You are hereBlogs / RichardMiller's blog / A Life unfolding from your own authority, not relying on external guidance

A Life unfolding from your own authority, not relying on external guidance

RichardMiller's picture

By RichardMiller - Posted on 14 April 2014

Richard J MillerRichard J Miller

Here is a chance to gauge yourself. Where are you on the spectrum described below?  

Your life definitions are a result of the teachings that you follow/recite.  What road are they taking you down?  Are you permanently on a high flying disc?  Have you ever given it enough time, (sustaining openness) to see if openness is a self-reinforcing feedback loop?

1. I have never given much time to listen to Ester Hicks.  But I want to use this audio to demonstrate a life of openness, which as she describes it, leads to ever-more openness.

She calls it living on a “high flying disc”. You know it because it feels good. She mentions that you are choosing your conversations, (with self and others) meaning that you choose your thoughts.  Maybe you’re not choosing the exact content of thoughts, but choosing the quality of thoughts.  

2. This is what I have been calling a life lived on its own authority. You need nothing else. No finger pointing at the moon. 

Thoughts are either closing or opening.  She defines the “vibration” of the thoughts, which is one step removed, and makes it too esoteric and kind of unapproachable.  How are you going to decide, that now you are going to raise up your vibration???  

Ditch the word vibration and just look at bodily contraction.   Beliefs (life definitions) played on the mind are thoughts, life definitions played on the body are your level of contraction.  IT”S EASY.


3. She makes it very difficult with many fancy concepts.  Without them, people might be sustaining openness in great numbers. She says mystifying things like:

a) In sync with infinite intelligence, how do you do that?

b) A high flying disc effects your point of attraction (like you have to be met by something coming down the road).

c) Your emotional inner guidance system works by noting the difference between you and your invariable source.

d) The inner never deviates, so you see the vibrational variance.

4. For me there is a much more practical route to take.  Just look into these beliefs which take you continuously down a limiting path.

a) Yes, I go with what feels bad so that I can stay with my friends, or with the dinner conversation.

b) There is a lot of conspiracy out there, shouldn’t we discuss it? 

c) If someone is mean, they should get that reflection back.

d) Then I want to teach someone a lesson.

e) I haven’t figured out that the one I am teaching doesn’t care, and only I get damaged?

f) When certain things occur to me, I have the right to react without thinking.

5.  It’s all your thoughts my friends. The best way to put non-contracting thoughts into practice is to call them an experiment.  We have gone the anxiety route for decades, and we see the kind of life that it produces.  What would it be like if my thoughts were different?

6.  I suppose that we can mention the value of flowering in life.  Some will argue that this puts too much premium on change for the better. Then I judge that my changes are not enough, or they are going the wrong way, and I feel worse.

Change is relative, perhaps to how much you're enjoying what is here. I remember times in my life where I wanted to slow down change, because I was enjoying my life at the moment so much.  (Please give me more time to love this.) Life was great after the changes too. 

We can also say that frozen in the movie “Ground Hog Day” is not pleasant to anyone. Of course greater and greater velocities are taken as catastrophe.  So the rate of acceptable (pleasant) change is different for everyone.

Then people are also visited by catastrophe.  Doesn’t that give me the right to react in a negative way?  Well let’s just stay with the practical.  Does that negative reaction help the situation in any way?  I think that you’ll be hard pressed to see where it does?

7. In this scenario what is the drive for enlightenment? It is a desire to jump off the wagon (to who knows where).  Basically you’re not enjoying anything about yourself.  The whole foundation of the enlightenment drive is skewed by dissatisfaction.  

Maybe you have had a spiritual experience or satori, that has demonstrated there is something way more.  I think that it is always your responsibility to put that experience in its place, (as the gift that it was) and manage it such that all of life doesn’t go sour.

For me this kind of seeking is a bogus activity assured to produce misery.  If true enlightenment is an accident, then let it happen when it happens.  That is soon enough for me.

Your rating: None
marcus's picture

Hi, dear Richard.

If man could premeditate the quality of thought, the premeditation would be a thought and the content of this thought would need to be "exact" because it defines the quality of future thoughts. As man is not able to choose the "exact content of thoughts" as you concede, he is obviously also not able to choose the "quality of thought" because in order to choose the quality an exact thought would be needed in the first place. Therefore man can never premeditate the quality of thought which is the aliveness of the moment with certainty. Obviously, living life with this kind of openness would be uncertainty rather than certainty. So, is it in uncertainty you have been living?

Marcus Stegmaier

RichardMiller's picture

The science of certainty broke down ages ago, and statistical methods were then developed. Statistics is all about identifying a pattern (a memory) about how things have resolved in the past.

Let’s say that in 99% of the recorded events, my thought was in this pattern. Will my thought be in this pattern again? This kind of science would say YES, with the caution that this is a 99% probability.

Premeditating on the exact quality of a thought in any moment with certainty (your statement) is no longer science.

So science should not be used as a justification for one man’s notion into the make-up of reality (as sound and light). It is just that, one man’s notion of how the world is put together. It has no basis in science to back up these vague thoughts. One man wants the world to be made up of sound and light. Good for him. Those are metaphors for vibration. I hope that it serves him. It does’ not serve me, nor those that I know.

Other thought leaders have a completely different take on the power of thought.

These are Indian types too, only with may hundred thousands of followers. Why so may followers? Because the teachings impact the quality results of living. Measuring results is science too. In fact, science has to produce results, or it is not science. It is only imagination.

Such a figure might also have his own take on what life is made of. But he is smart enough not to insist on his own interpretation. He gives some rules into changing your life, knowing that you will discover what needs to be discovered, when the time is right. 

Let's Discover
Richard Miller

marcus's picture

Dear Richard.

Everything known is memory and statistics is not an exception. Statistics is science too, and science has never broken down. Statistics does not analyze HOW things have resolved but only infers the occurrence in numerical terms but not its outcome. Statistics is illusory because, for example, if statistics of the average height of a group of people is taken, none in the group would be found to have the average height. Statistics proofs that life is precise yet unpredictable. 99% prediction of an average number is vague and not exact. However statistics makes man believe that life is controllable to 99% which is but an illusion, precisely manifested by the intelligence of life. Life is either controllable or not, if only 99%, not even as an actuality but as a number, it means it is not controllable, nor predictable. Statistics can record your events in numerical terms, only after they have happened and never before they happen, for statistics cannot premeditate the event in a moment with certainy . Statistics cannot record YOUR THOUGHTS or it’s quality on the events.
Premeditating on the thought or its quality with certainty is NOT possible even for science too.
That reality is made up of light is not anyone’s notion, it is a scientific fact, and not a statistical number. It does not serve anybody but relaxes him to live life in trust, when he understands that life is illusory and not real.
Followers too happen not because of any teaching but only because, a teaching instils a hope of that its quality may happen. Science too is illusory and therefore an intellectual illusion that might or might not open people’s eyes to what reality is. Before it was faith that opened people’s eyes to reality, as science had not happened then. Since science has happened to man it is science that opens man’s eyes to reality. Every one discovers what is meant to be discovered, albeit illusory.

So the point that still remains is, you are living life as an uncertainty rather than certainty.

Marcus Stegmaier

Part of the Action

We remain committed to be on the forefront of what will support life, both in your family and on planet earth. 


My interaction with you is an Experiment to further enable this vision to be true, and up to the rhythm that you are a part of the action.  


Please contribute to make this vision real.  

With Heart Felt Thanks, Richard Miller.



Who's online

There are currently 0 users and 2 guests online.