, there was only one PHYSICAL nothing. fine. makes sense.

but then he says that therefore, theres only one INTELLECT. maybe there are two, or 3, or 439857493867984?

just because there is only one possible PHYSICAL nothing, does not mean that there can only be one intellect.

in fact: the physical world, as long as its here for, is only temporary, right? and our minds can live forever if we allow it to, right? so what happens at the end of the universe, when the vibrations stop vibrating? THERE ARE BILLIONS OF INTELLECTS.

also, i agree that the whole "making something out of nothing" is BS. even our primitive scientists know the law of conservation of mass. if there is one point where there is absolutely nothing, and i mean NOTHING, then how can the biggest explosion of all time, the origin of ALL 3D matter, come out of it? with NOTHING physical in existance in a point, NOTHING physical can come out of it and occupy everything. its just not explained.

another thought is: what happens when we know EVERYTHING? i mean, i dont know how many flies flew above 5 feet in 1994, i dont know the birthdays of all the backstreet boys, and i dont know how many windows there are in australia. but who cares?

what happens when we know everything that matters? when we finally discover ALL knowledge; ALL math, ALL science, ALL calculus, ALL chess strategies, etc.? THEN what more can we do? NOTHING. our minds will shrivel up and die. at least according to the book.

and wait a minute, what about the Supreme Conscience? if it knows everything possible, which it has to in order to create us, is it gone now? maybe it learned everything and then created us, so that it wouldnt die? i just dont like the idea that eventually, even our consciences will all die.

i have plenty of other questions, as i tend to overanalyze these kinds of things [], but this post is loooong enough for now.

[bomohwkl]

Links Shadow, u have missed sooo many points.
True, there are a lots of intellect right now but at the VERY begining, there is ONE GREAT INTEELECT.
You seem to say that learning MUST need a physical body. Have you had out of body experience where you couldn't see and couldn't hear, only knowing your own thought? You should ask your higher-self to put you in such situation when u have OBE next time.
Law of conservation of mass is true when you decoupled it from consciousness. Any laws in physics created are limited by our current understanding. Consciousness (which is not material)creates the material world. From nothingness springs forth an intellect which evolves into great intellect.The great intellect then initiates the greatest explosion of all time, the creation of universe (material world), creating everything we see.
Nothing CANNOT create the universe, it requires INTELLECT. Do you see where have u missed the point?
You question is what the point of knowing everything that matter?And then you asked what next after you know everything, since nothing needed to know anymore? Again you have missed the point. Have you came to realize that in order just to know something more abstract, we need to develop our intellect? How could a child who don't know arithmatic come to understand relativity? Do you really interested  to know everything even something perverted and boring? NO! We aren't here to evolve to know everything. We are here to develop our intellect so that we can understand spirituality as much as possible which is within individual interests. However, it is your freedom to know the birthdays of everyone on earth and to know how fast all the bufferyflies fly and how fast each person heart beat is beating. You will find such information boring and uninterested and doesn't serve the higher purpose of the intellect.So see, how irreverent your next question has become. Devepment of intellect is unlimited.
you said, maybe it learned everything and then created us, so that it wouldnt die?
You really miss the point. You havent even come close to know the purpose of the universe. Such question only is possible when someone don't know the purposes of the universe (which is very obvious and direct in the book).

[bomohwkl]

sorry, it is for J-Man

[bomohwkl]

WHEN MONKEYS STARTED TYPING!

Typists all over the world, beware. Your jobs are in danger. You have
competition....from monkeys. That's what the scientists would have us
believe. At least those scientists who advocate the chance theory.

Chance is a popular word today in the world of science. And why not?
It is the one- word answer to all the questions that scientists always
found very disconcerting. How did the incredibly vast universe with
all its mind-boggling order come about? How did the atom with its
intricate design come? Even the tiniest cell is far more complex than
the biggest factory on earth. How in the wide world did it come from
simple starting elements? Pat comes the reply to all these questions,
with a triumphant smile, "Chance."

The Big Dogma
That there is absolutely no empiric evidence for anything ever having
come by chance doesn't really matter. In the religion of science, there
is one unspoken dogma which practically everyone agrees upon: any
theory, no matter how coherent and systematic, is unacceptable and
"unscientific" if it brings an ultimate creator into the picture. And
conversely, any theory, no matter how improbable and untenable, is
joyfully embraced if it helps in pushing God out. This scientific (?)
mentality is typified by the following statement of William Bonner
(pg 119, Mystery of Expanding Universe), "It is the business of science
to offer rational explanations for all events in the real world, and
any scientist who calls on God to explain something is failing in his
job. This is one piece of dogmatism that a scientist can allow himself."

No wonder then that the chance theory has found many adherents in spite
of the absence of even scanty evidence. For a mind programmed since
birth to think in a mechanistic (read 'atheistic') way, chance is a
far more comforting word to hear than God as the ultimate causative principle.

The monkey business
Now let us consider whether the chance theory is possible leave even in
principle. In the words of the eighteenth century atheistic philosophers
Denis Diderot & David Hume: Given infinite time, nature would by chance
alone eventually hit on the order that we see around us. A modern version
of this theory takes the form of an analogy (first introduced by the
famous Eddington): A monkey, if given infinite time, can by itself type
the works of Shakespeare. To gullible minds trained to worship scientists
as "the champions of truth", this analogy appears plausible. And since
the time scale involved makes it impossible to verify empirically, the
chance theory has assumed the status of an infallible truth.

Let's do some simple common sense analysis of the monkey's typing adventures.
Suppose that you are told to supervise the monkey and suppose you and the
monkey are told to work in 8-hour shifts. Day 1. Both you and the monkey
arrive on time and the monkey sits dutifully in front of the typewriter and
starts typing (Thank goodness!) After 1 hour, what will you see? Some
gibberish. Maybe 1 small word here or there. And at end of the day? Several
pages of meaningless typed pages. You may find a few meaningful words -
but only with great difficulty. (It is after all too much to expect the monkey
to press a spacebar exactly after a meaningful word is completed!)
Day 2. Again the monkey sits down diligently and you sit behind him and he
starts playing. Eight hours later, you are again looking at several printed
pages struggling to find even a few meaningful words somewhere.
Day 10. "History repeats itself" You begin to realize that whoever said that
knew what he was speaking about. The search for meaningful words in streams
and streams of meaningless texts is getting on your nerves.
Day 100. It is obvious to you by now that what you are looking for is never
to be found. Whether it is day 10^0 or 10^2 or 10^1,000 or
10^100000......00000...,
it really doesn't matter. The result of the monkey' typing is always going
to be the same - nonsense. He is not going to learn by experience!

Now let's assume that the monkey starts working in 24 hour shifts (We won't
ask you to supervise, don't worry!) Still that is not going to make any
difference. A 24 hour shift is just like three 8-hour shifts with no break
in between. So just as three 8-hour shifts don't give any fruitful results,
one 24-hour shift will similarly bear no fruit. And just as 8-hour shifts
repeated 10^1000..... times don't lead to any coherent text, neither will
24 hour shifts repeated 10^1000..... times.

The point is that the probability of a monkey typing out all the works of
Shakespeare, if given millions of years, is not an infinitesimally small
number; it is zero. No matter how many millions, billion, quadrillions or
whatever number of years are given to the monkey (assuming he lives that
long!),
still the probability always remains zero.

Thus even in principle randomness does not produce order on any appreciable
scale, irrespective of the time given.

Simple common sense, isn't it? But "common sense is not so common", especially
in Kali Yuga and especially in the scientific community.

So typists, sorry for the false alarm. But don't blame us; we didn't set it on;
rather we are setting it off.

The Small Bang Construction Company
An entrepreneur got really excited when he first heard about the big bang
theory. The very next day he inaugurated his own construction company,
'The Small Bang Construction Company.' His only infrastructure - rods of
dynamite. His mission statement: "Just as a big bang constructed the whole
universe, I will, by small bangs, construct small houses." His business
soon went bankrupt. Don't you think that the big bang theorists should pay
for it? Poor fellow. After all, his only fault is that he believed the big
bangers. Little did he know that his bank account would also experience a
big bang because of his faith in the big bang!
If chance, why copyrights?
When Srila Prabhupada was told that the French scientist Dr J Monod won
the Nobel Prize in 1965 for his theory that everything came by chance,
he at once challenged, "If everything came by chance, then even his theory
came by chance! Then what is his credit?" If everything has come by chance,
why do scientists copyright their theories. Everything has come by chance,
except, of course, their theories! A remarkably self-serving theory,
to say the very least!

Goodbye, Mr Chance.
Nothing comes by chance; even the chance theory doesn't come by chance.
Everything, especially everything well-organized, has an intelligent
designer behind it. So the huge universe and all things in it necessitate
a super-intelligent designer.

So Mr Chance, Goodbye. There is no chance for chance among the intelligent.
But don't worry. There is no shortage of fools in Kali Yuga. You can start
with the nearest "science" university !


From http://groups.yahoo.com/group/iyfweekly/

Hmmm...so many post, making me an avid supporter of freedom of choice?

[J-Man]

sorry man, but youre the one whos missing the point(s). i guess ill have to explain them more simply for you. you completely did not understand ANYTHING i typed. i hope at least someone on this forum did, or else i wasted a lot of time typing this stuff.

it says in the book, you need to continue to learn stuff or youll wither and die. your mind will stop existing. thats why we need to learn more constantly.

i said, "another thought is: what happens when we know EVERYTHING? i mean, i dont know how many flies flew above 5 feet in 1994, i dont know the birthdays of all the backstreet boys, and i dont know how many windows there are in australia. but who cares?

what happens when we know everything that matters? when we finally discover ALL knowledge; ALL math, ALL science, ALL calculus, ALL chess strategies, etc.? THEN what more can we do? NOTHING. our minds will shrivel up and die. at least according to the book."

i dont know how you get the idea that i want to know the unimportant and perverted, because i said the EXACT opposite. read more carefully or something.

in other words, what i said here was: FORGET about the unimportant. what happens once we know everything WORTH knowing?

you said, "We are here to develop our intellect so that we can understand spirituality as much as possible which is within individual interests."

my question is, WHAT HAPPENS ONCE WE DO THAT? what happens once we DO understand everything there is to understand? do we die then?

next topic to explain:

you said, "True, there are a lots of intellect right now but at the VERY begining, there is ONE GREAT INTEELECT."

how do you know that? you didnt answer my question. maybe there were TWO great intellects. you have no way of knowing. you cant just say there was only one without any reason. this was my question: how can the author of the book know? you both seem to be so sure, but neither of you have any logical reason or proof to believe it.

next topic:

you said, "You seem to say that learning MUST need a physical body. Have you had out of body experience where you couldn't see and couldn't hear, only knowing your own thought? You should ask your higher-self to put you in such situation when u have OBE next time."

dude, did you even read what i said? ill repeat myself: "it says in the book that we need CONTRAST to learn. nature was MADE so we could be curious. if there is NOTHING, how could the Supreme Intellect learn anything? if you were born without ears, a nose, mouth, brain, eyes, feeling, or any body at all, how would you know to walk? or even crawl? or talk, or know anything? you would be in complete darkness."

once again ill explain myself in simpler terms:

imagine being born without any senses. you cant hear, see, smell, taste, feel heat, nothing. it would be as if there was nothing, since you cant perceive anything anyway. just like the great intellect: there was nothing. darkness. zero. could you use astral projection? NO.

but what if you could?

would you then be able to see and understand things? would you be able to learn things and recieve an unlimited understanding? remember, you have no senses, there is no contrast, and you know nothing. if by some freak accident you APed, would you be able to know anything? if so, then blind people should use AP to see again. maybe we've found the cure to deafness/blindness together?

and you still didnt tell me how something not physical can just make something physical out of nothing. are you telling me that if i consentrated hard enough, i could make matter? that would mean
A: BRB, im gonna go make some diamonds out of nothing, and
B: im gonna go consentrate on some enemies of mine and cause the second greatest explosion of all time to happen on them out of nothing. you might wanna be on my good side [].

the only possible way i can think of everything coming out of nothing is that we are all the great intellects dream/imagination.

heres another question:

what would happen if the author was president?

you cant make any laws, because that would affect everyones freedom of choice. if you want to kill someone its your choice. but if the family wants to get revenge, its their choice. complete ANARCHY. you CANT make ANY laws.

but wait: you cant make any laws? what happened to freedom of choice? what if i WANT to make laws? what if i CHOOSE to make laws, but i CANT, because it affects other peoples freedom of choice? its a contradiction! do you see that while it sounds like a good idea, it makes NO logical sense? its NOT POSSIBLE for there to be 100% freedom of choice for EVERYONE.

ill admit it was a good read, but its clearly false. i wish i finally knew these god damn answers. i wish i finally knew why we're here and what our purpose is. i guess ill never know. i guess its not possible to know.

[bomohwkl]

What do you mean by knowing everything? Do you mean knowing everything from the past present and future?
If this is your definition, there is NO POINT for existence as all lessons, all understanding and all knowledge in the future have been known.
The Great Intellect (GI) is still evolving gaining new understanding and new knowledge.
The knowledge of building the universe is not obtained from the future but from the past as the GI imagined and improved the design of the universe.
One will NEVER know everything from the FUTURE.
One may know everything from the past and present but there are so much new understanding and new knowledge that can be gained eg from making even a better universe.
At the very beginning, the likelihood that two intellects spring forth at the SAME TIME from nothingness is very less likely than one intellect. As the one intellect evolved, there might be the possibility that another primitive intellect appearing but still, the one which been there is still an intellect which is more intelligent. The more intelligent will teach the primitive intelligent and the more intelligent becomes even more intelligent. Therefore, there is still one great intellect even considering the possibility of two intellects or more before the first physical universe is created. It has been discussed by Tom more clearly in his website. Although, you have the freedom of choice to accept the fact that there are two or more intellects spring forth at the same time but I prefer to accept something which is far more PROBABLE. Which is more probable? If someone tells me that he won two Jackpots consecutively, I would never believe him but I am more inclined to believe he has won a Jackpot before.

The creator of the universe creates the universe so that we could be able to catch up the evolution of consciousness of GI. Contrast is in built in the universe for us to learn faster. Just imagine if there is no contrast, it would takes ages for us to learn. The G.I knows that as it has experienced the situation. Removing everything except the intellect, learning is possible only the intellect INTENDS to learn.

The Alchemists were trying to convert something into gold, they failed because the lack of understanding of the nature of atoms. Now, we can thanks of the understanding of the nature of nuclei. I would congratulate you if you could make diamonds out from nothingness as it already shown that you have gained in depth understanding of consciousness and universe. However, it has been scientifically shown that our conscious concentration can influence even seemingly random events.
There are certainly something we haven't yet explored. Those who have gained in depth understanding of the universe and consciousness will never do such a cruel things as making an explosion towards its enemy just to remove them from physical world.

Sometimes the "law" is a result of wisdom acquired as a result of making mistakes for many generations.
When the "rule" prevents people from suffering (such as suffering food shortages because of overpopulation) - intelligent people agree with such a rule by their own Free Will.
The most important is to EXPLAIN the REASON for the "rule" so that people have a CHOICE to adopt it by their own Free Will. Without a sensible explanation any rule, including "do not kill", can be a seen as a severe restriction of the Freedom of Choice.
The same principle applies in the entire Universe. We have the Freedom of Choice, but certain choices are more sensible than others. Rules (such as 10 commandments for example) should be seen as "advice" of how to make choices in order to avoid suffering and make progress.
Something is for sure, if one doesn't AIM at finding out the purpose of our existence, one will NEVER KNOW.

[J-Man]

.........

still none of my questions have been answered fully []

o well. i like that monkey thing though. its weird how sometimes things are so obvious, that we dont even think about it.

[Osiris]

Greetings everyone,

It`s an interesting topic here. I just finished the book myself. And found it quiet nice.

There is my opinion on a few subjects that has been mentioned in the book.

God is expanding himself in infinity , through us. So no matter how mush we understand, there is plenty a room for grow.
On a freedom of choice I think it`s more less predetermined before we incarnate. So we do exersice our free will at the Higher Self level. And been a part of God we do carry the same qualities. So in reality slow or fast we still go up in our spiritual development, becouse it`s our nature.

To exercise our free will here on Earth is a matter of following certain morale code for me. For example if somebody attacts me I may choose to respond so they would learn too. Just come from the head `only strong can allow himself to be generous`

I do not fully support the point of view that one learns faster when suffer.
For example you can meet a nice person in your life, and would made an effort to gain her attention. Like by learning poetry etc,
I would say that one can also progress via inspiration. I can be inspired by nature, stars, etc .  

And I would not say that money is bad, they are just a tool. And if shopkeeper is gaining unfare profit, we as consumers can choose to carry our shopping in a different place. Of course in some countries there are just few big players on the market. But I would say to all who dislike that kind of situation. You still have to buy certain goods no matter what. And there is always a possibility to change situation. To ensure that the free market prevail. I know there is many homeless people on the streets and not everyone is happy. But instead of trying to manage our limited resources why would`t we just create a new one`s. I would prefere to see myself as co-creator carring abudance and inspiring people, rather that going in to unnessesary suffering patterns. Well I guess that`s my Free Choice[]

I see the life as a game of separation, where the one born without knowlege can gain it by using his potential. Just like the Great Intellect once did. I do think that God`s existence, as well as ours is infinite. No begining, no end. We can go through the different transfomations, and even send part of us to explore the material world.  What I wanted to say it`s like living in a present moment where the future,past and presented are integrated in one. That what I mean by infinity.

That`s my opinion at the present moment. I can agree or disagree.The choice is yours[]

With best regars,

Osiris.

[bomohwkl]

Money is not evil by itself but the accumulation of money and with the goal of making profit are themselves driving our earth into catastrophe .Just look at the world biggest economic engine,the USA.
No one on the earth would like the economy to has a zero growth or even recession. To has growth, consumers has to spend more (and those the natural resources)or the number of people buying the products increases (require increase of human population).If the population is stagnant and the people are buying the same amount of products, there wouldnt be any growth. People come up with suistable development,it only reduces the severity of the problem but fundamentally, economy has to grow.
In a barter system, the accumulation of wealth becomes irrevelant. We tend to get what is NECESSARY rather than what is DESIRED.Individual gains more freedom and independence. In monetary system, we give away such independence and freedom. Worst still, we are being controlled by the financial institutions like puppets. For the wise one, money is a way of comfort, for others, it is a way to gain power over people.

I am not an economist but it is just my humble observation of the way economy works.

[Osiris]

Greetings,

I believe until people on Earth will not progress spiritually, there will be no prosperity among us. Once people are advanced enough to use zero point energy devices, use prana as a direct sourse of  food, travel in Astral and beyond, etc.. , then the need to relay on the scarsed natural resoursed will diminish.

Financial institutes do tend to exersise control over population. But they are run by the fellow citizens. So it`s up to us to bring changes. To financial institutions, goverment, etc. I started with myself. Hopefully given time, I can develop my person in a way, that I can serve as a positive example to the people. And they might then decide to change they attitude to life.

Once become spiritually developed, people will not encounter greed anymore.
So the planet will be a place, where everyone have a chance to develop themself in a harmony.

It is a challenge to been able to accept love, especially such ultimate one as God sending toward us. Particularly becouse this reqiures us to love fellow beings, with is not always easy.

Intergration is much better than a division, and at one stage it`s  a nessesary step for progression.  

Economics and spirituality is not an easier topics for me to discuss.
So my post might look that am jumping from one conclusion to another without following the original line. I will try to improve it, in my future posts. BTW there is some interesting material has been published on a Harvard website regarding new economics conseptions. I might post a link later on.

P.S My post could be a bit of topic. So if there will be a considerable interest to discuss it futher, I can start a new thread.

All the best,

Osiris.

[jodinastar]

ok, this book sounds great but im poor so ive downloaded it (well impatience had a lot to do with it!) only thing is i still havent received the password and my impatience is growing!! grrrrrrr! has anyone read the tom chalko book on auras? im thinking about buying it but id like some reviews first. i dont have much luck with the books i buy!

[epsilon20]

I read the book last summer and at the time i thought it was ok, im not putting the book down but i have read better. From what i remember he jumped to some conclusions without explaining himself properly.Being a scientist i was surprised by this.

The positive thing about this book is that it may open people up to new ideas especially if they take a more logical side to life.

[epsilon20]

Jodi I also bought the Tom Chalko book on auras and that wasnt that great either. In reality its not even a book it simply a set of photocopies he typed up (with diagrams and pictures). I remember reading the same book online for free and that wasnt any different from the printed version.

As for the seeing aura bit, the book was too simple to show you that much. The book mostly tries to convince you that the aura exists then theres a few exercises and thats it. I had to wait to get it from australia and i was left unsatisfied.

I have had more luck with robert bruces Guides on how to see auras.

[jodinastar]

thanks epsilon, il save my money. off to the library now! well, you never know!

[bomohwkl]

Some points in the book takes years to come to realize the truthfulness. The good point is the book gives you a kick into what actually is the purpose of the universe..drawing your own experience...your self-reflecction..you would soon come to your own conclusion with the author which sometimes surpise you in later in years. Initially u have vague ideas of what the author is trying to convey.Even after u read it and u almost forgotten what u have read  but strangely it comes back to u through life expereince and self-reflection which strangely your own conclusion agrees so well with the author conclusion.
Agreement without hatred is only reach by agreement given by the free-will of the person. It is not force and it is not laws and it is not regulations. It is wisdom with love.

[vesselinpeev]

Adrian, you say:
"This book is not at all related to "The Thiaoouba Prophecy", which
is an entirely different matter altogether".
Excuse me, but did you know that the "Freedom of Choice" book is based on "Thiaoouba Prophecy" and that "Thiaoouba Prophecy" is the 1st reference in the book (see the endnotes)?
The idea for the multiple higher selves, the hierarchical network of consciousness, etc. is all from "Thiaoouba Prophecy". Tom was most inspired by "Thiaoouba Prophecy". And what do you mean by "entirely different matter altogether"? You mean that the book is crap?

[bomohwkl]

I personally find it much easier to draw life experience,psychology and world problems to talk about the importance of cultivating the mind and love rather than telling them the existence of God. It comes a long while for me to realize that.Thanks to the forum, I could see the feedback from other people.

For the reason is simple. People could too draw their life experience to compare, kicking them into self-reflection and gaining more understanding of Self.

[vesselinpeev]

I agree, bomokhl. Vast truths lie concealed in plain view, and only experience and good-will can lead to them.

[Adi]

There is a reason why this book is free.. it is mostly rubbish.

1) He is off the mark with his linear time idea... that everything must have a beginning.  By definition everything must have an end too if it has a beginning.  He's trying to put infinity in a box.  In infinity there is no begining, time and space are of course illusions.  He has said that in the beginning where there is nothing there is no time... but the isn't the very defininition of a begining to everything is linear time thinking[?].

2) To define a purpose for the entire universe...... no comment[V].
3) Humans are the purpose of the entire universe.... no comment[V].
4) An intellect can cease to exist by choice.... no comment[V].

This passage somes it up "Exercising your own Freedom of Choice in a way that limits anyone elses Freedom of Choice is a direct crime against The Purpose Of The Universe".  By his definition even choosing sometihng from the shelf at a supermarket would be a crime against the purpose...[]

Life is a GAME to higherselves... I can't see anywhere in this whole book that has written this.  There are some good ideas in this book, I liked it a year ago... but don't think it should be sticky threaded... it's home is in the trash can.

[bomohwkl]

1. I know the idea of singularity in the very beginning is very hard to understand. However, I am quite sure that new knowledge flows in one direction. You need lots of knowledge to design a universe. Where is the knowledge came from at the beginning?
The idea of 'time' is not linear stems from the idea that we could easily access the information from the past (akashic record), with sufficient understanding, we could even predict what will happen in the future (like our scientists do in prediction of the weather). However, still, new knowledge gained by the GREAT SPIRIT has to flow in one direction. That doesn't imply that time is linear or non-linear.

2,3,4 It would be great if you can come up with alternative ideas which could agree the observable universe as rational as possible.

Hahaha, You think too mathematically. You miss the meaning! Surely, if you KNOW that your freedom of choice is restricted, what is your feeling? Choosing a can food from a shelf,there are thousands of the same cans food other people can choose, no harm feeling is provoked on other people becuase you reduce one extra choice of the same can food from the shelf. The store is resposible to store up the cans.

[Adi]

I don't see why there needs to be a beginning.  I think experiential paths are infinite and the whole universe is conciousness experiencing different paths (obviously there is more awareness concentrated into higher selves, than say in a rock), back to the source if you like, but there is also energy coming from the source simultaneously.  There is no time so this process simply IS.  

I hate thinking about this stuff so I'm just gonna stop there!  Left brain just takes over.  Like Tom's!.  I understand the word universe as all energy but you are writing 'a universe' like there can be many. In your context you are right you need knowledge to design a universe but there doesn't have to be an ultimate beginning with no knowledge - drop belief of a beginning and then there is always this knowledge its just a question of whether you are aware of it on your path.
I couldn't stop []

I think Tom is just thinking SOO logical about it all it's just silly IMO.  I emailed him a question about why suicide is painted negatively in his book, as against the purpose for the universe according to this book... no reply... and not on his forums either.  
He is somewhat body ID: higher self would understand this is just another experience - I fly my plane in Desert Combat http://www.desertcombat.com into another person to end my life!!! No big deal!

As for human's being the purpose I would say human bodies are just like computers, built for a purpose, quite what I don't know, just as one would design a computer.  I liken them to computer because a) DNA programming b) you look at human bodies and they are like alien's they don't fit with the rest of earth's natural animals.  They are just not so important and are temporary vehicles for spirit.

Hehehehe Well I do know if Tom Chakro took the can I was going for I'd be right ticked off and probably remind him of his purpose for the entire universe.  [)]

[bomohwkl]

Simply IS. I have no idea to what extent your attitude to things with simply IS. Assuming that you have the idea of almost everything is simply IS,

Question: Why does there are gas bubbles in boiling water?
Your answer: Because it is simply IS.

Question:Why does USA being attacked by terrorist?
Your answer: Because it is simply IS.

Question: Why does human bodies are temporary vehicles for spirit?
Your answer: Because it is simply IS.

Question: Why does the experiential paths are infinite?
Your answer: Because it is simply IS.

Question: Why does the computer can do so many things?
Your answer: Because it is simply IS.

Question: Why does the  earth surface temperature increse in an unprecendental rate?
Your answer: Because it is simply IS.

Question: Why does love has been always been always emphasised in spiritual paths?
Your answer: Because it is simply IS.

So many understanding about the universe, people,environment and spirituality have been missed because of simply IS.
I wish the of cultivation of mind can be reduced into simply IS answer to whatever questions in my mind.

When a high school student learning calculus ask a teacher why 1+1=2 and not 1+1=3 or 4 or 5, the student just demostrated the fact that he hasn't come to understand some simple logic in life. How could more complex logic be instilled? (An analog of your kind of question you posted to Tom)

Just reminded you that the purpose of the computer at the beginning was just to crush some numbers!! Scientists didn't simply invite computer for NO PURPOSE!

[Nybster]

greetings,

tom chakro once wrote that spiritual teachers should often position themselves in front of plain-white backgrounds so that potential students can see their yellow aura.

..'nuff said.