HOW THE SOUL CHOOSES HIS PARENTS FOR reincarnate?

[riclapaz]

I think it can be speculated in many ways, the reasons why the soul decides to incarnate in a particular family, lessons to learn, karmic weight with other members of that family, any mission, etc, it is also important to remember that the battle between yes and no, is always present in us, and this leads us to take different paths, or create different realities, and this somehow ends up shaping our lives, in the end the direction to take our lives depend on the decisions we make every day.

 

[wodasi]

this reading was done just a day ago ...
from the BLOG
http://psychicfocus.blogspot.com/

Focus Sessions

Monday, May 11, 2015
Souls, Spirits and Incarnation
Q If (the Universal Consciousness) has a feel of a trap that doesn't cause harm, but holds you back from reaching your potential I get that the longer you roam, your soul develops more and has a better understanding of universal laws and allows your subconscious to expand. When you jump back in right away you are robbing yourself from the experience of stretching your subconscious.
So, our souls learn more by not going to the Light? How can we reach an enlightened state if we don’t reincarnate to learn life lessons?
A. I get that the more we "roam" in a spiritual state, the more we learn. In order to incarnate we do have to cycle through the light. The real key is to learn what you can in a spiritual state so when you are incarnated (choose to go through the light) you have more residual lessons in your subconscious. The higher you evolve before incarnating, the quicker you are to tap into that knowledge once you do chose to incarnate.

Q. You can do whatever and go almost wherever you want (if we chose not to go to the Light). You can travel the earth (and beyond). Gain insight without your conscious, rational mind giving judgement. I get that many people visit places of significance. You can see relatives, serve as a guide... Really the options are limitless. You make your place.
Doesn't that sound like paradise? Are the relatives we see in this realm, the relatives in our last life? Do we also meet our “soul pacts” here? If we do, and since we have lived many lives, won’t there be confusion in terms of relationships? Perhaps this meeting of “soul pacts” only happens after we go to the Light?
A. You do go and see whatever you would like. You also meet up with the energetic form of past loved ones (providing they haven't already gone to the light). Soul pacts also group here (I see it like magnetic attractions between balls of light), but there is no confusion- the rational mind and ranges of feelings create confusion here on earth. In the spiritual world things (without the conscious mind interfering) are just understood- there is no language- things just "are."

Q. Once you are in the light you start to forget who you were (not really the knowledge or experience, but the physical stuff).
If that is so then how do we recognize our soul mates if we forget who we were?
A. Soul mates are much more than a physical appearance. The body is just a shell for something much grander (the spirit). There is an attraction ("chemistry") that draws the two of you together. That "chemistry" is driven by their spirit (vibrations) and how their vibrations interact with yours.

Then I hear that in the presence of some people, you will feel repelled. They may make you feel ill, or like you don't want to be around them. It is the internal vibe that they exude that contradicts your vibration. Some people you enjoy being around- they make you feel happy and good- it is because of their vibration. A soul mate compliments your vibration so well that you cannot get enough of them.

Q. We normally do incarnate with the same pact of souls. They just are different to us in different lives. Who you feel is your soul mate in this life may be your brother or cousin in a future life. We do come together many times (not all, but many).
Do we decide who will be who in the future life before we reincarnate? If we decided to be siblings, doesn't that mean that the other pact of souls will have to wait longer to reincarnate into the same family? I somehow, don’t see the “souls pacts” with our partner because more often than not, they are complete stranger till we meet them. Correct me if I’m wrong.
A. I first get that if the soul pact decides to come in with the same family, some may have to wait. I also get that time is relative, and even though we define a lifetime as several decades, in the universal perspective time is so infinite that waiting a decade of earth years is not defined as "too long or short." There really is no "waiting," time just is.

Regarding the "soul pact" with our partner, we do make a pact with your true soul mate. Free will can intervene, which may cause a missed opportunity, but your soul mate will appear to be a stranger until you talk to them. I get most times when you connect with your soul mate, they feel like an extension of you (and feel familiar without being familiar prior to meeting).

Q. I do see several planes, and souls can visit the various planes BUT they will reside with the one they are most similar too (regarding vibrations). Low vibrations (most generally) don't "feel" well in a higher vibrational plane and vice versa. I hear that "like attracts like.
Is that why the Christians believe in paradise as their soul will reside with those who have similar beliefs/faith?
A. Yes, they feel as though when they pass they will be united with other spirits who share similar beliefs and behave a certain way.

Q. I get that some older souls advance to the ET level.
How? By reincarnation (like birth?) or just transformation to an ET appearance?
A. I see this happening in the process of reincarnation (exactly like a birth). There is no "transformation" because a spirit is still a spirit, and the outer covering is just a shell (human, ET or otherwise).

Q. I see it (human) as a humanoid looking ET that is incarnated in a place that looks similar to earth, but has a very different feel to it. This humanoid has an appearance similar to humans (skin texture, smooth hair, six fingers (?), six toes (?), they are empathic and intuitive (know what they are thinking and feeling without even talking). The main difference from humans is the color of their hair, skin and eyes- they look to be of all colors (red, pink, blue, purple).
Where is this place similar to earth? In one of the other planets or another realm on earth?
A. When I tune into this, it "feels" like an alternate solar system that runs parallel to ours (it's close). I see it spiraling like a cork screw right beside us (as if it takes the shape of the other side of the double helix DNA strand). Our solar system is one side, and this system takes the other- then I see it being attached to the sister sun, and it is one of the planets tied to it [referring to our sister sun].

Q. What intrigues me further.. What happens once the spirits cross over and absorbed into the "oneness? Do they reincarnate straight away or is there another spiritual realm after they crossed over the light tunnel, where they still have the free will to reincarnate or not?
A. Once you go into the light tunnel you being the process of incarnating- you lose your free will at that moment. You have complete control (even though you may feel the influence to go to the Light), while you are a roaming spirit.

Q. How do we know if we have a spiritual guide or not?
A. Every person has several guides. Some will stay with you your whole life, and others come and go to help you through certain lesson (like a specialist).

Q. Is the low birth-rate trend now due to many souls not wanting to reincarnate? Or because of human decision, many souls cannot reincarnate?
A. Soul incarnate in many forms. There is ET incarnations, animals, humans and beings on other planets. If a soul wants to incarnate, there are many places it can go (or wait if it chooses).

 

[riclapaz]

Hello crazycharlie.1, I'm not so sure several points mentioned this reading, talk about soul mates, the Cs have said that no such thing, only souls completentarias, also mentions that once he enters to light, you lose your free albredio , I think it is not, you still retains some of the most important in this universe his albredio free, I read somewhere that you can have some kind of advice for the soul when in the 5D, but ultimately it's own soul that decides to do.
just my thoughts

 

[Neil]

I mis spoke when I said universe I should of said here on Earth. Like anything else IMO its a resource. Also the value of people repeating the same life over and over again enables those who want to do "The Work" and break free from the general law the ability to do so while organic life and the world keeps spinning.

Ideally, I thought this was the reason for having the two humanities on Earth, the ones with the higher centers all could and should be doing some form of the Work, while providing a stable environment for the OPs to maintain organic life on Earth. In light of the Cassiopaean material, I thought that the potential for esoteric work was dependent more on receivership capability and desire/will than some arbitrary limited amount of available truth. 4D has set up this realm in a manner where most will be destroyed before they can meet the requirements to access it. I guess on a practical level it doesn't matter whether Gurdjieff was right or I'm right, our world definitely does function as if there is some such "limit." The whole concept that there's only enough for some special few just didn't sit well with me.

I view the general law as the water in our fish bowl. Maybe it includes the fish bowl too. It is there. We are swimming in it. The 4D STS are gradually adding salt water and we are fresh water fish. Or maybe the general law is like the playing field and rules of a ball game.

I like the ballgame analogy, here's my view on it:

Imagine that you have an automated ball field. The grass mows itself, the dirt and the bases maintain themselves, there is an electronic scoreboard that can sense the runs, there are certain fences maintained around the ball field that make sure the game doesn't get too far from it's intended purpose. To me, that's like the General Law.

Now you could say the players on the field are incarnating 3D souls and the stands represent 4D and 5D groups that like to watch, cheer on a particular side or influence the game. It's a very long game, but it is supposed to end after a certain number of innings. The people in the stands are able to come down and participate in the game, relieve players that are tired and have a bit of fun while they're on the field. In this analogy, I sort of see the Lizzies as the concession company. They're making a killing providing overpriced refreshments to the players as well as keeping people currently in the stands engrossed in the game. It suddenly dawns on them that they will make a lot more money if they make the game harder and last longer. So they decide to put the bases on top of hills made of loose rocks so that the players have to stumble up to them. Then they tamper with the home plate and conceal it with just another base so that no one ever really scores. Then they adjust the scoreboard so that the score always remains tied so that the game keeps going into overtime innings. The profits on concessions go through the roof with the endless supply of hungry, thirsty, beat up players and the managers of the concession company become billionaires. It is the goose that laid the golden egg. Every 309,000 years a thunderstorm blows in, lightning strikes the stadium, the scoreboard explodes, and a tornado tears through the ball field. The game is over and somehow those participants who have scored a victory in the game based on their efforts are allowed to go "home."

Is it possible that the 4th way, if held as a rigid obsession, can be an impediment to the possibilities the 4th way exists to offer?

I think the 4th way is a practical tool to get you from where you are to where you want to be. It is not the be all end all. Gurdjieff didn't know everything, I think the Cassiopaeans and Laura expanded a lot on his concept of the Work and what it really means. I think you have to have quite a bit of generalized knowledge of metaphysical matters before you can appreciate books like ISOTM. I had read a little bit about Gurdjieff and what happened with his school before I read his books, and after I finished ISOTM, the overall gist I got was, "Man has no freewill and is a completely mechanical being, and there is a Way to transcend this, but no one ever really attains it." Gurdjieff himself didn't even attain it. If ISOTM had been my first exposure to this type of material, I would have either dismissed it or been so depressed I couldn't move. But I had read Transcripts/Adventures/Wave which, while essentially saying a lot of the same things as Gurdjieff, showed that there was more to the story and there was a bit more hope than Gurdjieff implied in his book. Also, these traditions were written down by very serious, rather intensely intellectual men, and I thought having a female perspective on it via Laura added quite a bit to it too.

 

[BHelmet]

I like the ballgame analogy, here's my view on it:

Imagine that you have an automated ball field. The grass mows itself, the dirt and the bases maintain themselves, there is an electronic scoreboard that can sense the runs, there are certain fences maintained around the ball field that make sure the game doesn't get too far from it's intended purpose. To me, that's like the General Law.

Now you could say the players on the field are incarnating 3D souls and the stands represent 4D and 5D groups that like to watch, cheer on a particular side or influence the game. It's a very long game, but it is supposed to end after a certain number of innings. The people in the stands are able to come down and participate in the game, relieve players that are tired and have a bit of fun while they're on the field. In this analogy, I sort of see the Lizzies as the concession company. They're making a killing providing overpriced refreshments to the players as well as keeping people currently in the stands engrossed in the game. It suddenly dawns on them that they will make a lot more money if they make the game harder and last longer. So they decide to put the bases on top of hills made of loose rocks so that the players have to stumble up to them. Then they tamper with the home plate and conceal it with just another base so that no one ever really scores. Then they adjust the scoreboard so that the score always remains tied so that the game keeps going into overtime innings. The profits on concessions go through the roof with the endless supply of hungry, thirsty, beat up players and the managers of the concession company become billionaires. It is the goose that laid the golden egg. Every 309,000 years a thunderstorm blows in, lightning strikes the stadium, the scoreboard explodes, and a tornado tears through the ball field. The game is over and somehow those participants who have scored a victory in the game based on their efforts are allowed to go "home."

Is it possible that the 4th way, if held as a rigid obsession, can be an impediment to the possibilities the 4th way exists to offer?

I think the 4th way is a practical tool to get you from where you are to where you want to be. It is not the be all end all. Gurdjieff didn't know everything, I think the Cassiopaeans and Laura expanded a lot on his concept of the Work and what it really means. I think you have to have quite a bit of generalized knowledge of metaphysical matters before you can appreciate books like ISOTM. I had read a little bit about Gurdjieff and what happened with his school before I read his books, and after I finished ISOTM, the overall gist I got was, "Man has no freewill and is a completely mechanical being, and there is a Way to transcend this, but no one ever really attains it." Gurdjieff himself didn't even attain it. If ISOTM had been my first exposure to this type of material, I would have either dismissed it or been so depressed I couldn't move. But I had read Transcripts/Adventures/Wave which, while essentially saying a lot of the same things as Gurdjieff, showed that there was more to the story and there was a bit more hope than Gurdjieff implied in his book. Also, these traditions were written down by very serious, rather intensely intellectual men, and I thought having a female perspective on it via Laura added quite a bit to it too.

I grew up loving and playing baseball, so I can certainly relate to the baseball analogy. But I figured this is an international crowd so I veered away from that. One thing I like about the fish tank analogy is that it puts the Lizzies on another level up from the ball field.

Here is another slant: the owners of the teams and concession stands are the 3D human psychopaths aligned with the 4D STS. Also it is more like the 1930's - no union and no collective bargaining. So how about this:

The Lizzies are in their living room playing a video ball game. To make it interesting, the game designers have given the players limited Artificial Intellegence. A rogue game designer has inserted code that is going to cause the players in the game to suddenly bust out of the game console and swarm into the living room with the Lizzies. (and the Lizzies do hope to control us in 4D) At that point it becomes a brand new ball game. We go scurrying like a swarm of cockroaches into the Lizzies house and the STO oriented players manage to get into the walls and foundations of the house and create their own game in the house before they get corralled.

chuckle -

I know the cockroach analogy is not going to resonate with a lot of folks, but I am part Mexican and Pancho Villa was the ultimate cucaracha, so I can personally relate to that analogy in a positive way.

 

[Neil]

Yeah, that's good. I guess all parables have their strengths and weaknesses.

 

[3DStudent]

Thank you for this thread, I had it on the back burner.

I think the film analogy is very accurate. [...]

Thanks for this post. I especially like your theory of Individuated I's progression through 3,4,5, and 6th density. That brings up something I've thought about. And that is: if there are different timelines and/or dimensions, do the different versions of "me" have a different soul, or is it all the same soul? It kind of begs the question of what is a soul.

Speaking non-theoretically, I think the whole film aspect is a repeat of themes. If you are someone caught in certain programs, you are doomed to replay the same patterns. I've personally noticed some themes in my life that repeat. Overcoming such patterns requires alot as they push you against what you are used to.

I can imagine that in a new life, new world, I'll probably choose conditions that will replay the same themes until they have been learnt. I think they are learnt when you no longer feel constricted by them, when you don't repeat the patterns.

I think that's what it's all about basically. I've been going through some lessons and learning to change my behavior and quit certain patterns. The C's say that all lives are one, so if the next life is just like another day, why wouldn't you see yourself just doing the same things and making the same mistakes. If it's not resolved this life, it will appear in the next. Another quote is, "When you've learned, you've learned."

Thanks again for the thread. It seems I learned something and connected some dots. It was a pretty spiritual and enlightening thread. I recall something about you learn as much in 5th density as you did in the previous life in 3rd. I've learned so much in this life, so that's kind of something to look forward to in a way. I really just want to continue learning.

 

[davey72]

In fact, seeing as how Kisito took the time to post, and Obyvatel took the time to answer, it seems an injustice not to bring the thread back to the original subject ...

So, back to the comment Obyvatel posted about 'Mouravieff's (the film of life is replayed over and over by default)' concept - personally, this idea doesn't resonate well with me at all.
Logically, I don't see the benefit of replaying the exact same life, with the exact same script, over again, as it seems sure that given the same game parameters, you'll only make the exact same mistakes/conclusions. (especially given the amnesiac state required each time we come back).

Maybe what happens is that the film script (and acting credits) get reviewed in 5D - each lesson reviewed in detail - and a subsequent incarnation with 'tweaked' film script parameters gets set in motion to elicit a different outcome?
This may be a life in a different body, with a different environment/time-frame, specifically designed to aid that particular learning process that was lacking from the last life?
And this tweaking process gets done between each life, to assist in the particular issues the soul/consciousness is trying to work through in each incarnation.

I do believe that without a greater knowledge of the incarnational cycles of souls v's 'partially developed souls' we're probably all going to be way off the mark in how this process is conducted. Add to that our 3D restrictive thinking & we're probably only capable of seeing the tip of the iceberg, as it were.

All this pretty much rings true for me too. It feels like there is some logical inconsistency with the film concept. If it is an endless stream of re-runs, how did we get stuck in this series in the first place? Who is the screen writer? I would think that there has to be a reason or cause for the particular script. Karma? Why don't we all have the same script? 6 billion unique scripts and yet all repeating? What about the overlap of lifetimes? What if somebody waits a long time to reincarnate? What if you travel through time? What about all the missing people from the script who actually attain the second birth? Was I always born in 1950? What about those past life memories in other ages? The Ceasar/Jesus soul incarnated 1000 times as Caesar? I thought he was Socrates too according to the C's. The film script concept is just so limiting and full of holes.

I do agree the lessons have to be learned and an unlearned lesson will repeat until we 'get it'. Mouravieff missed the boat on a lot of stuff. I don't not believe it because it sucks. I usually embrace the suckage, but the film concept just feels, "off" to me too.

Perhaps this is because the predator gave us his mind. We become mired of this place and within it are duped. Everything it seems can become addictive when you see how the brain really works. Just a thought to add to an interesting discussion.