Ambres / Sture Johansson
- Thread starter worldbridger
- Start date
Lan8r
Jedi Master
Posted by: Burma Jones
After watching the Y-tube series, this is also my main concern, question. Yes, and all the unconditional love stuff did remind of the New Age Love and Lighters. And basically what was being said, that may have any ring of truth, was like Duh!! Heard that before.
But I couldn't help but wonder, particularly since Sture has no recollection of this and has no clue of what was being said through him, who invited Ambres to the party? 'Ambres' answers this question, when it is finally raised by the narrator, by saying that he is borrowing this body. This is the perfect body, since (and I paraphrase here) he is just a lowly carpenter, uneducated and therefore no one would question whether he made this stuff up. Of course, he claims that he is not doing him any harm and Sture is in a state of semi-consciousness or whatever, while Ambres drops in for a visit. But, still?
Now, Okay, I have only watched the you tube version and there may be much more to it than that. Maybe Sture invited him on some subconscious level, but if this entity were truly STO would he not state first of all that I am here because I was asked? And would he not require that Sture be an active and open participant?
And what kind of entity would chose a host based on them being, as Ambres states 'uneducated', which implies that they are not able to discern the message being brought forth, let alone throw him aside and take over his body? (not suggesting that Sture in not intelligent and able to discern) It seems that Ambres wherever he resides still has some Ego issues!!
After watching the Y-tube series, this is also my main concern, question. Yes, and all the unconditional love stuff did remind of the New Age Love and Lighters. And basically what was being said, that may have any ring of truth, was like Duh!! Heard that before.
But I couldn't help but wonder, particularly since Sture has no recollection of this and has no clue of what was being said through him, who invited Ambres to the party? 'Ambres' answers this question, when it is finally raised by the narrator, by saying that he is borrowing this body. This is the perfect body, since (and I paraphrase here) he is just a lowly carpenter, uneducated and therefore no one would question whether he made this stuff up. Of course, he claims that he is not doing him any harm and Sture is in a state of semi-consciousness or whatever, while Ambres drops in for a visit. But, still?
Now, Okay, I have only watched the you tube version and there may be much more to it than that. Maybe Sture invited him on some subconscious level, but if this entity were truly STO would he not state first of all that I am here because I was asked? And would he not require that Sture be an active and open participant?
And what kind of entity would chose a host based on them being, as Ambres states 'uneducated', which implies that they are not able to discern the message being brought forth, let alone throw him aside and take over his body? (not suggesting that Sture in not intelligent and able to discern) It seems that Ambres wherever he resides still has some Ego issues!!
Thanks guys for the sobering comments on Ambres!
It seems that the guy behind the project of filming Ambres is a Swedish (Jungian) psychologist named Hans Ljungqvist. It's said that he is one of Swedens foremost experts on 'esoteric matters'. I found a blog in Swedish discussing the 'Ambres scam': _http://hansiwanbratt.wordpress.com/2007/12/21/
From the blog we learn e.g. that (my rough translation):
"Hans Lungqvist seems to be a typical postmodernist, who claims that there are no truths, everyone has their own truth."
Ljungqvist seems to be a close buddy to the Russian professor in 'biophysics' Konstantin G Korotkov, see:
_http://new.korotkov.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=46&Itemid=53
A few quotes from that page:
So it seems that there could be many hidden motives behind making this film and promoting Ambres.
It seems that the guy behind the project of filming Ambres is a Swedish (Jungian) psychologist named Hans Ljungqvist. It's said that he is one of Swedens foremost experts on 'esoteric matters'. I found a blog in Swedish discussing the 'Ambres scam': _http://hansiwanbratt.wordpress.com/2007/12/21/
From the blog we learn e.g. that (my rough translation):
"Hans Lungqvist seems to be a typical postmodernist, who claims that there are no truths, everyone has their own truth."
Ljungqvist seems to be a close buddy to the Russian professor in 'biophysics' Konstantin G Korotkov, see:
_http://new.korotkov.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=46&Itemid=53
A few quotes from that page:
So it seems that there could be many hidden motives behind making this film and promoting Ambres.
Psalehesost
The Living Force
Given that I have that Ambres booklet mentioned in the thread (I think it's the same - if there's no more than one, it would stand to reason that it is), I thought it might be interesting to summarize and/or translate and post some excerpts from it for further discussion.
I agree on the whole with the assessment on Ambres' teachings thus far in this thread. As for Sture, I tend to think that there is likely "someone" there - as opposed to the split personality explanation - though that "someone" may not be all too wonderful.
In the booklet, there's some better stuff - reading it reminded me of bits and pieces from Gurdjieff and Castaneda - and plenty of things I don't really know about (too hard to make anything definite of), as well as some things that seem rather more "iffy".
So, going through it in bits and pieces: (a somewhat random and very incomplete look at the contents, though might still give a sense of limited overview)
In the introductory part, Simeno is quoted as saying that Ambres is his teacher. He says that their goal is to point out simple, obvious truths around us. He tells you to be critical and examine what they are saying. They aim at conveying their message more to the feeling (and love, and humanity) than to the intellect, saying that the intellect is in part an illusion and in part a process of learning. He cautions that, if all too hard, imprinting and learning can bind you by getting you stuck to your mental images, keeping you from seeing clearly.
Then comes a chapter on spiritual development. Parts of us are categorized and mentioned:
* The "God spark", or Rider (already discussed).
* Our body/instrument. Our five senses of the material world and the ordinary consciousness processing what they convey.
* The subconscious, our "garbage bag", which is stuffed with all the things in us that we ignore (uncomfortable things, aggressions, inhibitions, desires) because we don't want to face them.
* "Thought bodies" and "desire bodies" - things that form in us resulting from imprinting and environment.
More of these things come later in the booklet. At this point in the booklet, there is an analogy of journey through life as a journey entering, passing through, and exiting a room. At the end of it is a part I'll quote:
It's not really anything new, though reading it the first time around was useful, because it is pretty blunt. Much of what made it have an effect probably came from the context of what else I'd read - about the false personality, the lower self we live in and now really "are" until we can connect with something Real inside us. For me, it illustrated just how much of us - about everything - is the lower self. Without that context, however, I don't think it would have meant as much.
(sidenote: All the later remarks on imprinting, etc. give an idea of false personality - but it's not so clear in what is comparatively higher and lower, useful and not in what we are dealing with here in ourselves in this existence as machines trying to improve ourselves. There is also a remark that we don't really think, but like much else, this is not so practical in giving an idea of how to use our minds better. If I'd follow the teachings of this booklet as a basis of working on myself, then I'd be focusing on detaching from my thinking, feeling love and wholeness, trying to live in the world yet see beyond my conditioned responses to the sensory world, and so on. some good parts, some questionable/needing a lot of additional context to be useful, and a lot missing regarding practicalities of how to really come to know ourselves as expressed in the Work, beyond perhaps seeing in a very general way that much is illusion. OSIT)
Now, an example of the kind of statement often found in the text that's easy to make many things of:
After a bit of saying that "thought constructs", and cannot see the whole, and you must know it through the heart - feel that the Rider is activated even though you cannot describe your experience - there comes a bit of common sense. It is pointed out that all the typical focus on spirituality, chakras, healing, etc. can be a hindrance to spiritual development; that the first step is to "see through" the material world of our senses, clean up our subconscious and see ourselves as we really are. "When you understand yourselves, you understand others and can help them." Individual work without "judging or valuing" is then recommended - again, can be understood several ways, and can possibly be a pitfall. "Your greatest chance of change and development is precisely on this torpidity plane [ie. material world]. It is here and now you shall work and live, not in the astral or mental." That's good sense, and among the best unambiguous things I've found in the booklet.
A number of things follow on various subtopics that are pretty good (pitfalls of and missing the point when "phenomenon chasing", and there are no shortcuts to learning), more or less decent, and more ambiguous ("spiritual development means love without limits, without any purpose behind it") - nothing really new, though. Now jumping ahead a bit:
Teaching sessions are mentioned at one point, how people there are unified through their higher consciousnesses that are in connection, though unfortunately their subconsciousnesses block this awareness; how they listen and unify their frequencies Then, alone, people start wondering: "Is this possible? What did old Ambres mean by that? What if I'm letting myself be fooled into something", and so on. Then, which I guess Ambres would say applies to our attitude in the discussion in this thread, in relation to people who follow his teachings:
Ambres on the question of evil:
Jumping far ahead in the booklet, how about the nature of feeding? An example thereof is given in the context of higher consciousness from which we are separated by our cluttered subconsciousness, not allowing us to experience the full unity that exists:
Going to another little matter, diet:
That's somewhat random. I'm getting quite tired - might later post more in a follow-up if relevant to discussion. There are some further things that might be interesting. For example, a brief remark on catastrophes (the planet healing itself from our collective influence, war given as an example of something creating this influence), a prior high-technological civilization ending that way (details very limited), visitors "from other planets" of both the kind that is "in touch" as well as "out of touch" with their Rider (soul); no details on the control system or the role of these visitors, apart from a brief remark on limited contact by some for teaching purposes, and on the whole an avoiding of contact because of how humanity acts. (no mention of the huge and constant interaction with 4D STS sorts and their part in what goes on)
And any number of other things, some more and some less interesting, some easier to summarize and some not. Plenty of thoughts on imprinting, the resulting narrow workings of our minds, and so on - with a mixture of some good, many hard-to-make-something-definite-of, and some more questionable remarks in all manner of categories.
I agree on the whole with the assessment on Ambres' teachings thus far in this thread. As for Sture, I tend to think that there is likely "someone" there - as opposed to the split personality explanation - though that "someone" may not be all too wonderful.
In the booklet, there's some better stuff - reading it reminded me of bits and pieces from Gurdjieff and Castaneda - and plenty of things I don't really know about (too hard to make anything definite of), as well as some things that seem rather more "iffy".
So, going through it in bits and pieces: (a somewhat random and very incomplete look at the contents, though might still give a sense of limited overview)
In the introductory part, Simeno is quoted as saying that Ambres is his teacher. He says that their goal is to point out simple, obvious truths around us. He tells you to be critical and examine what they are saying. They aim at conveying their message more to the feeling (and love, and humanity) than to the intellect, saying that the intellect is in part an illusion and in part a process of learning. He cautions that, if all too hard, imprinting and learning can bind you by getting you stuck to your mental images, keeping you from seeing clearly.
Then comes a chapter on spiritual development. Parts of us are categorized and mentioned:
* The "God spark", or Rider (already discussed).
* Our body/instrument. Our five senses of the material world and the ordinary consciousness processing what they convey.
* The subconscious, our "garbage bag", which is stuffed with all the things in us that we ignore (uncomfortable things, aggressions, inhibitions, desires) because we don't want to face them.
* "Thought bodies" and "desire bodies" - things that form in us resulting from imprinting and environment.
More of these things come later in the booklet. At this point in the booklet, there is an analogy of journey through life as a journey entering, passing through, and exiting a room. At the end of it is a part I'll quote:
It's not really anything new, though reading it the first time around was useful, because it is pretty blunt. Much of what made it have an effect probably came from the context of what else I'd read - about the false personality, the lower self we live in and now really "are" until we can connect with something Real inside us. For me, it illustrated just how much of us - about everything - is the lower self. Without that context, however, I don't think it would have meant as much.
(sidenote: All the later remarks on imprinting, etc. give an idea of false personality - but it's not so clear in what is comparatively higher and lower, useful and not in what we are dealing with here in ourselves in this existence as machines trying to improve ourselves. There is also a remark that we don't really think, but like much else, this is not so practical in giving an idea of how to use our minds better. If I'd follow the teachings of this booklet as a basis of working on myself, then I'd be focusing on detaching from my thinking, feeling love and wholeness, trying to live in the world yet see beyond my conditioned responses to the sensory world, and so on. some good parts, some questionable/needing a lot of additional context to be useful, and a lot missing regarding practicalities of how to really come to know ourselves as expressed in the Work, beyond perhaps seeing in a very general way that much is illusion. OSIT)
Now, an example of the kind of statement often found in the text that's easy to make many things of:
Could be taken in a constructive way in the context of all the other things learned, or could lead to deeper sleep, only with different dreams.
After a bit of saying that "thought constructs", and cannot see the whole, and you must know it through the heart - feel that the Rider is activated even though you cannot describe your experience - there comes a bit of common sense. It is pointed out that all the typical focus on spirituality, chakras, healing, etc. can be a hindrance to spiritual development; that the first step is to "see through" the material world of our senses, clean up our subconscious and see ourselves as we really are. "When you understand yourselves, you understand others and can help them." Individual work without "judging or valuing" is then recommended - again, can be understood several ways, and can possibly be a pitfall. "Your greatest chance of change and development is precisely on this torpidity plane [ie. material world]. It is here and now you shall work and live, not in the astral or mental." That's good sense, and among the best unambiguous things I've found in the booklet.
A number of things follow on various subtopics that are pretty good (pitfalls of and missing the point when "phenomenon chasing", and there are no shortcuts to learning), more or less decent, and more ambiguous ("spiritual development means love without limits, without any purpose behind it") - nothing really new, though. Now jumping ahead a bit:
Teaching sessions are mentioned at one point, how people there are unified through their higher consciousnesses that are in connection, though unfortunately their subconsciousnesses block this awareness; how they listen and unify their frequencies Then, alone, people start wondering: "Is this possible? What did old Ambres mean by that? What if I'm letting myself be fooled into something", and so on. Then, which I guess Ambres would say applies to our attitude in the discussion in this thread, in relation to people who follow his teachings:
Ambres on the question of evil:
No deeper reality of evil seen or explained there.
Jumping far ahead in the booklet, how about the nature of feeding? An example thereof is given in the context of higher consciousness from which we are separated by our cluttered subconsciousness, not allowing us to experience the full unity that exists:
No suffering involved? No reality of predation?
Going to another little matter, diet:
So, vegetarian it would be. Another remark is also made in support of this elsewhere, though I don't find it right now.
That's somewhat random. I'm getting quite tired - might later post more in a follow-up if relevant to discussion. There are some further things that might be interesting. For example, a brief remark on catastrophes (the planet healing itself from our collective influence, war given as an example of something creating this influence), a prior high-technological civilization ending that way (details very limited), visitors "from other planets" of both the kind that is "in touch" as well as "out of touch" with their Rider (soul); no details on the control system or the role of these visitors, apart from a brief remark on limited contact by some for teaching purposes, and on the whole an avoiding of contact because of how humanity acts. (no mention of the huge and constant interaction with 4D STS sorts and their part in what goes on)
And any number of other things, some more and some less interesting, some easier to summarize and some not. Plenty of thoughts on imprinting, the resulting narrow workings of our minds, and so on - with a mixture of some good, many hard-to-make-something-definite-of, and some more questionable remarks in all manner of categories.
Trending content
-
Thread 'Coronavirus Pandemic: Apocalypse Now! Or exaggerated scare story?'
- wanderingthomas
Replies: 29K -
-
-
-