Are the C's really Lizards?

SaturnMane said:
Jerry, my definition of spirituality is transmuting faith into knowledge.

Wouldn't this simply mean taking our own assumptions for Truth?

That sounds typically like the usual New Age wishful thinking pattern.

I don't think we can trust our own perceptions and that's because at the base, we [humans] are being programmed. As long as we don't recognize those programs and get rid of them, our perceptions remain distorted. This can be done by doing the Work but there's absolutely no free lunch here. The first step is to get rid of all our sacred beliefs and accept the fact that all we've been taught so far might be wrong. Even [especially] what makes you feel warm and comfortable, such as what is promulgated by the New Age movement. If one just sends light and love to the Universe, one is basically, imho, barely feeding the moon and offering him/herself as a free lunch on a silver plate.

Seriously, if that was so easy, don't you think the world would already be a better place to live with all those on that same line of thought?

If that's not really how you think, fine. I'm just trying to put this sort of thinking in perspective here because I think it really is endangering humanity at large. Especially as we speak.

For me being objective is to be able to see the Universe as it sees itself. Not like we wish to.

And I don't think we can think objectively if we don't look at the big picture. To understand the Universe as a Whole, you've got to look at it as a Whole. Don't you think? Unless it doesn't matter for you. Then, you risk being disappointed by what this board has to offer.

SaturnMane said:
More times i can shatter my belief system the stronger the next one will become.

The Cassiopaea experiment/material isn't a belief system. Beliefs aren't what this board is seeking nor trying to induce. Doing the Work is totally the opposite. We learn to get rid of these programs.

I suggest you simply start by opening up and put all those beliefs aside for a while and read carefully what others have suggested. You might find a lot more than you expect. ;)

Welcome aboard!
 
SaturnMane said:
Yes i have buddy. I try and look at things from different angles, which is why i asked the question about the C's. I initially read Laura's material and took it at face value and then decided to read it with a more critical viewpoint. More times i can shatter my belief system the stronger the next one will become.
Then its curious you missed "we are you in future' bit. There is nothing wrong with being critical but being rude and disrespectful is completely different kettle of fish. Unless you have an agenda. Do you?
 
Radagast said:
Then its curious you missed "we are you in future' bit.

Curious indeed as it is pretty much the first thing that is said about the C's.

Cassiopaea Homepage; Lines 4 to 6 said:
The name “Cassiopaea” was given by a consciously “channeled source” which Laura accessed in 1994 after two years of experimental work. The source identified itself by saying “we are you in the future.”
 
JayMark said:
Radagast said:
Then its curious you missed "we are you in future' bit.

Curious indeed as it is pretty much the first thing that is said about the C's.

Cassiopaea Homepage; Lines 4 to 6 said:
The name “Cassiopaea” was given by a consciously “channeled source” which Laura accessed in 1994 after two years of experimental work. The source identified itself by saying “we are you in the future.”

Indeed. That is why I commented as I did. As I noted, either you did not read, in which case you are not prepared to discuss anything on this forum, or you DID read, in which case you were just being insulting.
 
SaturanMane, I think if one reads the recommended material, including G's stuff, more than one time as he instructs the reader to do, you will probably find that the best short definition of Kundalini is; "The arising of self-calming."

Long before finding this wonderfully objective group, and after doing some yoga and staring at my navel for a month or two, I too thought "something was happening" and read a lot of hooey about "Kundalini" and subsequently started a new little "I'm speshul" program...what someone (C. Trungpa?) tagged as "spiritual materialism". Taking the time to read ALL the material here will definitely help deconstruct that little "i".


" I'm actually rather amused at being called a lizard on my own forum. "

Thanks for that one Laura, nothing like a good belly laugh !


Posted by: SaturnMane
« on: March 02, 2013, 09:45:58 PM »

Jerry, my definition of spirituality is transmuting faith into knowledge.

It seems to me that you got that backwards. Correct me if I'm wrong, but what is done here is to gain as much Objective Knowledge as possible which can then lead to Real Faith, rather than belief/faith. ( I can't find it at the moment but that G quote about the kinds of faith might be helpful here too.) Good luck!
 
SaturnMane, I think personally, that you have difficulties to "digest" the objectivity of material here and I can understand that. it's much easier to dwell in "peace" and "love and light" warm and fuzzy feeling. Be "safe".Totally understandable. To one point we all doing that.

But know imagine that you live with the person, that you loved for a lot of years. You "know" her. He/she is warm, loving and take care of you and your needs. In one moment, in a different, "heavy"situation he/she go totally mad. You don't know what to do, what to think. Who is this person? It's like you, for the first time, can see the "other side" from that person. You are confused. This is not a loving person that you know. it's scary and it's frightening, because you NEVER could imagine something like this and you don't have control. I think that is the same what happened when we ( full of "knowledge" and half truth mixed with lies) face for the first time the truth. Objective truth. It's scary, it is frightening. Our whole belief system is shaken and is fighting for survival. You can read this in Amazing grace. Laura describe this very well.

But for the true seeker who would like to KNOW the truth, is no other way. He accept the reality for what IS.

And remember what C's have said. Half truth mixed with lies is worst than not knowing.

Just my 2 cents.

Welcome to the forum.
 
Belief is faith and faith is belief knowledge doesn't believe it knows but IMO you can have educated belief through knowledge/experience.

But for the true seeker who would like to KNOW the truth, is no other way. He accept the reality for what IS

Also if you want to live the best life for youthen I believe knowing the truth will get you their quicker then if you were to only look at one side. Knowledge does protect.
 
One thing I always thought was important when studying the C's transcripts, was the fact that as STO beings of light, they not only serve the light, but also the dark, aka the positive and the negative, because they are light-givers to whoever is calling to learn and ask questions.....osit. I remember in one of the transcripts when Laura was discussing freemasonry and the illuminati, who make up the quorum and consortium, there is supposedly a 50/50 balance of positive and negative. In this discussion, the C's explained that they serve light and the dark, because they serve to release knowledge to both sides of the equation, for whoever is asking(not demanding or begging of course). But I could have misinterpreted that.but that's what I took, from these superluminal thought forms. They definitely want us to embrace the dark black hole of the universe and the wonderful illumination of STO light givers, for the polarity is all just lessons to be learned.
 
Emmanuel said:
SaturnMane, I think personally, that you have difficulties to "digest" the objectivity of material here and I can understand that. it's much easier to dwell in "peace" and "love and light" warm and fuzzy feeling. Be "safe".Totally understandable. To one point we all doing that.

But know imagine that you live with the person, that you loved for a lot of years. You "know" her. He/she is warm, loving and take care of you and your needs. In one moment, in a different, "heavy"situation he/she go totally mad. You don't know what to do, what to think. Who is this person? It's like you, for the first time, can see the "other side" from that person. You are confused. This is not a loving person that you know. it's scary and it's frightening, because you NEVER could imagine something like this and you don't have control. I think that is the same what happened when we ( full of "knowledge" and half truth mixed with lies) face for the first time the truth. Objective truth. It's scary, it is frightening. Our whole belief system is shaken and is fighting for survival. You can read this in Amazing grace. Laura describe this very well.

But for the true seeker who would like to KNOW the truth, is no other way. He accept the reality for what IS.

And remember what C's have said. Half truth mixed with lies is worst than not knowing.

Just my 2 cents.

Welcome to the forum.
Knowledge Junkie 2012 said:
One thing I always thought was important when studying the C's transcripts, was the fact that as STO beings of light, they not only serve the light, but also the dark, aka the positive and the negative, because they are light-givers to whoever is calling to learn and ask questions.....osit. I remember in one of the transcripts when Laura was discussing freemasonry and the illuminati, who make up the quorum and consortium, there is supposedly a 50/50 balance of positive and negative. In this discussion, the C's explained that they serve light and the dark, because they serve to release knowledge to both sides of the equation, for whoever is asking(not demanding or begging of course). But I could have misinterpreted that.but that's what I took, from these superluminal thought forms. They definitely want us to embrace the dark black hole of the universe and the wonderful illumination of STO light givers, for the polarity is all just lessons to be learned.
" I did not come to bring the peace, but the sword. " (Matthieu, 10:34)
 
This is my first post, but I felt internally inclined to create an account and share my thoughts on this.

First of all, ofcourse the C's say they are you in the future, as past, present, and future is a 3D illusion. And if lineair time is an illusion, then separation is an illusion (because without separation, then everyone is you and vice versa, then the C's are you), for separation is based on space, which only exists again because of lineair time. However, the one thing one must realise is that aslong as one is within the 3D illusion, lineair time and thus separation are very real. The box is real for those who are within it. The illusion is real for those who are within it, so believing it is all an illusion and there is no separation when you are in a physical body is the biggest illusion of it all. It is denial.

So this already discredits the statement Laura has made:
"I'm actually rather amused at being called a lizard on my own forum."
What this means is that Laura has already subconsciously identified herself with the C's (because the C's say they is her in the future), but she is not, she is in a human body. But because she believes this, any attack or critical questioning on the C's is viewed as an attack on herself. It is actually very similar to the authoritarian nature of humanity she often criticizes (like Republicans who identify with Romney/Democrats who identify with Obama). The OP said clearly "Are the C's really lizards?", not "Is Laura a lizard?". By this logic one may aswell assume that every word Laura speaks comes directly from the sixth density, the home of the C's (according to the C's that is). And I believe this is the reason why you all kiss her butt (although you will likely not admit this). You see her as the link to the all-knowing C's, the link that can give you spiritual growth. One poster (is it worth it to recall your name as I can't see the purpose of naming non-individuals?) also replied this to the idiotic above statement Laura made:
"Which says a lot imo, about the difference between your spiritual growth and his." Oh, does it now my loyal initiate? How do you know this? Since I'd assume by such statements that you find Laura to be more spiritual than yourself, and Laura had not yet compared her growth with the OP. Seems like Laura is put on pedestals yet again here, as Laura puts the C's on pedestals. If you were really genuine Laura, you would disprove of such behaviour, instead you seem to revel in it.

Secondly, I definately can relate to the rest of the OP's post. People here are puppets to knowledge, slaves to knowledge, just as the New Agers are puppets and slaves to wishful thinking by the name of love and light. Nowhere do I find truth (=not synomous with knowledge). Knowledge binds you, truth does not, it sets you free. You all appear to be amazingly scared of loosing your knowledge, because you have an unquestioned belief that your spirituality is dependant on your knowledge. No, the only measure of spirituality is capacity/ability of speaking Truth, which is the voice of the Universe. Truth is supposed to raise your "vibration". If it does not, it is either not truth, or you are simply not listening.

Take also this message by Ra of the Law of One material:
11.12 Questioner: Where are these three entities now?

Ra: I am Ra. These entities are in the dimension known to you as fourth. Therefore the space/time continua are not compatible. An approximation of the space/time locus of each would net no actual understanding. Each chose a fourth-density planet which was dedicated to the pursuit of the understanding of the Law of One through service to self, one in what you know as the Orion group, one in what you know as Cassiopeia, one in what you know as Southern Cross; however, these loci are not satisfactory. We do not have vocabulary for the geometric calculations necessary for transfer of this understanding to you.

I would assume Cassiopeia and Cassiopaea is the same thing. This was the only reference to the C's I could find in the Ra material. It is implied here that the Cassiopeia group is closely tied to the service-to-self polarity. So I would suggest that next time you read the Wave series you take it in with a more critical eye and a grain of salt.

This forum and the work being done here isn't about achieving Kundalini, spiritual experiences, bliss, or 'enlightenment'. These things are the 'negative' that you think you are avoiding. It's all about the self, feeling good, and what you want from the universe rather than what you can do for the universe. It's service towards self. If you have no interest in the universe because you think it has nothing to do with you, that fine but that does oppose the work being done here. Just thought you might want to know.
(quote by Shane)

Is it now? Do you have any idea what the Kundalini is? I shall enlighten you if you do not. The Kundalini is the universal energy that passes through our chakra system. High-vibrational energy is linked by our crown chakra. Low-vibrational energy is linked by our root chakra. Our crown chakra is the link to the fourth density (STO 4th density to be exact), our root chakra is our link to the second density. It is almost impossible to directly contact 6th density beings, since that is 3 octaves above our own. The energy of such beings should blow your 3D brains out (yep, bye bye, knowledge). STS 4th-5th density is an anomaly however in that it vibrates at lower levels than our 3th density, while still being astral/ethereal in nature, instead of physical/biological. Hence, such beings used to be called "fallen angels". This is why I find it highly strange (even somewhat manipulative) that the Cassiopaeans tell Laura they are sixth density, because if they really were, they wouldn't have to tell, Laura would fucking feel it! If I was a negative entity talking to an esoteric person, I would also try to convince them I was of the highest kind (sixth density). That would leave the channeler vulnerable for misinformation (=low-vibrational information) by turning him/her into an unquestioning authoritarian, me being the authority! The more I can lower the channeler's vibration, the more I can control him/her. In turn, the channeler, convinced of his/her spiritual growth, may start luring in other Earthly followers with the new wealth of misinformation, lowering their vibration in turn, and making them dependant on him/her, who is again dependant on me, the original service-to-self puppeteer!

But here is the key deception: "... The Kundalini is all about the self, feeling good, and what you want from the universe rather than what you can do for the universe. It's service towards self." No, it does not, if you do not feel good, you cannot possibly serve others. You can only serve those who have a lower vibration than you, who are operating on lower chakras, a lower level of Kundalini. Hence why positive 4D is called service-to-others, because every single being in there has a higher vibration than Earthlings. They just cannot not serve us, even if they tried. Similarly, negative 4D is called service-to-self because every single being in there has a lower vibration than Earthlings. They just cannot serve us, even if they tried. It is indeed that simple.

CONCLUSION: Sorry Laura, your esoteric books and the Wave series are ultimately unimportant. If they do not raise the reader's vibration, they may aswell be thrown in the cosmic garbage can. I especially despise places where people measure eachother spirituality. This is absolutely laughable in my eyes, and everyone who does this is so far in denial of the true nature of spirituality. It's supposed to remove boundaries, not take one away, and replacing them with a more sophisticated one. Not the biggest fan of the spiritual ego here.

Take my word folks, the game is almost up. 3D Earth is ready to be replaced by two independent 4D STO and 4D STS Earths. Energetic vortices are acting as portals, you can already visit if you like (if your vibration is high you can't fall into a negative vortex, only in a positive one, and vice versa). Failing to choose energetically will transfer you another 3D planet, where you'll have to wait for the end of their Grand Cycle.
 
Knowledge Junkie 2012 said:
One thing I always thought was important when studying the C's transcripts, was the fact that as STO beings of light, they not only serve the light, but also the dark, aka the positive and the negative, because they are light-givers to whoever is calling to learn and ask questions.....osit. I remember in one of the transcripts when Laura was discussing freemasonry and the illuminati, who make up the quorum and consortium, there is supposedly a 50/50 balance of positive and negative. In this discussion, the C's explained that they serve light and the dark, because they serve to release knowledge to both sides of the equation, for whoever is asking(not demanding or begging of course). But I could have misinterpreted that.but that's what I took, from these superluminal thought forms. They definitely want us to embrace the dark black hole of the universe and the wonderful illumination of STO light givers, for the polarity is all just lessons to be learned.

STO beings don't serve light, they are light, they create light. Likewise, STS beings also don't serve darkness, they are it, and they create it by absorbing light into them. It is said that the ultimate manifestation of STO is a star (radiation of light), whereas the ultimate manifestation of STS is a black hole (absorbtion of light). And if sixth-density beings are indeed trying to merge polarities, then they are not a good source of information. I suggest instead that if you want to follow the STO path, you listen to 4-5D STO beings. If you want to follow the STS path, you listen to 4-5D STS beings.
 
Woah, lastrevolution. I think you are taking a lot of things WAY too seriously, including yourself and your personal narrative. You are making a whole lot of assumptions and exhibiting a lot of beliefs that just may not necessarily be so. It is best to proceed with caution in the worlds of Samsara. One must also beware the Dunning-Kruger Effect.
 
lastrevolution said:
This is my first post, but I felt internally inclined to create an account and share my thoughts on this.

You should always think twice about following the dictates of those internal inclinations. For example, I had an internal inclination to respond to the many bogus contentions and statements in your post, but then I noted the number and frequency of your spelling mistakes and quickly realised that I would be wasting my time trying to get you to understand anything. Because, in my experience, someone who hasn't learned how to spell correctly, usually hasn't learned how to think correctly either, which, coincidentally enough, is evidenced by most of what you wrote.
 
Back
Top Bottom