Co-linearity: What is it? What does it involve? Can it be achieved?

[Bernardo GA]

When I think about colinearity, I assume we're talking about a shared goal towards which we are striving, an ideal that is placed above our own subjectivity and a love for something higher. Maybe we can call it truth or objectivity.

What gets in the way is our own subjectivity and the overall state of our being, as has been covered in the Wave series, and also by Gurdjieff, Mouravieff, Ashworth, modern psychology etc.

By having a share goal, and valuing it enough, we could, at least in theory, overcome the pull of "many I's" and arrive at something real. In practice though, it's a long process with many setbacks, back-and-forths, mistakes and so on

hank you BHelmet for starting this thread, which addresses a topic of utmost importance for the forum, in my opinion.
What I think about it, is already very well expressed in Antonio's words.
He knew how to summarize what I would try to say using a mountain of words.
I also agree with you, that this is an effort worth making.
I know I was once hard on you, because perhaps I misinterpreted you.
I sincerely hope you will accept my apology.
I have faith and hope in this work together, where collinearity is both desirable and necessary.
As to the good question posed as to whether the Cas are referring to the collinearity of a specific group in this forum, or whether they are addressing everyone, I am inclined that they are addressing everyone.
I don't even think they refer only to collinearity among the members, as might be a real interest in the purpose that brings them together.
I think that in addition to that, they refer to the collinearity of each individual with himself.
The work on oneself, in a certain way, consists precisely in gradually aligning oneself with one's higher self, so to speak.
Each one, at his level of understanding or schedule, must make the effort so that his actions are not divorced from his higher inner voice.
I comment on this, because while the question to the Cas was about the weakness of the group, let us not forget that the group is made up of individuals.
I hope it is understood that I used the term "individual" in the most common sense of the word, and not to refer to those who have achieved true individuality, which would be those who make up the esoteric circle if I am not mistaken.
Thank you all for your contributions, and excuse me for not being able to synthesize better what I want to say.
I hope it is understood in spite of that.

Thank you guys.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)


Traducido con www.DeepL.com/Translator (versión gratuita)

 

[BHelmet]

hank you BHelmet for starting this thread, which addresses a topic of utmost importance for the forum, in my opinion.
What I think about it, is already very well expressed in Antonio's words.
He knew how to summarize what I would try to say using a mountain of words.
I also agree with you, that this is an effort worth making.
I know I was once hard on you, because perhaps I misinterpreted you.
I sincerely hope you will accept my apology.

THANK YOU AND CERTAINLY I FORGIVE YOU! And great post...

It is hard enough understanding another person in the same language and culture let alone from a foreign perspective and language. That obviously goes on here and I think that is the cause of a lot of misunderstandings.

 

[BHelmet]

Furthermore, there are local cultural differences that also give each individual a different set of assumptions about meaning of words and phrases. Add the fact that these words do not necessarily convey where the speaker is "coming from". So, I think this was/is why Gurdjieff was obsessed with objectivity. What is any individual really saying? The problem is compounded by so many things:

Any given individual is always at least partially unaware of their own biases and programming. So sometimes we are saying things that people hear that we are unaware we are saying. That is another place networking comes in. Often an individual will get defensive and feel attacked. It goes downhill from there unless all the people involved really work hard at getting things clear and straight.

This relates to the challenge of collinearity.

Here is a little story. I lived in Hawaii for 10 years. There is a certain social aspect there that was very interesting and it took me a while to really "get it" even after it was explained to me. There were aspects to life in Hawaii that can seem VERY dysfunctional and insanely stupid to someone fresh from the "mainland". "Why do they act this way??" (and often the mainlander will go on a crusade to change things and get everyone to see the light. Wrong approach!)

There was also a major background element to all relationships. In Hawaii you are on an island in the middle of the ocean. IF there is a disaster; a tsunami; a hurricane; if the boats and planes ever quit coming, then everyone has to work together to survive, so you want to maintain civil relationships with everyone: even those you might seriously disagree with. IF you are hanging onto a cliff, you want to be pulled back up no matter who is taking your hand. And you have to be willing to pull anyone up if they are hanging there and it is your opportunity to save them. Are you going to say, "this person is a complete lying, cheating ass whose kids are meth dealers, so I am going to allow him to fall off the cliff into the crashing waves on the rocks"?

The situation here is not like that but that same element can occur. Someone seems blind or obsessed or obnoxiously sure everything they say is golden. But there is an aspect of collinearity: what is REALLY important and are we aligned on those things and working to help each other towards them?

 

[benkostka]

There was also a major background element to all relationships. In Hawaii you are on an island in the middle of the ocean. IF there is a disaster; a tsunami; a hurricane; if the boats and planes ever quit coming, then everyone has to work together to survive, so you want to maintain civil relationships with everyone: even those you might seriously disagree with. IF you are hanging onto a cliff, you want to be pulled back up no matter who is taking your hand. And you have to be willing to pull anyone up if they are hanging there and it is your opportunity to save them. Are you going to say, "this person is a complete lying, cheating ass whose kids are meth dealers, so I am going to allow him to fall off the cliff into the crashing waves on the rocks"?

That’s all great in theory, but things never play out that way and in fact you’re incredibly foolish to think that the same people who scream things like “I hope your daughters get raped.” (As a recent example at Stanford) will do anything when it gets difficult.

Might as well find your tribe, when things get difficult I sure as hell don’t expect a cheating meth dealer who ruins kids lives to save me. If he lets me die, so be it but I’ll be clear eyed about things.

Joseph Conrad wrote about your theory in his book The -homie- of the Narcissus. It pretty much summarizes what someone who’s dead weight will do when SHTF, and even before that. Some people just don’t have it, and they’ll ruin everything if you let them.

 

[BHelmet]

We each have a certain "Listening". I believe this is an important concept. In every personal journey, a certain listening develops over a lifetime from events, reading and life experience for many reasons. One of the standard human listenings is to be sensitized in a certain way to respond to whatever is our personal "bait". A major example is to quickly judge. "You are wrong, or incorrect in what you are saying". The other side of this is "my judgement is accurate." I think this is rooted in a desire to be "right" as well as our self-importance and resistance to change our outlook which takes more work and acceptance to try to get where the other person is coming from.

(BTW, benkostka, I am not directing this specifically your way, it is a general reflection that just occurred to me this morning.)

Every post is a potential catalyst; an opportunity for self-discovery and self examination. The question this brings up is: what am I a listening for? I will use myself as an example. As an innocent and gullible youth, I believed many incorrect things and illusions. As I aged and discovered the hypocrisy of many adults, and leaders and narratives...as I honed the skills of discernment, the ensuing disillusionment catalyzed a certain snarky cynicism in me. The discovery of how things "really" are; the realization that it's a two-faced dualistic world of lies led me to a certain attitude. I would say this is a standard aspect of the path to knowledge. But, my automatic response to events is something learned that, in order to really be objective, has to be unlearned or at least recognized as an aspect of "the machine".

Another spect to this forum is that vocal inflections are out. And facial expressions are out. It is mostly the written word which, IMO, creates a bias to be mental/right-brained about things; about what is being said/written. It is a challenge to write an accurate reflection of expression with one hand tied behind the back given we can't see each others faces or hear each others voices or look into each others souls.

That said, this phenomenon is a kind of comedy as well as a stumbling block to both co-linearity here as well as in our own personal relationships, especially with the significant others in our lives. The best relationships I have all have gone through this trial of fire.

"I think or see "x". "Your wrong". "No, YOU'RE wrong". "Well, clearly it is YOU who are mistaken because I can prove I am right!" "But did you consider this?" "No, that is total BS and anyway, this other thing carries more weight, so once again you are wrong and I see more clearly....It is my duty to set you straight" and finally, "It is clear to me that I am SO much more enlightened than you, not to mention being more objective, when will you ever acknowledge my obvious brilliance?"

yadda, yadda, yadda

It does harken back to the Castenada posts about self importance from another thread (kudos to genero81)

And I would not be saying this if I had not walked this path...I have to own it!

Of course now that I realize this, it makes me even more right and self-important.

At some point you just have to laugh; to rise above this mechanism. OSIT.

To conclude, our "listening" is the water the fish is not aware of (unless it jumps out of the water for some reason: to eat a flying bug overhead or to attempt to avoid being eaten...or perhaps out of an accidental involuntary spasmodic leap of sheer joy) LOL

 

[Bernardo GA]

Thank you BHelmet.

We all have blind spots and programs, that only by walking with others can we come to see, if good will is present in the walkers.

This Cassiopaea Forum is an "active and dynamic miracle". I feel like a poet saying these things. I hope the automatic translator doesn't mess up the super sentence I just made up.

What you say about the difficulties of understanding due to language and cultural differences has a lot of truth in it. While there are other reasons, those are real too.

To minimize that problem what I try to do, and often fail to do, is to find the most universal and direct way to say something.
On many occasions I am tempted, and I would like to write as if I were talking to other Uruguayans on a daily basis. But if I do that, only other Uruguayans or Argentines, and to a lesser extent other Latin Americans and Spaniards, would understand me.

And if I am even more local, I would be understood by others from Montevideo like me, and by the porteños of Buenos Aires.
Having to give up some local humor, having to be less colloquial, etc., I don't like it at all.
However, I must adapt to the circumstances, accept reality, and learn as I go along how to communicate with you here.

Thanks for being on the road guys.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

 

[Candice]

And if I am even more local, I would be understood by others from Montevideo like me, and by the porteños of Buenos Aires.
Having to give up some local humor, having to be less colloquial, etc., I don't like it at all.
However, I must adapt to the circumstances, accept reality, and learn as I go along how to communicate with you here.

I can relate to this. Since I live in a foreign country amongst people from many different cultures I’ve developed a communication style that I’ve noticed has become too sterile, lacks my authenticity because I try to simplify what I say so people can understand me better. Colloquial phrases are so wildly different they can cause miscommunication and even different types of humor don’t translate well.

Then communicating on the forum strips more realness due to the need for objectivity, to keep emotions and opinion to the minimum as this is supposed to be a research forum and not a chat room. All of this can sometimes feel too restrictive as I end up overthinking too much about how to write something that I just don’t write anything.

So to me colinearity must be something that seeks for unity in “seeing”, direction of goals and unified action but also allows for uniqueness and individuality. There needs to be a balance between group as well as individual consciousness. That the individual awareness doesn’t get lost or stripped by over use of logic, objectivity and rigidness.

I’m someone who both dislikes the restrictiveness of rules as well as a person who understands the necessity of restrictions. What I’ve had to learn in group dynamics is that basically the freewill of the group and their agreed upon rules are the dominant force of free will that holds sway and should be respected even if at times it doesn’t make sense. This is a really hard lesson for people who are used to navigating reality solely by their own freewill.

I view colinearity to be something far more complex than adhering to a set of rules, I see it as alignment with a frequency.

The analogy of the forum or more likely the core group in France to being a lighthouse makes sense to me to understand this concept. The knowledge accumulation, assimilation and active use of said knowledge by the core group has created its own frequency fence, if it has indeed been anchored then maybe it’s like its own frequency island. I view the rest of us as out at ocean within our own boats, each boat has its own frequency according to the knowledge and being state of its occupants. The Work is about refining one’s frequency to match that of the lighthouse, the more we do so then the more colinear we become. A colinear fleet may be able to steer through storms, steer clear of rocks etc.

So in truth we don’t need to give up our individuality to be colinear but the key lies in clear communication and respecting the guidelines set by the majority. If the guidelines aren’t clear enough then communicate. If one feels the guidelines are too restrictive then communicate.

Another point is that we can’t expect every newbie to the forum to be colinear with the majority from the beginning. People are attracted to the forum from so many points of entry. For example someone who joined due to diet may not have much awareness about geopolitics or hyper dimensional topics.

So my question is, does being colinear have to mean a total consensus on belief on all topics in the forum? Or does it mean a shared frequency alignment? That comes from the continual process of questioning, researching and distilling the information through networking into a shared “truth” or view of reality.

When I joined the forum I joined because I’d read the Wave books and I was curious about the hyper dimensional topics, 4th way, psychology and metaphysics. I already had some knowledge on diet and intelligent design. It was the emphasis on topics such as politics, geopolitics and culture war stuff that threw me for a loop when I first joined. I couldn’t work out how any of it related to the Work or why it was emphasized by the forum so much. It’s not that I disagreed with the consensus but that I felt such topics were like a diversion or source of tension so I didn’t feel colinear. Then 2020 happened and I joined twitter and only then did my awareness expand to include these topics and I realized why people felt them to be important. Politics, kinetic war and culture war represent a madness or a darkness that permeates this reality, to truly understand one’s own machine and it’s own “madness” one needs to understand the madness mirrored around us. I’m still not overly interested in those topics especially culture war stuff as it’s not really evident in my surroundings but assimilating the knowledge of it has expanded my awareness. Geopolitics expands awareness even further because it forces one to face biases they didn’t even know existed. So each topic expands awareness from self (diet, psychology) out to inter relationship awareness, then from immediate community to global and dimensional. It’s alot!

I guess my point is that we can’t expect everyone to see reality the same and be colinear, it’s a process that takes time. The individual needs to respect the freewill consensus of the group with humility while we research new topics and it’s our responsibility to confront our biases and to network if we we’re not in alignment.

So here’s to networking, clear communication and continued growth towards colinearity!

 

[Wandering Star]

I can relate to this. Since I live in a foreign country amongst people from many different cultures I’ve developed a communication style that I’ve noticed has become too sterile, lacks my authenticity because I try to simplify what I say so people can understand me better. Colloquial phrases are so wildly different they can cause miscommunication and even different types of humor don’t translate well.

Then communicating on the forum strips more realness due to the need for objectivity, to keep emotions and opinion to the minimum as this is supposed to be a research forum and not a chat room. All of this can sometimes feel too restrictive as I end up overthinking too much about how to write something that I just don’t write anything.

So to me colinearity must be something that seeks for unity in “seeing”, direction of goals and unified action but also allows for uniqueness and individuality. There needs to be a balance between group as well as individual consciousness. That the individual awareness doesn’t get lost or stripped by over use of logic, objectivity and rigidness.

I’m someone who both dislikes the restrictiveness of rules as well as a person who understands the necessity of restrictions. What I’ve had to learn in group dynamics is that basically the freewill of the group and their agreed upon rules are the dominant force of free will that holds sway and should be respected even if at times it doesn’t make sense. This is a really hard lesson for people who are used to navigating reality solely by their own freewill.

I view colinearity to be something far more complex than adhering to a set of rules, I see it as alignment with a frequency.

The analogy of the forum or more likely the core group in France to being a lighthouse makes sense to me to understand this concept. The knowledge accumulation, assimilation and active use of said knowledge by the core group has created its own frequency fence, if it has indeed been anchored then maybe it’s like its own frequency island. I view the rest of us as out at ocean within our own boats, each boat has its own frequency according to the knowledge and being state of its occupants. The Work is about refining one’s frequency to match that of the lighthouse, the more we do so then the more colinear we become. A colinear fleet may be able to steer through storms, steer clear of rocks etc.

So in truth we don’t need to give up our individuality to be colinear but the key lies in clear communication and respecting the guidelines set by the majority. If the guidelines aren’t clear enough then communicate. If one feels the guidelines are too restrictive then communicate.

Another point is that we can’t expect every newbie to the forum to be colinear with the majority from the beginning. People are attracted to the forum from so many points of entry. For example someone who joined due to diet may not have much awareness about geopolitics or hyper dimensional topics.

So my question is, does being colinear have to mean a total consensus on belief on all topics in the forum? Or does it mean a shared frequency alignment? That comes from the continual process of questioning, researching and distilling the information through networking into a shared “truth” or view of reality.

When I joined the forum I joined because I’d read the Wave books and I was curious about the hyper dimensional topics, 4th way, psychology and metaphysics. I already had some knowledge on diet and intelligent design. It was the emphasis on topics such as politics, geopolitics and culture war stuff that threw me for a loop when I first joined. I couldn’t work out how any of it related to the Work or why it was emphasized by the forum so much. It’s not that I disagreed with the consensus but that I felt such topics were like a diversion or source of tension so I didn’t feel colinear. Then 2020 happened and I joined twitter and only then did my awareness expand to include these topics and I realized why people felt them to be important. Politics, kinetic war and culture war represent a madness or a darkness that permeates this reality, to truly understand one’s own machine and it’s own “madness” one needs to understand the madness mirrored around us. I’m still not overly interested in those topics especially culture war stuff as it’s not really evident in my surroundings but assimilating the knowledge of it has expanded my awareness. Geopolitics expands awareness even further because it forces one to face biases they didn’t even know existed. So each topic expands awareness from self (diet, psychology) out to inter relationship awareness, then from immediate community to global and dimensional. It’s alot!

I guess my point is that we can’t expect everyone to see reality the same and be colinear, it’s a process that takes time. The individual needs to respect the freewill consensus of the group with humility while we research new topics and it’s our responsibility to confront our biases and to network if we we’re not in alignment.

So here’s to networking, clear communication and continued growth towards colinearity!

When I read you, I feel collinear with you.

 

[T.C.]

When I read you, I feel collinear with you.

I thought your whole post was an excellent description of the situation.

I’ve been keeping the idea of what it means to ‘anchor the frequency’ in mind over the last couple of weeks. Due to the fact that the main discussions here about frequency involve the idea of FRV, or ‘frequency resonance vibration’, and that this is related to STO vs STS, I never explored the idea in other ways. But I think simply being someone who wants to know the truth about things, and to develop the ability to see the truth about things, well the C’s say that ‘once one is aware, all conforms to that awareness’.

So, I think there’s actually a kind of ‘you create your own reality’ about this. Imagine if no one on the planet could really see the truth about anything at all… what effect does that have on reality itself? At the very least, I think that there could be no successful societies, no successful families and relationships and friendships. It would be a chaotic hell (sound familiar?! ).

But what if everyone could really see things the way they actually are? Wouldn’t the opposite of all that just naturally manifest instead?

Isn’t reality itself simply some sort of frequency, or a large number of frequencies, according to physicists? If I see the ‘objective’ frequencies of reality, do I have an effect on them, and strengthen them?

What if a big group of us all do that? Would we be anchoring a certain frequency - a frequency of truth?

These are the types of questions I’m asking myself at the moment, but the point of my post is that I do wonder if co-linearity can be explained in this way. Those who are co-linear are those whose inclination is towards truth and objective reality, and that, yes, I do think that means that such a group would see things pretty much in the same way, which would mean that they would all be experiencing and living in the same reality.

If we are fragmented units of a larger soul, we are a group-soul that is split up into 3rd density units, then it would follow that by coming to a consensus view of reality, we were putting ourself back together into a unified being at 4D. If we complete this putting back together of ourself, so that there is no contradiction between the 3D individuated parts, perhaps we would automatically and necessarily exist at 4D. Logically, how could that not be the case?

 

[Lyndi Lama]

Collinearity, my current thought, has to do with seeing us all, or most of us, challenging ourselves in the individual cleaning up of personal blind spots and programming. That increasing energy and clarity probably broadcasts on a subtle level, well, maybe not probably, but it makes sense to me it would. Collinearity could be seen as like rowing a boat; we're going to the same place but we have different levels of strength and perception. There are basics here that we are here to investigate. We acquire an understanding that the Wave can be expected (a really signature concept) an understanding we are managed by hyperdimensional critters as well as their human counterparts, we can get our of this state of being, and we will see mega events from our different corners in coming 'time'. We approach the Wave event (more or less) together, simply following our daily lives and preparing as we think necessary or possible and supporting others.

I always remember the C's saying nobody has all the answers! I am wary of any exceptional demand for conformity. There doesn't seem to be any, in fact it seems an emphasis on what each of us brings to the table. And look at the thread 'What are you listening to'. The variety of musical taste is so wide and eclectic, it's very neat.

I do feel a flow of connection with other people here especially when attending to the Crystals, singing, reading the prayers and at times in meditation. There's a lot of kindness and responsiveness and questing ceaselessly.

This is not a very in-depth post, but it's what I'm capable of feeding back. I'm still pretty new - a bit more than 2 years since coming to the Forum.

 

[brandon]

Great posts!!

Then communicating on the forum strips more realness due to the need for objectivity, to keep emotions and opinion to the minimum as this is supposed to be a research forum and not a chat room. All of this can sometimes feel too restrictive as I end up overthinking too much about how to write something that I just don’t write anything

Hah, yeah, I'm the same.. In the last couple years I've been practicing trying to write more, and to sometimes just click 'post' on the posts I write which I used to just cancel out of, written when I don't have the energy to figure out how to word it as succinctly and usefully as I want to... and just trust the forum, and that my realness will come through (or lack of realness will be noticed & called out).. it gradually becomes easier to write naturally and "be myself" without feeling like I'm just being noisy. I think trust in the forum is key..

I view colinearity to be something far more complex than adhering to a set of rules, I see it as alignment with a frequency.

But what if everyone could really see things the way they actually are? Wouldn’t the opposite of all that just naturally manifest instead?

Isn’t reality itself simply some sort of frequency, or a large number of frequencies, according to physicists? If I see the ‘objective’ frequencies of reality, do I have an effect on them, and strengthen them?

What if a big group of us all do that? Would we be anchoring a certain frequency - a frequency of truth?

Yeah! I don't know if this exactly "co-linearity", but I think it's to do with it: This thing the C's once said about Stonehenge has always stuck in my mind when thinking about co-linearity:

Q: (L) Well, we talked about Stonehenge before, that it was an energy transducer, so to speak. So, was Stonehenge put there because of the location, or did Stonehenge create... (T) Why don't you just ask what it is about Stonehenge? (L) Okay, what is it about Stonehenge?

A: Location attracted those spirit types on the proper frequency, who in turn, placed stones in proper location to receive the coded communications in code telepathically, in order not to have to chase around the countryside reading encoded pictographs.

Q: (L) What was the technique used within the circle to receive the information telepathically? [Planchette spiralled in, and spiralled out.]

A: Transcendent focused thought wave separation.

Q: (L) OK, so that you're saying that moving in a spiral...

A: The spiral serves to translate message by slowing down the wave and focusing thought wave transference energy. Utilizes /transduces electromagnetic waves, the conduit, by breaking down signal from universal language of intent into language of phonetic profile. This is for multiple user necessity.

Q: (L) Multiple user necessity implies that a number of people must do the spiral. Is that correct?

A: No. Must hear and feel and understand precisely the same thing. The molecular structure of the rock, when properly sculpted sing to you.

So I don't see it as a top-down enforcing of rules or a way of thinking handed down from above.... I see it as a bottom-up, internally generated thing, where the "way of thinking" is natural, it's based on what we SEE ("Must hear and feel and understand precisely the same thing").. if a group of people understand precisely, completely the same thing (aka truth, probably, because if it wasn't truth then they probably wouldn't all be seeing the EXACT same thing, because each person's perception would be flavoured by their own wishful thinking).. then, their courses of action would - naturally and coming from within themselves - be the same. I think.

Adding two waves of the same frequency together, makes a wave of the same frequency with double the amplitude. If the frequencies of the original two waves aren't exactly the same, you get phasing - the peaks and troughs of the wave go in and out of sync, and so the amplitude is all over the place. (or if the waves are 180 degrees out of sync, or of opposite polarity, you get phase cancellation, ie the whole wave is zeroed).. So if multiple waves are all of the exact same frequency and phase, the amplitude is greatly increased..

 

[BHelmet]

There has been a minor dust up on the Tucker Carlson thread which speaks to some of these exact issues. It was just a difference of opinion. But there has to be room for that. It was an "I think X" / "I don't think X" deal which got a bit amped up. So where is co-linearity when that happens? Since this is a research forum, (yes?) I think it needs to be remembered we are all looking for what is true about this world and sharing our situations and viewpoints as a group of humans. Differing conclusions and outlooks are only natural. If we are really committed to empowering a vector towards an STO direction in a co-linear fashion, there needs to be space for the differences.

 

[Candice]

Adding two waves of the same frequency together, makes a wave of the same frequency with double the amplitude. If the frequencies of the original two waves aren't exactly the same, you get phasing - the peaks and troughs of the wave go in and out of sync, and so the amplitude is all over the place. (or if the waves are 180 degrees out of sync, or of opposite polarity, you get phase cancellation, ie the whole wave is zeroed).. So if multiple waves are all of the exact same frequency and phase, the amplitude is greatly increased..

Thank you for sharing this great breakdown! Even though I did do some physics at university I’ve always struggled to fully understand this concept of frequency and waves, yet I understand it on another level where I can feel or sense it and it becomes difficult to translate my perceptions, which is why I end up using a lot of analogies and metaphors .

So I don't see it as a top-down enforcing of rules or a way of thinking handed down from above.... I see it as a bottom-up, internally generated thing, where the "way of thinking" is natural, it's based on what we SEE ("Must hear and feel and understand precisely the same thing")..

I did not intend for my previous post to imply a “top down enforcing of rules”. I see it as a group-consensus enforcing of “rules” or guidelines or maybe it’s just a balancing of frequencies, our 3D perception of frequencies getting in synch?

Ok so here’s another analogy, I see the forum as an organic organism, each individual as cells, some have grouped into organized parts like organs with higher functions. The organism is the whole or symbolizes the majority consensus, “rules” or guidelines are like the actions of the immune system response, defense, maintenance. So imagine if someone joins the forum who is used to being and navigating according to their own unicellular will, there becomes the choice to unite with the “whole” of the organism, learn to navigate as a larger more complex organism, in unison. Meaning now they need to make a choice, unicellular or multicellular. Multicellular is more complex, is basically existing in a realm magnitudes of difference to a unicellular organism but everyone (cells, organs, immune system etc) must work in unison to achieve this. A multicellular organism with specialized organs is going to “see” and exist in a completely different reality to a unicellular organism with very limited awareness.

Though I hesitate to use the analogy of the multicellular organism in relation to colinearity because it oversimplifies things. A human is it’s own multicellular organism, unique due to individualized lessons. I think what happens is that a human with so many hard won lessons resists or struggles to let go of holding to their “uniqueness” when faced with acting as a part of a whole, there is a fear of potential loss when in fact there is potential gain due to increasing the amplitude of the knowledge, experience and awareness.

So I have to ask, do you mean ALL topics when you say “Must hear and feel and understand precisely the same thing"? Or only those that pertain to the Work? For example if I don’t fully understand the emotional reactions to figures like Jordan Peterson or Tucker Carlson, am I fundamentally not colinear? Or am I just overthinking this concept?

If I take the current divergent views on the Tucker Carlson thread as an example, I see one part getting rather emotional (anger) about a “divergent” point of view. I observed this interaction, thinking to myself, is this emotional reaction to such a subjective topic necessary? Does it really benefit the whole of the organism? With more observation it appears that other parts stepped in to neutralize the anger. So which part was “out of synch”? Was it the divergent view from one party or was it the emotional response from other parties?

So maybe it’s not about having the exact same views on things, there is more to the colinear concept than sharing exactly the same opinions. It’s about shared “understanding” which is rooted in Being and those with a shared understanding of Being can allow for differences in opinion on subjective matters of like/dislike, yet most likely have also a shared understanding of Knowledge of matters that are objective, example “what is a woman?” etc.

I also keep thinking about if an organism comprised of many into a whole is either organized along a left hemisphere pathway or a right hemisphere pathway, leading to either STS or STO, would both pathways be through working towards colinearity but one is like a hivemind of automatons and the other a community of individuals?

If I bring it back to frequency, the one I recently feel aligned with is of beauty, harmony, creativity, balance, gratitude, sharing, truth, resilience and flow. Before I felt an alignment with the frequency of the warrior, righteous and stubborn, I felt a need to fight, to defend and to protect. It’s strange because I feel my alignment changing to what I mentioned earlier. I’m not sure how this relates to colinearity.

If I’ve veered into overthinking this topic please let me know.

Ps. I just read the post of @BHelmet above, well I think I’m in alignment with your thinking and it is what I had in mind when writing my post.

 

[Bernardo GA]

Collinearity, my current thought, has to do with seeing us all, or most of us, challenging ourselves in the individual cleaning up of personal blind spots and programming. That increasing energy and clarity probably broadcasts on a subtle level, well, maybe not probably, but it makes sense to me it would. Collinearity could be seen as like rowing a boat; we're going to the same place but we have different levels of strength and perception. There are basics here that we are here to investigate. We acquire an understanding that the Wave can be expected (a really signature concept) an understanding we are managed by hyperdimensional critters as well as their human counterparts, we can get our of this state of being, and we will see mega events from our different corners in coming 'time'. We approach the Wave event (more or less) together, simply following our daily lives and preparing as we think necessary or possible and supporting others.

I always remember the C's saying nobody has all the answers! I am wary of any exceptional demand for conformity. There doesn't seem to be any, in fact it seems an emphasis on what each of us brings to the table. And look at the thread 'What are you listening to'. The variety of musical taste is so wide and eclectic, it's very neat.

I do feel a flow of connection with other people here especially when attending to the Crystals, singing, reading the prayers and at times in meditation. There's a lot of kindness and responsiveness and questing ceaselessly.

This is not a very in-depth post, but it's what I'm capable of feeding back. I'm still pretty new - a bit more than 2 years since coming to the Forum.

What I put in bold is the only thing you are wrong about.
¡¡¡What you said is extremely profound.!!!

 

[brandon]

I did not intend for my previous post to imply a “top down enforcing of rules”. I see it as a group-consensus enforcing of “rules” or guidelines or maybe it’s just a balancing of frequencies, our 3D perception of frequencies getting in synch?

Ah, I didn't word it vey well.. to clarify: I was agreeing with you :) I didn't think the "top-down" thing was what you were saying, but rather the opposite. I.e.:

I view colinearity to be something far more complex than adhering to a set of rules, I see it as alignment with a frequency.

In my words, the "top-down" was intended as being sort of like your phrase "adhering to a set of rules". And "bottom-up" as being like "alignment with a frequency"... if that makes sense. Basically, I mean like the difference between following the rules because they're the rules, set by an authority vs following the rules because those are the rules you yourself decided were right, based on everything you know. So then, I guess it gets a bit more complex because we don't all have the same knowledge... which links in to what this next quote reminded me of:

I think what happens is that a human with so many hard won lessons resists or struggles to let go of holding to their “uniqueness” when faced with acting as a part of a whole, there is a fear of potential loss when in fact there is potential gain due to increasing the amplitude of the knowledge, experience and awareness.

..reminds me of the Gurdjieff quote about having to submit yourself to the will of the teacher, in order to get anywhere in the Work. I don't have the exact quote to hand but while searching for it found this in a different thread which seems relevant!:

Using one's mind does not preclude the idea of "submitting your will to a teacher", in fact, it is often a function of using one's mind in a useful and independent way. After all, deciding to "submit to the will of a teacher" is a sovereign, independent choice that usually takes a level of personal insight, strength and courage that most people lack.

Few, if any, people can be an effective "authority to themselves". Those that know this viscerally (through hard-won experience of their perception and thinking errors and the painful results) have usually lost enough self-importance to insist that they should never be 'managed from the outside'.

~

So I have to ask, do you mean ALL topics when you say “Must hear and feel and understand precisely the same thing"? Or only those that pertain to the Work? For example if I don’t fully understand the emotional reactions to figures like Jordan Peterson or Tucker Carlson, am I fundamentally not colinear? Or am I just overthinking this concept?

I don't really know. That phrase was said by the C's, specifically about the technology of Stonehenge and how it was used to transduce & receive higher density information(?).. It made me think of waveform summing (I didn't study any physics and am terrible at maths, I come at it as a musician, hehe).. The C's often talk about anchoring of frequencies, FRV, magnetising, etc, in this kind of context.. So it seems to me that maybe it can be taken more generally than just the Stonehenge thing.. it's just how waveforms work..

(I think this doesn't necessarily matter, in relation to your question, maybe you're not co-linear with the people having emotional reactions to those famous people, on the subject of those famous people - me neither.. doesn't mean you're not co-linear on other topics or with the forum as a whole...)

But whether it's exactly or entirely what the IDEAL of co-linearity is, dunno. To me it's an abstract/high-level thing to think about, but since we can't really measure it (?) maybe it's not that useful in day-to-day life in The Work. Like maybe at our level, that kind of 100% co-linearity isn't possible, and if we did achieve it we would no longer be at this level. (I'm thinking along the lines of, if reality could be said to be the interference pattern between the waveforms of...the Names of God maybe? (like how RA is always talking about "distortions")).....

OK, I don't really know what I'm trying to say, and have to go out, so leaving this thought unfinished for now... I hope it makes SOME kinda sense.... I'll keep thinking about it. But yeah I don't really think this stuff is that useful for daily life, or for a practical definition of co-linearity...I've gone a bit abstract..