Thought vs Feeling

5 April 2019 Friday 8:26am

Thoughts are not feelings, they are ideas of how you “should” feel. When thoughts and feelings get confused, truth becomes clouded, lost.~ Neale Donald Walsch

So what’s the difference between thought and feeling?

When you’re hungry, what do you feel?

Hunger.

When you’re hungry, what are you thinking?

I’m thinking I need to eat.

That’s the difference.

Huh? I don’t understand.

Hunger is a feeling. The word ‘hunger’ is the name you gave to a sensation in your body wanting food. That sensation is the feeling.

But isn’t ‘feeling hungry’ also a thought?

Yes. A thought is the meaning you give to a feeling. A thought is also what you do about the feeling. Imagine a world with no words. If there weren’t any words to describe ‘hunger’ what will happen?

I guess no one will know that I’m feeling hungry.

No, child. You can communicate with your body even without words. If you suddenly look pale and weak, wouldn’t someone deduce that you’re probably feeling hungry?

I suppose so. Um, I still can’t see the difference.

Read Neale’s quote again—the first sentence.

Okay. “Thoughts are not feelings, they are ideas of how you “should” feel.”

Try to use the concept of hunger in that sentence.

I’ll try. Okay…The thought that I need to eat is not a feeling. It is an idea of what I should do about the feeling of hunger.

Now, read the next sentence.

Okay. “When thoughts and feelings get confused, truth becomes clouded, lost.” This one sounds complicated.

Only if you believe it is so. Now do the same.

Use it with the concept of hunger?

Yes.

Oh man. Here goes..The THOUGHT that I need to eat just because I’m FEELING hungry is confusing, my truth becomes clouded and lost. That doesn’t make any sense. When anyone is feeling hungry he will definitely put into action the thought of eating. That’s the way it works. What’s confusing about that?

Have you heard of the expression, “I skipped lunch”? Or “I skipped breakfast”? Or “I’m on a diet”? Or…

Okay, I get it. Just because someone is feeling hungry that doesn’t necessarily mean he’s going to eat. So if someone is feeling hungry and yet doesn’t eat, what does that show us about confusing thought with feeling? And the truth gets clouded and lost if you do?

When you in particular get hungry, what do you do?

I have to eat something. Even if it’s just some crackers or biscuits. I always try to have some with me, especially when I’m travelling. Because if I don’t, I’ll feel nauseous and dizzy. It’s a very yucky feeling. I tried fasting before—hated it. Fasting isn’t for me. I prefer to eat smaller meals if I really have to fast. Anyway, I’m still confused. Thought and feeling—what’s the difference?

Maybe hunger isn’t the appropriate concept to use to explain it. How about something else?

Like?

Like love, for instance.

Nah. Let’s stick with hunger.

At This Moment In Time

20 July 2018 Friday 12:28am

G, am I being a hypocrite when I still eat meat and yet at the same time I promulgate that creatures have soul too?

Are you eating their soul?

What? No!…I don’t understand.

We are all about the soul here, my child.

I know that. Anyway, I’m re-reading Awaken The Species and Neale described it this way: “There are many who describe our species as “civilised” in spite of the fact that we’re still brutally killing and eating the flesh of other living creatures, pretending that those living creatures are not sufficiently self-aware to experience suffering in the way that they are raised and how they are slaughtered.”

Neale is referring to how animals are treated before they are slaughtered, my dear. There are animal farms that engage in animal cruelty because the handlers of these animals have the belief that since these animals are going to be slaughtered anyway, why be nice? As opposed to the belief that animals are also worthy of fair, or even the best treatment, even though they are specifically farmed and produced for human consumption. To put it in a spiritual sense, everything in your world is a reflection of everything else. How you are treating animals is a reflection of yourselves. Think of it this way—when we explain about crimes or transgressions, usually people against people, we explain it in such a way that the victims and the perpetrators have it in their soul agenda to be involved in that particular transgression in order for the soul to experience its highest self. The same goes for animals that are meant for human consumption. It is in the creature’s agenda to be treated in one way or another in order for God to experience Godself at this moment in time. Because God is everything, including animals. Let me repeat the words “at this moment in time.” Those words are important because you cannot know what works for your world unless at first you experience what does not work at this moment in time. When you are experiencing what does not work is when you usually begin to ask yourself questions about why it does not work at this moment in time. When all of you have answers or solutions that all of you can agree on and act upon, only then will you move forward towards being civilised beings. At this moment in time, you are mere infants, nay—mere embryos at the level of your evolution. You are now asking yourself questions about everything—including what you eat, and how you treat what you eat at this moment in time. And that includes all food, not just meat. What brought this about anyway? It’s after midnight.

Cheese.

What about cheese?

Mum cooked baked pasta for dinner and it had cheese in it. I can’t sleep because…well, cheese gives me discomfort. That’s when I started thinking about food that I should avoid. We still eat chicken and fish. But when we’re eating out, we occasionally eat beef or pork. Before eating I will usually say, “Sorry, cow.” Or, “Sorry, piggy.”

How about—sorry, chicken? Or sorry, fish? Or sorry, broccoli?

Now you’re being ridiculous.

God is everything.

What’s your point?

You are your own decision-makers. I do not hinder anything. God is freedom. God is everything. God is everyone. Do you say sorry to a man or a woman before killing them?

Where did that come from? You sound angry.

Because you are angry, my child.

I started reading the papers again.

Nothing is made known to you without a purpose.

So what’s the purpose of me knowing about a child being raped over and over again…and surviving in order to relive the ordeal over and over again?! What?! What’s the purpose?! Please tell me!

The purpose is for you to remember your purpose.

I wish I can forget.

Foetus vs Child

2 April 2018 Monday 11:03pm

…but a woman knows how to make decisions. And if she gets pregnant, then she gets pregnant. To me, having a baby is a blessing. There are women out there who would sell an arm and a leg just to be able to conceive. And yet when a child is conceived out of wedlock it is considered a curse. A child is a blessing whether its parents are married or not. Am I mistaken about that?

No, you are not. Once again rules of society are at play when it comes to how women should treat their bodies. At the moment, women are fighting for the right to have a say in what decisions they choose for their own bodies, especially when it concerns pregnancy. Your beliefs are the powers that be that have a say on how women should treat their bodies. Abortion is one of your biggest issues at the moment. The irony of it is that when a child is conceived out of wedlock – the situation and condition that the pregnant woman is in, is considered unacceptable in society’s eyes. Anything that which is borne out of wedlock, is also considered a sin. But it is also against your beliefs to get rid of that which is borne out of wedlock – which is abortion. So what is a woman to do?

She can abstain from sex, that’s what she can do.

That’s another one of your beliefs – sex out of wedlock is also a sin.

Well then, there’s the logic, isn’t it? Being pregnant outside marriage is a sin. So having sex out of marriage is also a sin. As for abortion being a sin, it’s like murder to some – murder is a sin.

And yet you have a thing called death penalty.

But that’s because of a heinous crime. A baby hasn’t committed any crime!

Isn’t a criminal in death row once a baby?

Argh! I don’t know where you’re coming from sometimes!

I’m coming from the truth, my child. So do you still think there’s logic in those beliefs?

Wait. What is “logic” anyway? Hang on. Okay. Logic means “a particular method of reasoning or argumentation.” Sample sentence is “We were unable to follow his logic.

So do you still think there’s sound reasoning with those beliefs? That it’s a sin to have sex outside of marriage? And that it’s also a sin to get pregnant outside of marriage? And then if the woman gets pregnant out of marriage, it’s also a sin to abort the foetus? So what is a woman to do if she’s already with child?

Wait a sec. First you called it a “foetus” and then next, you called it a “child.” So which is it?

Is there a difference?

The dictionary defines “foetus” as “the young of an animal in the womb or egg, especially in the later stages of development when the body structures are in the recognizable form of its kind, in humans after the end of the second month of gestation.” As for the word “child” the dictionary says it’s “a person between birth and full growth; a boy or girl.” But the dictionary says that the word “child” also means “a human foetus.”

So is there a difference between the word “child” and the word “foetus”?

Um…Yes and no. No, there’s no difference because a child in a womb is a foetus. And yes, there’s a difference to the meaning we give each word.

How so?

To me, “foetus” sounds like it’s not a person yet. As in, it’s not fully human yet. When it comes to the word “child” I feel like it already has its own mind. Or maybe even a soul.

Everything has a soul, my child – even plants. Anyway, I get where you’re coming from. Now imagine this – there’s a group that says they are for abortion. Let’s call them the Anti-Foetus Group. Now imagine another group that says they are against abortion. Let’s call them the Pro-Child Group. And these two groups are always at each other’s faces, shouting at each other, protesting that their group is right. Who do you think will win? The Anti-Foetus Group or the Pro-Child Group?

I have no idea. The word “foetus” & “child” mean exactly the same thing.

Precisely. Both groups are not fighting for the foetus or the child. They are fighting for the meaning they are giving to the words. It’s all about the meaning. And what is a meaning? A meaning is a thought. You are all fighting over a thought.

But a child in a womb is not a thought. It’s a living, breathing entity.

It’s not breathing yet.

Well, it has a heartbeat, that’s for sure.

So you’re Pro-Child?

Since you put it that way, maybe I am. My purpose is for all children after all.

As in living, breathing children?

Yes—wait. Haha. Nice trick. So are you saying that a foetus that isn’t breathing yet is not a child?

Didn’t we already discuss the meaning of the words “foetus” and “child”?

Fine. So are you saying they’re the same but they’re not the same?

Let me just say this – words can help you or words can destroy you. And it’s all because of the meaning or meanings you give each word. And most of the time you are all fighting over the meaning. And as I have said, a meaning is a thought. Most of the time you are fighting over a thought. Does that make sense to you?

I don’t know. Sometimes, nothing makes sense in this world anymore.

You can make something make sense with any sense anytime you wish, my child. By giving it meaning.

Oh no. I’m not going back there again. Meaning is a thought, thought is meaning, fighting over a thought which is the meaning. It’s a losing battle!

That’s the problem. Why does it have to be a battle? Why can’t it be a discussion?

Don’t ask me! I’m just writing stuff here.

I know, dear. I know.