Hi Sainbury, thanks for your input. I'm going to try and clarify some of my points as I don't think I really expounded enough. Obviously, these are huge topics so I'm going to try and be a bit more detailed using their sources. Sorry about the formatting, blue is my previous statement, bold is Sainbury!
We are living in something like a programmed virtual reality
This is not a programmed reality but rather a digital probable reality. No one programs reality, that is where God is always inserted, but rather the reality evolves.
Yes, they would differ here I think about the probable
reality; I think they say everything is predetermined. They say we are in a reality called "Adam" which is a closed computer/matrix-like system [https://bit.ly/2DDLPwG
]. But they have a different conception of God as below:
They define "God" as "Nature"
"The wisdom of Kabbalah speaks only about the discovery of the higher system that is concealed within our nature. Behind the nature that we see, feel, and discover with our five senses, there is a system that manages us, our entire lives, and all of our development.
The wisdom of Kabbalah is engaged with discovering this system. It explains how this same system, the upper force, created us, how we exist, how we are evolving, and what kind of state we must ultimately attain.
This entire system is called Elokim (God). Elokim and nature (HaTeva) are the same thing (they have the same numerical value according to Gematria, and this indicates that they have the same essence). However, by the word “nature” we don’t mean the physical nature that surrounds us, but an immense system, a minute part of which is revealed to us, whereas 99.9% of it is concealed." [https://bit.ly/2qN95A9
"I don’t know what people mean when they say “God.” If by God we mean a force that controls everything, then that force is nature... ...Nature can be called God if we remember that it is an absolutely rigid force, which does not abide to any of our wishes. It is not like our parents to whom we can come and cry and they will have pity on us. Our tears will not help. It is a system that acts according to its precise laws." [https://bit.ly/2DDm8g6
But I get your point about Nature here being a part of this particular PMR. But I wonder if they would say, that God/Elokim is all laws of nature in every PMR... Probably.
That genetic information is what is carried on to the next incarnation
Genetic information isn't carried on, but the quality of consciousness, better or worse, from the end of one incarnation is taken into the next.
They say it is a form of "spiritual genetics" which is probably an allegorical way of putting it. They say that the "quality of attainment" (i.e. your accumulated inner qualities of altruism) are what carries on to the next incarnation, so in that sense again it is similar.
It is actually this last point which most shocked me; that a supposed 5000 year old secret knowledge equated (almost) to what a physicist like Tom says today.
The part where they differ is what they call the "Law of Equivalence of Form"; that is, equating your intention with the "Creator's" intention. By that they say there are only 2 forces: above and below. Above is God/Nature/Force of Bestowal - below is everything else/Us/Quality of Reception. They emphasize a lot the Bestowal/Receiving dynamic. In order for the Receiver to "equate" with the Bestower, he shifts his intention to ALSO give at the same time as receive. He does this by watching intentions closely and, upon notice of any reception, receive whatever it is graciously with the intent that this would be pleasing to the Bestower. In short, shifting egoistic desires to altruistic desires.
"The desire to receive is unchangeable; it is matter which cannot be altered. But desire can be used in two different ways: It can either be filled from the inside by receiving, or it can be utilized for bestowal. In the second case, the desire will receive for the sake of bestowal. It is possible only as an outcome of love and union with others." [https://bit.ly/2DBly2n
So I wonder if those here who have been involved in MBT work for a while have a similar notion to this "equating" or any of this makes sense in some other abstract way?