what ever happened to love?

General postings that don't fit into any other forum.

Moderators: wolfman, leecol

Core member
Posts: 947
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 9:24 pm

Post by toouk » Tue Mar 21, 2006 8:20 am

Hi all,

Ramble mode… :D

On a purely cold level of thought, love is the act of harmony, an expressed willingness of one thing to fully give of itself in creative harmony with another thing for the betterment of all (the act is not singular, it is the creation of several elements in creative harmony, a concept, not tangible, but very real, as real as the Conceptual Reality). No thing possesses love, love only exists when freely given away, and the human act of loving is synonymous with the creative harmony that Reality is founded upon. A well known fellow who lives in Europe, his science books repeat similar thoughts, but many of his peers world-wide reject him because they do not possess the understanding of what love is since they have not experienced it to understand.
One theory is that we don't need anything else, because qualities are just the brains subjective view. the people who hold that view have no way of explaining it directly. So science describes the mechanisms and describes it beautifully, but it can't explain qualities. It cannot explain this rich perceptual world that we live in.
For over twenty five hundred years, quality was as elusive of being defined as were terms ethics, morals, virtue, and knowledge. “Quality exists as a state of elements in creative harmony” (from one of my scribblings). No thing exists alone in the Universe, all things are in motion and change, all things relatively influence and are influenced by all other things, no singular linear definition can apply to any thing in motion and change, and the understanding of quality must be born of the conceptually created combination of experiencing and understanding things relative to the thing in question. Creativity self-nascents when two or more elements are in harmony (1+1=3), and the nature of the union defines that which we with inherent logic weigh and relate to the thing’s environment whether it is of quality or disquality. (Sorry about the word “logic”, I do not like it at all, but it is the best English term for signifying the inward act of the intellectual association and weighing of memories).

While Jeffery Iverson and Dr Peter Fenwick’s thoughts are generally correct, that it was difficult to explain the rich perceptual world, the thoughts missed the possibility that some individual might in time explain the how and why. To a master of Zen, there is no need to explain the experience, the experience is the explanation itself, and to understand a thing, each person must experience it; external symbolic words will never define what is inwardly real. Science can only speak of what is observed externally from a distance, science cannot (or chooses not to) define what is observed as being the thing itself.
We cannot talk about redness because this is non-scientific and there is no theory. So we talk about movement and chemical change but not the subjective experience of redness'.
That is exactly the failing of science, the act of attempting to measure that which the scientists refuse to empirically observe and therefore cannot possibly understand. Of what value is the attempt to measure and define what is not first known? Scientists should first experience the perception of red as a master, and then devise words to describe what is real. Life is beautiful, wonderful, filled with awe and perceptions; life is not a cold lifeless element measured in cubits by men with a fear of exerting the effort to investigate life itself by experiencing life.
We certainly need a new science to understand the true nature of the universe. The mechanical aspects of the universe we've now got nearly tied-up. In terms of the nature of man and his subjective experience we haven't even begun. We cannot say what man's place is in this mechanical universe, ther is no proper definition of consciousness, nor explanation of why in mystical experience and in Near Death Experience we see the universe as composed of love.
The general consensus by some is that a NDE, enlightenment, or other form of enhanced perception may not be valid unless it is accompanied with strong comments by the individual of perceiving what is interpreted to be love. The ‘ether’s polarity’ may not be ‘love’ per se, but is of the similar tone and coloring as what the body feels while in the state of loving. Untold millions of individuals have experienced the sensation of Universal Love, the Source, especially the masters, and it is deemed wise to suspect there is a reason why all known masters repeat the same perceptions. The answer will likely be something different than is currently believed, but within unselfish harmony of elements there is a specific resonance of giving and reciprocal influence, and it is that specific resonance that all the very best non-conformed scientific books I know of refer to as being love, the foundation of all of Creation, of the holy trinity of science.
We need a science of values and with that will come a much better appreciation of man's place in the universe. So morality and experience come into science where they are not at the moment.
(Big smiles at this keyboard). A new book will be on the market tomorrow that generally covers what Iverson spoke of, and is directly aimed at academics. The laws of Nature are correct in the correctness of being the laws that Reality uses to create Creation, the laws are logical (correct) relative to Reality, and if a thing is of quality, then it is in creative harmony with its environment, which are the laws of Nature, which are correct/logical to Nature, and logical to all things created. The ‘new’ science is not new, it is but a detailing of what the masters have known for thousands of years, but put into words that will appear ‘logical’ to those who prefer the angle of view.

In my most cold-hearted frontal lobe structuring of a definition, it is logical to love, it is logical to be in harmony with the Universe, and what is deemed ‘good’ is that which is logical/correct relative to the laws of Creation. All things good, whether they be ethics, morals, virtue, patience, compassion, empathy, love, kindness, fairness, or justness, all are founded on the original source of Creation, that of love, and it is logical, smart, and of good behavior to give all for the betterment of all. A group of ten elements giving all unselfishly, reciprocate ten times more back (the creation of a substance greater than the sum of the individuals).

In my heart-felt definition, life only has meaning while loving, and no quantity of money or fame or power or intelligence or physical good looks has meaning next to love. A good heart is in harmony with Nature, and what is in best harmony with the Universe, is naturally the smartest behavior, and the most beautiful.
The exciting thing is this new science is almost here. Physics is already pointing the way and I think psychology will also start to go along that line. Then we will have the beginnings of a science of mind'.
Hogwash I say! :D The fellows just finished saying that science was missing the mark, yet the fellows turn and once again lean upon the crutch of science with the expectation of finding new answers from using old ways. “Insanity: repeating the same thing over and over while expecting different results” (Einstein).

Gaz’s topic is as important to the understanding of one’s self as it is to science. Without love, nothing is possible.

Love is like a flashlight in a dark closet. When it is turned off, it sees nothing, but when turned on it can see all things, but it is really only seeing its own light reflecting back. All forms of observation color perception (subjective coloring) unless the perception is done through unselfish unbiased sensing. Only love in its pure form is capable of observing a thing without bias, and no scientific observation is valid nor correct without love.

Much can be explained to have originated within ‘logic’, but logic requires information to weigh logically, information can only be achieved through personal first-hand experience, to possess information a person must sensorially perceive a thing, and to correctly sense a thing it must be done with love. Love is correct behavior, and yep, logical too. :D


Core member
Posts: 947
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 9:24 pm

Post by toouk » Tue Mar 21, 2006 9:47 am

Hi all,

Just a FYI about how emotions affect the environment around us. Do a MSN search for “water holds emotion” and you will find sites like this one: http://www.life-enthusiast.com/twilight ... _emoto.htm . The ability to alter the physical molecular structuring of an element is deemed paranormal, but it is a well known effect among many.

A person could say that love at the quantum level restructures molecular sequencing, and the thought is darn close. :D

To pick up an object and feel its past is deemed paranormal, but if the object is altered molecularly through emotion, a sensitive person will feel it. Holding an old tool of a known person’s, the holder can sense an emotion in it, mentally analyze how the emotions relate to the owner’s, and accurately determine who the tool originally belonged to. (An old bubble level of my boss’ was felt to have been his dad’s, but the boss said it was his uncle’s, who I later discovered had been the boss’ only father figure while growing up.) Items in museums may hold memories of death, hunger, survival, war, family, etc.. It is common for a person to keep a possession that a deceased loved-one cherished most because it holds the strongest emotions. Parents feel it and can know which child an object belongs to or was used by last.

Love modifies, improves, and in all ways betters the world around us, not just by behavior, but also by literally creating a better Creation. Plants respond well to being around people who love (maybe why some plants only grow towards some people’s homes or windows), and a good thing is to plant seed with love, as well as do the old ways of Native Americans, to pray with love to the thing to be eaten for forgiveness and thankfulness. The Biblical thought of not eating while under duress is valid, not as a rule to be followed, but because emotions affect the food.

The thought needful of knowing however is that if food or water is prayed over so as to improve its quality to better serve the body, then the prayer is not in love, it is selfish, and the prayer will create a negative effect. Parallel, ‘scientific’ inspection colors all measurements at the ‘quantum’ level, nullifying all.

We all have the ability to Create: love is the Creator, love is paranormal, and as “with the greatest effort does enlightenment arise without effort”, so does love create without the desire to do so. Push, and Nature pushes back, pull, and nature pulls back, but standing still in love, all things are possible. The paranormal usually occurs when we are not trying, and when we do try, we alter the outcome because the trying is selfish.

S/he who is with love for all things, perceives all. Choosing to do what is correct, to be in harmony with Creation, the union is creative, of quality, and it creates goodness. There is no good reason why to love, merely seeking a reason negates the possibility of love, but love is the natural state of a quality soul.

Imagine six billion people loving unselfishly. :)


User avatar
Group founder member ASSAP approved
Posts: 4211
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 7:06 pm
Location: Derbyshire

Post by Cherill » Tue Mar 21, 2006 3:09 pm

Hi all,

Thanks for those fantastic ramblings of yours took! :) You have a way with words that makes the most impossible seem so reasonable! (I hope you know what I mean here :D ?)

I can actually relate a lot to your words and in them I found some of the answers to some hidden questions that have been niggling at me for the last few months. It seems the simplest of statements can make a the muddiest waters crystal clear! :lol:

Will the human race ever learn? Only now am I beginning to understand some of these things about enlightenment, after living this life for 40+ years!

Quote: Love is like a flashlight in a dark closet. When it is turned off, it sees nothing, but when turned on it can see all things, but it is really only seeing its own light reflecting back. So true...........

I would never have thought that such a thread would mean so much to paranormal investigating! Thanks to everyone for that! Superb! :lol:

Blessed be!


"sentio aliquos togatos contra me conspirare." J. Ceaser.

User avatar
Posts: 1044
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 6:46 pm
Location: Walsall

Post by GAZ » Tue Mar 21, 2006 11:17 pm

Hi Cherill, Toouk and all. Cherill i have to agree that Toouk has a certain eloquence to his posts, I admit I have to read them over a few times for my sponge of a brain to soak up all the meaning, but what a lot of depth to them, and omniscience.

The quote about a torch and light is wonderful, i think that our lives are like a torch, illuminating a light, helping us to see and others to see, but the beam originates from the torch itself, and we are the the torch, the power behind the extenal but integrated illumination. But some people choose to look backwards, the light from a torch can only illuminate a limited area and usually only in our direct path. (sorry i don't have toouk's eloquence to explain this more in depth).

I have to agree with Toouk's comments on Dr Fenwick, he is still coming back to 'bricks and mortar' science to explain 'love' or a universe of 'subjective experience' but i think he(Fenwick) is , at least, starting to think with his own thoughts as opposed to the way we have been told is exeptable to think to be 'normal'. I suppose it's difficult to discard one's conditioning so easily, we all have to rationalise (and that is a personal thing and our conditioning does play a part) in our own way.

Can love be quantified? can love be explained by e=mc2?. I love the way science will give you some numbers and say, WOW 1+1=2 so it has to be real it has to exist. Take Black holes, for example, has a scientist ever seen one, erm... probably not, but they can put some numbers together and say, wow, there you go, black holes exist! Now, because of quantum Physics they're saying, well actually... well we now think that there is a DARK STAR at the centre of the galaxy, not a black hole. !!!

Always remember scientists are people, we are all people, so, we must all be scientists, we all experience a unique place in life, the universe and in the beyond.......!

Gareth :shock:
They say the definition of madness is doing the same thing and expecting a different result. Try It Again, The Hives

User avatar
Posts: 1196
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 10:20 pm


Post by leecol » Wed Mar 22, 2006 5:40 pm

Hi everyone,
Ever since i was young i have felt the universe(for want of a better word) created us so it can percieve itself.I dont know why i feel this way i just do.It sounds a bit mad or even illogical to a lot of people-oh well cant help that. :lol: The current paradims wether it be science or a lot of religion,seems to point to seperateness,or difference.Reductionism can explain some things,but you have to dismantle (physically or metaphorically) the subject to do so.In doing so its difficult to get an overall picture of the complete subject in its natural state.Breaking something into pieces is not the only way,it also encourages are own inate urge to destroy.As aluded to by previous posts everthing single thing in this universe is connected on all levels.To see and experience this interconnectedness at first hand.Is part of (to me)experiencing universal love.Most of humanity doesent experience this,mainly due to social conditioning,base emotional wants,expectations or plain stupidity. :cry:
Kindest regards Leecol.
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible- Frank Zappa.
To negatively criticize another man's thoughts without first criticizing one's own, it is an act of aggression, a form of psychological terrorism, and an immoral behaviour Larry Gowdy

User avatar
Analyst consultant
Posts: 300
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 1:57 pm
Location: Cheslyn Hay, Staffordshire, England

Post by kevanf1 » Fri Mar 24, 2006 5:06 pm

This may seem a little cold, it's not meant to be, bear with me.

I think that the reson human beings and some animals - they do bond to us and vise versa - love each other is down to where we all originally came from. Who knows or remembers the song by Mathew Southern Comfort? That's the one, Woodstock. There is a certain line, 'we are star dust, we are golden'. Well, we were all originally formed from star dust. We all came from the original formation of matter many, many billions upon billions of years ago. We may have shared space with the same atoms as the tree over the road, or the frying pan hanging in the kitchen. What about the many murderers languishing in all the jails all over the world? We could have shared atoms with those despicable ones too. But, here's where the emotional attachment we know as love comes in. People do actually fall in love with those terrible people, we get used to using that old frying pan (not love I know but a certain affection), there's something good about that tree over the road. Then there is love between human beings, that real, powerful emotive force that has brought strong men to their knees. Maybe it's a recognition of fellow atomic charges from all those billions of years ago? An attraction that really is atomic? Could that be why we can instantly fall in love with a stranger? That happened with Kim and me, it just all clicked, instant attraction.

Then there are the animals I mentioned earlier. I'm sure we've all heard of somebody owning pets who will not go to another person yet strangely change habit and do go to a complete stranger and are totally subservient to them. On the other hand there are really daft, totally cuddly cats and dogs that take an instant and very unusual dislike to somebody. Could they have opposite atomic charges?
Live life to the full and smile.... everybody will wonder why you're smiling so make sure your hands are in full view :)

User avatar
Jane H
Posts: 1184
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 11:57 am
Location: Birmingham

Post by Jane H » Sat Mar 25, 2006 11:44 am

Hi Kevan,

I found your post really interesting because what you are talking about is something that I have been wrestling with for years, Lots of times I have come across people in every day life that I feel as though I have known for years after talking to them for an hour, Then again There have been the ones that I want to slap as soon as I clap eyes on them, They have done nothing to me yet I just dont like them.

The animal thing is right too, I had a cat once that loathed my ex brother in law with a passion that was so intense that I couldent even begin to describe it, She would go out of her way to attack him jumping on his head, savaging his leg etc, Any one else though she was fine with :shock: .

Its odd isnt it ?, The way that we form such intense bonds with people animals and things, I love my best pal to bits, Yet there are times when we fight like cat and dog and are vile to each other, He always comes back though, (he says that Im the only one that understands him :? )

There is one School of thought that says that or souls have a continuous existance and that although our eyes and minds dont recognise someone our souls recognise each other even after a dozen lifetimes. I do agree though that we all come from the same place (wherever that is).


Jane :)
We do what we must and call it by the best names - R.W Emerson :

Core member
Posts: 947
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 9:24 pm

Post by toouk » Fri Apr 14, 2006 5:31 pm

Hi everyone!

What a beautiful day today! I hope everyone is having a good day! :D

Below is a link that caught my interest in how it points towards different effects of environmental energy. Many of us have voiced our dislike of microwave and how it negatively affects the environment.


The effect may have been partially caused by other factors, but the experiment is interesting to say the least.


Posts: 182
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 4:26 pm
Location: Florida

Post by TwilightEyes » Fri Apr 14, 2006 5:59 pm

WOW :o toouk I wonder what it is doing to the foods we eat ouch :shock:
I have always heard not to stand in front of a microwave when it is on,because of radiation. People use the microwave to heat water for coffee too. Did they analyze the plant chemicals of the healthy plant and the wilting one and see what changed. That is very unnerving if the micro water really did that :? eeek
I am a desert plant,that can survive on little,but desires a forest.

User avatar
Group founder member ASSAP approved
Posts: 1602
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2004 5:00 pm
Location: Central (United Kingdom)

Post by Navigator » Sat Apr 15, 2006 3:15 am

Hi everyone,

Toouk I just have to echo the WOW response of Wanda a most interesting and informative link. 8)

I had this stupid idea do you think drinking micro waved water could aid in wait loss? :idea: Another stupid idea might be as a possible substitute for holy water? :twisted:

Best wishes,

Stefan :)
Believe the impossible it's probably true!

"nonnullus qu lema firtivus neus porcus"

© nostalgia: "Emotion is the sum of all beings say’s © and to help remember this adds, think of it as energy in motion (Emotion)"

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests