> I like Barfield's ideas (the issues of language somewhat notwithstanding).
> Here's a synopsis, tell me what you think.
Ritva, I have had a chance now to look at your link...
Since he was a lawyer, I can see now why Mr. Owen Barfield could clearly see the power of the word, but I am more of a "visual" being... To me a symbol (or image) is worth at least a 1000 words...
Nevertheless, I do agree with many of the things that Mr. Barfield states...
One key difference is in this. He says "full reality of consciousness is what we collectively chosen not to perceive"... I see that as a
big negative and, as such, I do not agree with it! IMHO, collective common sense tends to
degenerate into common reality which becomes a false or fake reference...
A free being cannot use common reality as its main reference but rather natural reality...
To me consciousness still continues to be way over-rated! I see consciousness only as a subjective personal reference for one's personal reality. So, collective consciousness makes no sense to me!!!
If one chooses to
not ignore, deny and/or dismiss anything (from an energy point of view, that is), then the only limitation that one will have on him or herself is based on one's senses and one's ability to sense (or perceive) the energy associated with those senses...
Therefore, this puts the task on the self to try to achieve or develop higher energy sensory abilities...In other words, to open the mind vs. to close it down! To me this is the only real way to evolve from an energy point of view...
One has to breakdown his/her own vicious circles and expand the bandwidth of its karmatic filters in order to be able to move higher and higher in frequency...
+wirelessguru1
