I am of the camp that tends to believe that medication should only be taken if one clearly has not much of a choice. All medications have side effects, and I doubt that there's a single medication that doesn't have at least one negative side effect.

So I prefer to tough it out most of the time, and it seems that you can often eliminate much of the negative symptoms by simply ignoring them and keeping busy. In Buddhism, we encourage mind control whereas certain negative stimuli are to be ignored. For example, you might see a monk sitting on a snowbank only with thin robes on in freezing weather attempting to toughen his mind and body up.

I'm at the ice cube stage.

Shalom,
Vern

__________________
"The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge."-- Einstein

The medicine is merely a magic pill that we believe works and so it does

The law of cause and effect is seen backwards in this world and as we remember we will all realise what we expereince is what we cause in thinking
Ie disease dis ease in thought

I dont get ill because i know illness is false - mine or anothers
You cant walk past it if you believe in it or see it in another - thats the way it works - you buy it and its yours !

This is what needs to be remembered
We are the cause - Its our thinking and the World is here to show us in a million different ways that we get ill are helpless and will die
Its all a silly dream - walk past it

As always and appologies for droning on but ACIM explains it better

Yes Tony you are right, but there is more to it: In this article it stated that it does not apply to everyone and in Wikipedia I read about the placebo effect that it canot be replaced with all things. I agree it has to do with beliefs, but whoms?

__________________
May your awareness be perfection

Our life expectancy is roughly double as what it was around the time of the American Civil War. Why? At least for one reason why I'm also alive today-- medicine. If it weren't for modern medicine, I would have most likely died a little over 30 years ago. And I ain't exaggerating one bit.

Shalom,
Vern

__________________
"The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge."-- Einstein

Viv

I am not trying to cop out here but this will get into level confusion

There are no levels

There is either sickness or no sickness

Either God or No God

In the dream the placebo affect may well appear to work on some and not others just as medicine appears to work on some and not others - thats the dream - chaos - nothin is ever certain

So for me to get into why a placebo may or may not work is actually admitting illness is real = if you get what i am saying

Simply the only answer then is
There is no Illness
Should have just put that in the first place heehe

>> The medicine is merely a magic pill that we believe works and so it does <<



Hi .



What do you mean exactly . Aspirin does take a headache away even when we believe it won't work ,,it does ,


Please clarify

Moo moo

What i mean is there is no headache

The magic pill cures an illusion because it attempts to fix what was never there in the first place

Its not a headache that needs fixing - Its the belief that we are a body that can suffer from anything at all

So perhaps it would be better to work on the question "what am I" ?

I would pay real, hard cash for one -- just one -- piece of real evidence that there is nothing but consciousness, "belief" as you put it.

I would also like to ask why anyone would seriously believe that Jesus Christ himself would decide to tell one woman -- just one -- this "new truth" that is ACIM, and expect that everybody would just naturally believe her.

And finally, I'd give anything to understand why so many actually do.

This is a persistent theme in religious belief -- that God can only speak to one or two people at a time, "prophets," and that it becomes their job to convince the rest of us. Think about it for just half a second: this God that could create trillions upon trillions of worlds in a universe vaster than anything you can imagine, can't find the time to give the same message all at once to a few measly billions of humans, and so has to resort to this absurd route of using intermediaries, and all of the confusion that results.

__________________
evangelicalhumanist: Greek "eu"=good and "angelos"=messenger. Spreading the good news of Humanism.

It is a bit more complex than that, actually, but thank you, you have made a good point. It is true that many faiths recognize prophets, holy men, and yes, a Messiah as being somehow special, somehow in closer connection with God. However, it seems to me that many of those same religions also practice prayer and/or meditation, which are methods of attempting to commune in some manner with the Infinite, the Divine, the Universe, etc. Hence, it's not a clearcut thing that one can say a persistent theme of religious belief is that God can only speak to one or two people. An example to the contrary would be the Christian concept of the Holy Spirit, which is God in-dwelling, and comes from an older Hebrew concept which is similar. Frequently Christians will say the Holy Spirit led them to take an action. As someone who probably doesn't believe in such a thing, you might find that alienating or scary. Call it conscience or the better part of oneself, though, and it might seem quite familiar.

A couple of times here I have said I don't believe in a small God. You are right, some people apparently do believe they can only reach God through a single chosen intermediary. Personally, I don't believe it is even possible for any being to entirely sever the connection with God, although it is certainly possible to view that connection in all kinds of different ways (I am a Christian, you are a caring citizen of the Universe). I know nothing about ACIM but from what little I have seen on the board here, it sounds like it's supposed to teach you how to commune with God more effectively in some manner. I think we are born knowing how, in the way that is best for us. We can put on religions of various names, we can find inspirations various places, but my personal belief is that every person is to some degree a prophet, in that every person indeed opens onto the Infinite. If it teaches that, I cannot disagree although I might disagree with specifics.

As the Bible says of prophets, you can know them by their fruits. I think you and I would both agree that there are people who, IF God is sending them a specific message and God is good, probably have either wildly misinterpreted or misrepresented that message. These too we are supposed to know by their fruits. Me, I love mangos and papayas, but not everyone does. There's a similar problem with the Biblical fruit metaphor. When we judge the prophets we usually judge them by our personal tastes. Tastes...differ.

__________________
"For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love."
- Carl Sagan

E.H,
I would pay real, hard cash for one -- just one -- piece of real evidence that there is nothing but consciousness, "belief" as you put it.

The evidence is in one's own person experience. You can not see it or proove it, because it is an inner revelation.

I would also like to ask why anyone would seriously believe that Jesus Christ himself would decide to tell one woman -- just one -- this "new truth" that is ACIM, and expect that everybody would just naturally believe her.

First of all "This Truth" is not something new. You can find it in the N.T. and from many other sources. It is a new interpretation, other than what we are taught in church. The course calls it an un-doing, I see it as a stop doing, since there is no past outside of time. The course resonates with those seeking, if one is not seeking one will not resonate. It is not the person they believe in but the message that is received.

And finally, I'd give anything to understand why so many actually do.

Many are ready. It is the age of Aquarius. Many have seeked and many will find.

This is a persistent theme in religious belief -- that God can only speak to one or two people at a time, "prophets," and that it becomes their job to convince the rest of us. Think about it for just half a second: this God that could create trillions upon trillions of worlds in a universe vaster than anything you can imagine, can't find the time to give the same message all at once to a few measly billions of humans, and so has to resort to this absurd route of using intermediaries, and all of the confusion that results.

This is a persistnet argument amoung none believers. Not because of lack of answers but the willingness to step out of the box. As long as none believers only see evidence in physical proof, their questions will go unanswered. To step out of the box is to open up to the possiblity that there is something other than physical proof that can be revealed to us as true or knowing.

__________________
May your awareness be perfection