"We are all entangled in the teeming activity of every other person on earth."
Indeed!
love,
~Kate

Yes indeed Kate and Deepak, this last sentence is true.

But I remember, Deepak, that this was one of your first messages to the world: "I wonder, just as we are able to make all our pessimitic and negative thoughts come true, would it also be possible to make all our optimistic and positive thoughts come true?"

This sentence was the one that attracted me to your vision and being attracted to yoga, i also started practicing this question at the same time. And guess what I found out:

You are right, as much as we can make our negative thoughts true, we can also make our positive thoughts true.

After an experience of more than 30 years making my positive thoughts come true,in other words changing my perception, i am convinced of this and I certainly know what to choose!

;)

Good luck with the iconoclasts movie this week!

love, Mieke

I can't help but think that those saints and sages, Adi-Buddhas and Christs, Maietryas and all, really do have good wishes for us. And we individuals, regardless of our circumstances, pick up on that.
I really kind of think that thanks to Jesus's good wishes, 2000 years ago, that we were able to formulate the ideas of women's rights, animal's rights, even human rights and civil rights, no less the Magna Carta for a prelude to democracy.
And that while they are not incarnate, those vibrations remain.
It may be why the whole does not equal the sum of its parts and why the different regions of the brain are responding simultaneously without an apparent connection.

Beautiful! Very well written!

This is some great stuff, as I really like how you explain it all to where we can understand the process of the One Mind.

Thanks Deepak!

Love, Char

Sherry, Jesus was only the messenger. The global brain the author and the message itself was Love.

Jesus is a miracle of LOVE.

mir·a·cle

1: an extraordinary event manifesting divine intervention in human affairs2: an extremely outstanding or unusual event, thing, or accomplishment

LOVE

1 a (1): strong affection for another arising out of kinship or personal ties ... b: an assurance of love ...2: warm attachment, enthusiasm, or devotion ....3 a: the object of attachment, devotion, or admiration .... b (1): a beloved person : darling —often used as a term of endearment ....

a: unselfish loyal and benevolent concern for the good of another: as (1): the fatherly concern of God for humankind (2): brotherly concern for others b: a person's adoration of God5: a god or personification of love6: ....

9capitalized Christian Science : god

Dear Deepak,
Thanks for this post, for highlighting how we are a part of the whole while still being very individual at the same time.

Individual brain works independently as well as one with the collective brain. There is evidence that individual cells in our body do the same- work independently, with their own intelligence as well as in co-operation with other tissues and the body as a whole. It is as if there is microcosm within macrocosm at every level, each a complete representation of reality in itself and also only a part of reality on a bigger scale.

Perhaps that is why there appears to be an external operator of the brain, co-ordinating various different regions to be active at the same time for a single task and an operator within, generating new impulses and activity within the brain. There is one operator outside and one inside and they are both the same. It is mindbending but we see this picture repeated everywhere in nature, of reality within reality.

It is no wonder then that the global brain/global consciousness behaves like the individual one and vice versa. And of course global brain itself is part of the universal brain/ consciousness, isn't it? I wish there was a CAT scanner for global and even universal brain for real. It would solve so many mysteries of our own brains that still confound doctors and scientists.

Char:

If Jesus was indeed the "Only" author.. and if this WORLD is what he authored then:

1. He suffered from a rather small vision - because the earth is insignificant in the context of the many Universes that scientists say exist, and

2. was a rather poor author for if THIS is what he created out of His imagination, then it does not reflect well on Him..

.. does it?

I wonder if you realize that your views are at odds with the "Global Brain" concept of Dr. Chopra? And that you are no different from the many Jehadists who will kill others who believe there was a Prophet after Mohammad.

This fundamentalism of "ONLY" is what the Human-kind suffers from.... this false sense of superiority that one is unique in some way... even if it leads to making others suffer ...

For Dr. Chopra:

Anhad di had disdi nahin;
Had lagdi taan je main hovaan.

I am the limitation of this global... rather Cosmic brain....

Cheers,
Desh
Drishtikone.com

Yes, we are One Humanity, and we are all connected -- especially, as Char says, through the gift of Love.

Char did not say that Jesus was the "only" manifestation of that Love. She has been the most refreshingly non-sectarian Christian, being very respectful and appreciative of other faiths and viewpoints. Meanwhile, she is true to herself, not as a blindly conforming Christian so much as a true Christ-follower. Jesus sees His miracle of divine Love in Char, and embraces her as His own close friend.

Sir,
If The so called global brain exits...What about Global Heart...U speak of people communicating with each other through this network.

If for a chance the people of your generation train nextgen through this network .Since its global ,people may be of different language in physcial sense but global brain ,can understand a neutral language which may be of thoughts ,the language used even before one learns some language. So is it possible to track this language neutral one. What frequency is this wave being transmitted. What makes one receive it. If such a possibility exist this can be used for both transmitting the so called good for people or evil for people. This bcomes more dangerous when one knew the evil things one do may not be ineffect theirs but some oneelse mind power compeling it on them..And they do have no knowledge ofwhat they are doing..

And what is the possibility that what your generation are training the nextgen through this global field is right. How can the younger gen choose. Do they come there willing or do by compulsion. Or people with higher power mind fields are miss using it to train the lesser ones to achieve what they wish.

Without a global heart ,the global brain can become selfcentered ,and be used for personal motives..

http://www.heartmath.org/research/our-heart-brain.html Not sure the site gives a real research or not..

Sir,
I have doubt too. I have seen some where you mentioned, about your writing on Buddha..You said you are amazed to see many buddists even don't know he is from india. What does it make a difference for followers of buddha..For history or biography students it do make a difference..If the global brain exists how can one say buddhas enlightment is his .MAny have helped him in his journey, through global level brain networks.Just their collective effort manifested through one. How can one ignore all other unknown personalities who might have really struggled more than him to make him up there. I just got doubt in this global brain talk and ur comment on buddha i read somewhere..

Just as bush has his god in name of his religion, India or any country name to be shine more means same religious madness. One have to love motherland then only they knew how others feel about their motherland. But to say only our land is a bond in the mind..In global vision ,one has to love ones own and has to expand, to take others to same effect..

With Love
Triumph

My goodness how important words are!
I first read the post as Jesus was the only messenger. But now I read that Jesus was only the messenger.
I really like the way the French and the Iroquois {at any rate, one of the Native American languages), put their adjectives after the noun. Therefore the noun coming first in the sentence is more important. Its modification coming after is secondary. Its psychological difference is apparent. - the black man or the man who happens to be black.
Since we tend to forget things, I'd rather forget the last part of a French phrase than the first part.

Regarding post #15: My high school history teacher used to pose the question - Do the times make the man, or does the man make the times?

Triumph #14 & #15:

Thanks for including heart...I love heart math! What you say in #15 reminds me of someone I know who takes credit for work that others do. He had an abusive childhood and this is his insecurity talking. Is his self-centered behavior okay because of his wounds?

I like your thought that Buddha's light/life is not his. It's a collection of all the impressions and experiences he gathered along the way. And yet he is unique just one single flower is in a garden. It's good to appreciate the differences in the sea of Oneness.

How do flowers thrive? With love through water, air, sun, earth. We are all gardeners supporting life...or destroying it.

En-joy today, Triumph.

Trish~~

Interesting metaphor. The idea that global heart can be a metaphor is intriguing also.

Extending the metaphor, we could say there's a global gut, which would be mass instincts towards self-preservation, survival, and basic human emotional reactions.

Global gut would encompass the three lower chakras, global heart the two middle ones, and global brain the two highest chakras.

The three (gut, heart, mind) have to function in a harmony for happiness, fulfillment, and eventual enlightenment.

It's a workable metaphor.

What is needed is, to use the word you have used, objectivity. I don't think it's the best word to choose, because it a word which is prominent in the languaging used to create the materialist/spiritualist conflict (which, ultimately, like all dualities, is an illusion).

I like the phrase meditative viewpoint, but that is also loaded up with images of holy meditators and so on.

Another phrase is "one step back view," meaning just enough separation that one can see and feel what one's attention is on, but not be over-identified with it to the point of losing awareness.

Less over-identification with our gut reactions, emotional attachments, and beloved personal opinions would serve humanity well.

A type of education which is free from imposed ideologies, religions, and not glued to a particular cultural conditioning is what is needed.

A type of education that encourages creativity and teaches responsibility for what one creates along with it.

As I read recently somewhere (maybe it was here on this blog?), we are raising children who will live in a world different from ours, who will use technology we don't yet have to solve problems we haven't yet encountered.

So the education has to avoid the pitfalls of getting stuck in past worldviews, past technologies, and being geared only to solve yesterday's problems.

Thank you, yogi-one! I appreciate your logic and emotion woven together and delivered.

I could chat all day and weave these threads of heart/mind and gut!! You said it well. A trinity of sorts?

I have to go to work now. This blog begins to feel like family.

En-joy!

Trish~~

"This blog begins to feel like family."
Trish
--------------------------------------------------

How true, Trish!

I think all the bad elements have been weeded out. They should have been sent packing home long ago. It's relieving not to see the irrelevant comments and the crazy poems calling everybody a dimwit here. What temerity!

Deeepak, I enjoy your posts. Your insights into working of human brain and global brain are remarkable. Please keep up the good work.

In the movie Truman Capote, about his writing of the book In Cold Blood, Truman interviewed the convict in his jail cell. Truman wanted facts for his book. There was a poignant scene where the convict tried to explain something to Truman. He tried to explain it twice, from his heart. Yet Truman responded twice, "There is nothing, nothing, do you understand? There is nothing you have to say about that that I don't already know."
Well, I dismissed some Jehovah Witnesses one time. But really, it was because I didn't have the where-with-all to know what to say. The kind words weren't coming. The intellectual ones were. And so I dismissed them.

Deepak Chopra's article reminds me of the movie, The Village.

The critics were unkind toward its premise, but if the movie's treated as an allegory, you can glean a lot from it.

Thanks Ocean Breeze, as I think you said it well. God loves all the children and does not differentiate between the beloved. I was reading in Romans this morning where St. Paul said our God is in all things as he worded it more to the effect of knowing God in Nature like the Greeks, Romans, or Gentiles know God is sufficient, or as I have also read, 'God's laws are written in the hearts of all.' That's why I so love Deepak and his teachings. God is Love and Love is God.

Love, Char

That's totally cool, Char4.

God is Love where 'love' grammatically is the predicate nominative, not the object. Not OF love. Not FOR love. Not IN love. Not TO love. God IS love, and so, as you say, Love IS God.

What's interesting about the predicate nominative is that it can logically be the subject, and even carries the attributes of the subject for that very purpose. Grammatically we say, "It is I," not "It is me." Or "This is she" rather than "This is me."

I think Shakespeare wrote, "Woe is me," but I think he might have actually screwed up grammatically...or was subject to the idiomatic use of his times. Rather, it ought to have been "Woe am I". Anyway, ignoring, for a moment, Shakespeare:

Love is very close. God, in most humans' minds, is very far away. So if, as the predicate nominitive indicates, "Love IS God", then to say "I love" is the same thing as to say "I GOD". Too bad God isn't a verb in most people's minds.

I God you, Char4, for bringing it close to home!

That's totally cool, Char4.

God is Love where 'love' grammatically is the predicate nominative, not the object. Not OF love. Not FOR love. Not IN love. Not TO love. God IS love, and so, as you say, Love IS God.

What's interesting about the predicate nominative is that it can logically be the subject, and even carries the attributes of the subject for that very purpose. Grammatically we say, "It is I," not "It is me." Or "This is she" rather than "This is me."

I think Shakespeare wrote, "Woe is me," but I think he might have actually screwed up grammatically...or was subject to the idiomatic use of his times. Rather, it ought to have been "Woe am I". Anyway, ignoring, for a moment, Shakespeare:

Love is very close. God, in most humans' minds, is very far away. So if, as the predicate nominitive indicates, "Love IS God", then to say "I love" is the same thing as to say "I GOD". Too bad God isn't a verb in most people's minds.

I nevertheless God you, Char4, for bringing it close to home!

That's totally cool, Char4.

God is Love where 'love' grammatically is the predicate nominative, not the object. Not OF love. Not FOR love. Not IN love. Not TO love. God IS love, and so, as you say, Love IS God.

What's interesting about the predicate nominative is that it can logically be the subject, and even carries the attributes of the subject for that very purpose. Grammatically we say, "It is I," not "It is me." Or "This is she" rather than "This is me."

I think Shakespeare wrote, "Woe is me," but I think he might have actually screwed up grammatically...or was subject to the idiomatic use of his times. Rather, it ought to have been "Woe am I". Anyway, ignoring, for a moment, Shakespeare:

Love is very close. God, in most humans' minds, is very far away. So if, as the predicate nominitive indicates, "Love IS God", then to say "I love" is the same thing as to say "I GOD". Too bad God isn't a verb in most people's minds.

I nevertheless God you, Char4, for bringing it close to home!

Anyway, if you can do this, then it guarantees God's continual presence in your household.

In your very bones, really.

It gets a little trippy when you more accurately translate "Ehyeh asher ehyeh" as "I shall be that I shall be".

But what's in a name?

Little kitty-cat in one hour dead or alive
depending upon whether the atom decays or survives;
quantum superposition collapsing upon human measurement.

Spooky action at a distance;
or nearby hidden variables?

“Do you really think the moon isn't there if you aren't looking at it?”
Declares Albert Einstein

Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen,
leaving Alice and Bobs’ heads up and down spinning.

O entangling states we weave when reality we try to perceive . . .
the ensuing quantum mathematics looking pretty Greek to me . . .

Alas, at least within the CI there is only one world that will die,
as compared to many worlds that endlessly exist or commit suicide.

Bell inequalities violated, nonlocality substantiated;
“Einstein, don't tell God what to do.” Rebuts Niels Bohr

Can God create a riddle even an omniscient one cannot solve?
Can the Alpha and Omega not know the present unfolding?
Is a human beings means of “freely”-willed action,
for all, the end of God’s determined satisfaction?

Is there a superluminal universal connection
that humankind can discover that will lead to our redemption?
Is the Kingdom of God Within, a particle looking to unite,
with the heavens above that wave to us each and every night?

Did I create this poem or has this story already been told?

(Nevertheless, I wore Wiki out with this multiply linked shout!)

Peace

I really liked in the Bible when Moses asked God what name shall he tell the people, i.e., God's name. And God said, "I am that, I am." I just love that, as it really does best describe God, i.e., the unknown.

So the way I see it is that no only do I have to know myself, but one needs to know everything else to know God, which is the self. To me, it means that God is in everything and that God is everything ... all that.

But to know God, I have to experience all this within myself and expand, as the Kingdom of God is truly within us all. Then, one becomes more whole.

I cannot imagine this, as God is so big! so great! so magnificent! so perfect everything - even in imperfection! And once we get this far, I have read and heard others say, God is infinite. Plus, I was reading in Enoch (still on the 1st book) the other day, that the highest Holy Angels that are nearest God, as still completely blown away by God's presence, they go round and round God saying, "Holy! Holy! Holy!" Like what can someone really say about being that close to God? I don't know, but I really liked reading this. Will we ever really know God??? the fullness of it all? the infinite - never ending nor beginning? It is amazing and I cannot possible wrap myself around this magnificent, all knowing Presence.

Love, Char

The other day, I was thinking about God being this really big brain ... like the one of the sci-fi movies I have seen before. But that's really restricting God, but the name of Deepak's post caused me to ponder up this big brain. Some of it has sparks of light and some of it has dark corners, as it relates to this one big brain ... just thinking out loud. Yep, sounds funny.

Love, Char

Well, I wonder if we can really know God. Is there a "knower" and a "known"? Doesn't this imply a separation between the subject and the object? Another duality? Yet God includes both, is one with both and beyond both duality and non duality. God is the Absolute, The Source, The Energy of all that IS, including the global brain (collective consciousness if you will). Yet again, beyond all that IS and unknowable.

Just wondering.

Bonnie, maybe God is a portmanteau? Imagine a small, worn, unattended suitcase in an empty train station in which any two words may be packed up into one single meaning.

The suitcase is covered in tattered stickers of far-away places.

And then words are pulled back out and separated once again. And what if we jammed the full lexicon into it? Would they fit?

I'll bet they can.

But what could be said about it then?

If that is the case, dana, then IS would stand forth, self-evident and dazzling.

All the other words would become Jabberwacky.

:)
bonnie

I stand with you in celebrating is-ness.

Is-ness fun?

Because it's time we got down to is-ness.

dana

Thanks for the Smil-is this perfect fall morning.
:)

bonnie

:)

What we don't understand, we sometimes fear. That is when our faith is supposed to be brought in. I have known about Quantum Physics before the scientists came up with it, or even had a name for it. And with just faith and faith alone, I have always used it. The problem I find with ego mind is that it has a tendency to want to control, in the absence of knowledge it certainly will make it's own reality.
I always remember my Grand Mother quoting William Cowper "God moves in mysterious way's, His wonders to perform". Well far be from me to figure those ways out. I believe Deepak has seen the light.Works with the light, and now knows the scientific equations of it. He is a seeker, and a knower.And now he see's a way to impact the world with it. I beleive.
Thank you Deepak I have followed your every insight throughout my 60 years. Never have I found a flaw.
Nameste Rev Dee

What we don't understand, we sometimes fear. That is when our faith is supposed to be brought in. I have known about Quantum Physics before the scientists came up with it, or even had a name for it. And with just faith and faith alone, I have always used it. The problem I find with ego mind is that it has a tendency to want to control, in the absence of knowledge it certainly will make it's own reality.
I always remember my Grand Mother quoting William Cowper "God moves in mysterious way's, His wonders to perform". Well far be from me to figure those ways out. I believe Deepak has seen the light.Works with the light, and now knows the scientific equations of it. He is a seeker, and a knower.And now he see's a way to impact the world with it. I beleive.
Thank you Deepak I have followed your every insight throughout my 60 years. Never have I found a flaw.
Nameste Rev Dee

What we don't understand, we sometimes fear. That is when our faith is supposed to be brought in. I have known about Quantum Physics before the scientists came up with it, or even had a name for it. And with just faith and faith alone, I have always used it. The problem I find with ego mind is that it has a tendency to want to control, in the absence of knowledge it certainly will make it's own reality.
I always remember my Grand Mother quoting William Cowper "God moves in mysterious way's, His wonders to perform". Well far be from me to figure those ways out. I believe Deepak has seen the light.Works with the light, and now knows the scientific equations of it. He is a seeker, and a knower.And now he see's a way to impact the world with it. I beleive.
Thank you Deepak I have followed your every insight throughout my 60 years. Never have I found a flaw.
Nameste Rev Dee