Does the truth of it really depend on how one sees it? Or is it more a matter of how one experiences it?Rick wrote:Depends upon how you see it.Webwanderer wrote:...is it not possible that there is an available choice to consciousness being? Does this not seem a reasonable process of conscious evolution?
A follower of Abraham might see it this way:
"If you are ending up where you want to be, what difference does it make whether you went fast or slow? Or what difference does it make whether it was painful before it got really good? Isn't that the point of free will? You get to choose." -Abraham
A non-dualist might see it this way:
"For a nondualist, who sustains that everything appears in Consciousness, and that there is only that One Consciousness, there is no such thing as free will, because all individual body-minds are not real entities, but mere appearances without substance.
There is actually more to the Abraham perspective than what you quote, and it's much like your quote for the non-dualist. Abraham continuously teaches that everything appears in consciousness - that we are indeed Source Consciousness extended in this physical leading edge experience. The distinction of course is the matter of free will.
If one takes the perspective of being a separate being from the Source that is one's origin, then free will is an illusion, as being separate is not possible in a universe of One Consciousness. And make no mistake, even in the perspective of claimed oneness, believing one does not exist is a perspective of separation. 'I don't exist' is a strongly implied statement that 'I am not a part' of eternal being.
However, from the perspective of being a unique perspective within the One Consciousness, somewhat isolated by lack of available memory of one's True Nature, then free will exists as an element of the Source Being of which one remains a part regardless of one's immediate lack of clarity.
It seems more accurate to perceive that what appears as separate is not real, but the consciousness that perceives it, as real or not, is real, because it is Source Itself seeing life from infinitely unique perspectives.
So in this context the question of free will is irrelevant. The significant issue is is there a Real Doer? And could (did?) this Doer pass the capacity for doing into unique perspectives within its own being, even if limited within certain environments?Where there is no real doer, there cannot be a free will.