Session 16 August 2014

Approaching Infinity said:
Zenith said:
I read this as relating to the second of the three particular areas of focus that were advised:

Q: (L) Okay, is there any final bit of advice, or any last thing to say before we shut down for the night?

A: Just work daily at becoming more aware on three levels
1. Body and immediate environment,
2. Wider world affairs,
3. Cosmos and spirit.

ie That true spirituality and work must incorporate knowledge of macro-social lies and the nature of pathology on a global scale. If we are indeed aiming to be receptors and transducers of order and objectivity and such order works through our consciousness and conscience then this must necessitate having objective knowledge of the inner and outer worlds. Consider this quote from a session in 2009:

From Session January 3rd 2009

Q: (L) I have a question I want to ask. A lot of people say that esotericism and politics shouldn't be mixed together, that somebody who has esoteric pursuits - or spiritual pursuits, let me put it that way - shouldn't be interested in "worldly" things. I would like to have your view on this. Have we gone completely astray by mixing in politics?

A: Absolutely and vehemently not!!! There is no possibility of true spiritual work progressing without full awareness of the world that surrounds you. What have we said about "true religion?" Let your curiosity guide you. In its pure state curiosity is a spiritual function.

There's an excellent and brief explication of this in the forward to the recently published 'Cassiopaea Transcripts 1994' book. I don't have it to hand as I'm not at home but as I remember it asks the question of whether a spiritual leader could be in any way truly spiritual and in the position to lead or give advice to anyone whilst this 'spiritual' being lives under and adheres to the dictat of a pathological, lying and corrupt Government that causes endless suffering for the masses. Indeed, it seems to me that the entire concept of what 'spirituality' actually IS needs to be re-written entirely to incorporate both the inner work and the outer knowledge of the seen and unseen political landscape.

Here's the section in question:

Politics and Spirituality

Some readers may wonder what place so-called ‘paranormal’ research has in a project that endorses and strives towards real science and rationality. And others may, as I did just over a decade ago, wonder what on earth political conspiracies have to do with so-called ‘spirituality.’ In a world as controlled as our own, where lies can be glibly passed off as indisputable fact, with media, corporations, academia, and government acting as shapers of public opinion on every subject, an individual finds him or herself in a situation not dissimilar to that of Theseus in the Minotaur’s labyrinth. At every turn we are confronted by lies, even (and perhaps especially) when it comes to our most basic views about the nature of reality. And we would be lost if not for the thread of Ariadne.

While I’m on a Greek bent, let me share something a member of our forum recently pointed out from Manly P. Hall’s The Secret Teachings of All Ages:

It is generally admitted that the effect of the Delphian oracle upon Greek culture was profoundly constructive. James Gardner sums up its influence in the following words: “Its responses revealed many a tyrant and foretold his fate. Through its means many an unhappy being was saved from destruction and many a perplexed mortal guided in the right way. It encouraged useful institutions, and promoted the progress of useful discoveries. Its moral influence was on the side of virtue, and its political influence in favor of the advancement of civil liberty.”

In other words, there’s our answer to the second question: a good oracle (or spiritual source) doesn’t shy away from politics. Like a Greek Cynic, or the proverbial Cassandra, the prime role of an oracle is to present a vision of the world as it is, no matter how painful or unpopular the view, and provide the only alternative fit for a lie: the truth. So, yes, we track and study ‘high strangeness,’ and our worldview is quite at odds with the materialistic dictum peddled and enforced by PhD’s and media pundits the world over. Everything you ‘know’ is a lie, and that includes all your metaphysical assumptions about the way the ‘reality’ really works. Luckily there’s a way out of the labyrinth, and (please excuse me for going Biblical here!) the truth will set you free.

With politics, it’s no different. Any ‘spiritual’ source that suggests otherwise ­-- perhaps holding the view that such things are unspiritual -- is no better than COINTELPRO, directing people to ignore the man behind the curtain, lie down and go back to sleep while unscrupulous individuals conspire to rob you of your money, your freedom, and the opportunity to live a fulfilling life where evil and abject mediocrity aren’t the norm.

Think about it. Can you imagine a ‘great spiritual leader’ living under a corrupt government who is so stupid as to believe the lies ‘the Party’ tells him? Or one who would give her support to a leader who spouts high-sounding words while killing innocent people? Well, maybe those are dumb questions, because I can picture any number of such ‘spiritual leaders.’ But I hope the point is clear. A spiritual source that ignores politics is like a doctor who ignores disease.

Trying to make sense of chaos is human nature. Look at a blurry picture and your mind will try to ‘piece it together’ into something intelligible. And it’s rewarding when it comes together. ‘Aha!’ However, say that picture is evidence of a crime. The criminal has a vested interest in keeping it obscure, whether that means burning the evidence or influencing your perception of the blur in question. When truth is an obstacle to one’s ambition, lies are the only option, and that puts one at odds with anything truly human or spiritual in nature. It puts one in a position that goes against reality, forcing it into something it is not. Silencing those who question your manufactured reality -- and thus risk waking others up to the truth and your own downfall -- naturally follows.

This places those on the receiving end of the propaganda at a crossroads. It forces the questions: What do you truly value? Will you settle for being conned, if it means a relatively comfortable life? Or will you walk the ‘thorny road of truth’? That is spirituality.

Thanks for reproducing this here AI, it's a fantastic summaation of the bridge between the commonly separated realms of 'inner' spirituality and macro-social realities. I'll be adding it to my quotes collection for future reference. Clearly my paraphrasing was somewhat limited! :)
 
Palinurus said:
Hi l apprenti de forgeron,

This mechanism has been discussed sporadically here on the forum and in several sessions as well, like the one on February 13 2011 for instance:

A: Those that have a certain genetic profile may suffer very little.

Q: (Andromeda) Is that any of us? (Galaxia) That doesn't sound like anybody is immune... like, "They'll suffer very little before they die!"

A: Smoking tobacco is a clue and an aid.

Q: (L) A clue to the genetic profile?

A: Yes.

Q: (Psyche) Oh, interesting. [everyone lights a cigarette and starts laughing] (Psyche) Everybody lights up! I feel like smoking! (laughter)

A: It is not just aliens that don't like to eat people that smoke! But from a certain perspective the viruses that cause such illnesses as the Black Death are "alien".

Q: (Belibaste) So it means that aliens like the Black Death virus because they don't like people that smoke? (L) What? (Psyche) No, you should read the article in the next issue of The Dot Connector magazine: "New Light on the Black Death: The Viral and Cosmic Connection". (L) If you look at it from a 4th density perspective, when something like the Black Death comes and there is global suffering - and when you read about it, the Black Death is just horrible - but if there was such suffering on our planet from something like that, 4D STS would be getting a rich feast of suffering which is what they feed on. So, an alien virus would be interactive with 4D reality by providing its food.

A: Close enough!


Q: (Andromeda) When will this start? (Atriedes) That's kind of a prediction... (laughter) (Galaxia) Soon, or long term?

A: 18 months to 2 years.

Q: (L) In other words, if Elenin or something else has something like that in its tail, and the earth goes through the tail, it can still take a year or so for it to precipitate onto the earth?

A: Yes

Q: (Galaxia) Will colloidal silver help us fight the plague?

A: Not alone, but very helpful.

Q: (Galaxia) Will our dietary changes help us fight it off?

A: Enormously!!! Especially fat consumption for cell protection.

See also: http://www.sott.net/article/228189-New-Light-on-the-Black-Death-The-Viral-and-Cosmic-Connection and the references given there.
Thank you, Palinurus!
Other thing about this session. It could also be said that there is a deep relationship for the individual and collective consciousness between aliens and attachment. Because if people can recognize something strange/alien in what they believed it was their innermost self, perhaps they will be more qualified to recognize psychopaths in a future. That is, non-human creatures who look human. It could be a release of the limits of the anthropocentrism of our species.

Zenith said:
Thanks for reproducing this here AI, it's a fantastic summaation of the bridge between the commonly separated realms of 'inner' spirituality and macro-social realities. I'll be adding it to my quotes collection for future reference. Clearly my paraphrasing was somewhat limited! :)
Yea. Thank you, AI!
 
With all the support for smoking as a protective agent what about non-smokers? I don't like smoking for myself, I have no urge to smoke, I don't see the sense in going against this, I tried smoking when I was younger, it didn't become something I wanted to do, in fact the opposite. Is that okay too?
 
gottathink said:
With all the support for smoking as a protective agent what about non-smokers? I don't like smoking for myself, I have no urge to smoke, I don't see the sense in going against this, I tried smoking when I was younger, it didn't become something I wanted to do, in fact the opposite. Is that okay too?

I second that query- as I am a non-smoker too. I have tried it and it's not for me. Is it tobacco per se, or the nicotine in it that is protective? Because if that is the case, perhaps non-smokers may want to look at alternative ways of getting nicotine. Just a thought...
 
gottathink said:
With all the support for smoking as a protective agent what about non-smokers? I don't like smoking for myself, I have no urge to smoke, I don't see the sense in going against this, I tried smoking when I was younger, it didn't become something I wanted to do, in fact the opposite. Is that okay too?

My understanding is that the "clue" is that smokers (those who smoke and benefit the most - and can't really not smoke) have the genetic profile the C's mentioned and are also aided by the smoking for additional protection, or so I think.
 
Arwenn said:
gottathink said:
With all the support for smoking as a protective agent what about non-smokers? I don't like smoking for myself, I have no urge to smoke, I don't see the sense in going against this, I tried smoking when I was younger, it didn't become something I wanted to do, in fact the opposite. Is that okay too?

I second that query- as I am a non-smoker too. I have tried it and it's not for me. Is it tobacco per se, or the nicotine in it that is protective? Because if that is the case, perhaps non-smokers may want to look at alternative ways of getting nicotine. Just a thought...

Just saw your post. I think nicotine is the main benefit, but there certainly can be other substances that act in a synergistic way to maximize the nicotine benefits. Smoking is THE most efficient way to get the needed nicotine (directly into the bloodstream as you're smoking). But other methods of getting nicotine into the system may be better than nothing, but again, for those who have the genetic profile.
 
SeekinTruth said:
gottathink said:
With all the support for smoking as a protective agent what about non-smokers? I don't like smoking for myself, I have no urge to smoke, I don't see the sense in going against this, I tried smoking when I was younger, it didn't become something I wanted to do, in fact the opposite. Is that okay too?

My understanding is that the "clue" is that smokers (those who smoke and benefit the most - and can't really not smoke) have the genetic profile the C's mentioned and are also aided by the smoking for additional protection, or so I think.

For many years, I too believed I couldn't tolerate smoking. What I later realized was cigarettes did not agree with me but pipe tobacco did! As we now know cigarettes are packed with nasty chemicals. So perhaps you might like to try getting a smoking pipe and a pouch of Mac Baren Original Choice pipe tobacco which in my mind is the commonest mild, relatively low-flavoured pipe tobacco you can find to start out. Other brands like Captain Black and Borkumriff are aplenty but they are loaded with additives. You can also try stuffing Roll Your Own tobacco into a pipe such as Domingo Original as rolling your own cigarettes for a beginner may prove too messy and difficult. A cheap corncob pipe such Missouri Meerschaum is a good starter's pipe.

Best of luck trying out :)
 
Started some research, as has been mentioned on this forum before, Nicotine mimmicks Acetylcholine neurotransmitter. Dietary sources of choline which is the ACh precursor eg. egg yolks and liver. Well thats a good start anyway. I read quite a bit more on ACh, plenty of research out there. I wonder what the particular genetic condition is that requires someone to use nicotine, do they not synthesise ACh or enough of it?
 
rymw said:
SeekinTruth said:
gottathink said:
With all the support for smoking as a protective agent what about non-smokers? I don't like smoking for myself, I have no urge to smoke, I don't see the sense in going against this, I tried smoking when I was younger, it didn't become something I wanted to do, in fact the opposite. Is that okay too?

My understanding is that the "clue" is that smokers (those who smoke and benefit the most - and can't really not smoke) have the genetic profile the C's mentioned and are also aided by the smoking for additional protection, or so I think.

For many years, I too believed I couldn't tolerate smoking. What I later realized was cigarettes did not agree with me but pipe tobacco did! As we now know cigarettes are packed with nasty chemicals. So perhaps you might like to try getting a smoking pipe and a pouch of Mac Baren Original Choice pipe tobacco which in my mind is the commonest mild, relatively low-flavoured pipe tobacco you can find to start out. Other brands like Captain Black and Borkumriff are aplenty but they are loaded with additives. You can also try stuffing Roll Your Own tobacco into a pipe such as Domingo Original as rolling your own cigarettes for a beginner may prove too messy and difficult. A cheap corncob pipe such Missouri Meerschaum is a good starter's pipe.

Best of luck trying out :)

Yup, I smoke Mac Baren Original Choice in my pipe (and sometimes roll it in rolling papers) great to inhale like cigarettes / RYO tobacco, in addition to cigarettes (additive free from whole leaf tobacco here in Armenia) and roll your own - really great additive free pipe tobacco, best I've found. I also inhale cigars like cigarettes. And hadn't had Mood's cigarellos in quite a while and my brother got some the other day and we enjoyed one each together - another really great smoking experience - (but that's kind of like a treat for special occasions as it's pretty expensive and we both smoke a lot so not something that can fill the daily tobacco needs). For some reason, I've been smoking a lot more lately almost twice as many cigarettes and about the same amount of the Mac Baren bowls of pipe.

Just remembered to mention too that a lot of not liking/tolerating tobacco smoking is related to candida overgrowth (also being irritated by "second-hand" smoke). For those interested, you can search the forum for candida and smoking.

I think it's worth doing more research and experimenting for those who are interested and/or want to explore the smoking "phenomenon."

gottathink said:
Started some research, as has been mentioned on this forum before, Nicotine mimmicks Acetylcholine neurotransmitter. Dietary sources of choline which is the ACh precursor eg. egg yolks and liver. Well thats a good start anyway. I read quite a bit more on ACh, plenty of research out there. I wonder what the particular genetic condition is that requires someone to use nicotine, do they not synthesise ACh or enough of it?

I think it's not that we don't synthesize enough ACh, but we just get the optimal benefits from infusing nicotine by smoking. Even people who weren't smokers and tried it out and became accustomed to it, know all the benefits for concentration and general enhanced cognitive function. Among those who didn't start smoking naturally at a young age, I would imagine that there are quite a few who don't fit the genetic profile mentioned by the C's and Laura several times over the years, but they still experience benefits, just maybe not as much as those with the genetic profile. As far as I know, it's not a genetic glitch type of thing where the normal Acetyl-choline activity is impaired, just that nicotine is essential and most beneficial to these types with this genetic profile. Also, as mentioned before there can certainly be other substances in tobacco working synergistically with nicotine.

Also, there's more to the myriad benefits of smoking tobacco than just the mimicking of ACh for the nicotinic Acetyl-Choline receptors (that's just ONE great benefit). There's also protection from radioactive particles and other detrimental substances to the respitory system, protection from infections, and much more. You can search on SOTT and the forum, as there's a huge amount of info available about the benefits of smoking tobacco. There's actually quite a lot of scientific evidence that's just not promoted in the mainstream media (similar to the benefits of a grain-free, dairy-free (except butter and ghee if tolerated) ketogenic diet).
 
Can someone please point me in the direction of the research that nicotine is good for you?

I'm not arguing against it because I'm always open to new information, but I've never been a fan of cigarettes. I'm one of those weird people who have smoked off an on since high school (I'm 51) but have never liked it enough to get hooked on them. Now I can't even remember the last time I smoked.

However, my partner is a life-long smoker. He only smokes occasionally now when he's at work, but it has been a point of concern for me. As you know, we're all told that smoking is bad for you, and he has had health problems that docs say are due to smoking. If this isn't true, I'd like to know more.

I know the Native Americans used tobacco, but in far less quantities than do today's smokers, so there must have been some good reason for it. I also heard recently that a nicotine-based drug showed promise in the fight against Ebola.

Thanks in advance.

[Moderator, please feel free to move this post if it should go elsewhere.]
 
Hi Alkhemist,

Take anything you like from: https://www.google.com/search?q=nicotine%20healthy&sitesearch=www.sott.net
 
Just saw your post. I think nicotine is the main benefit, but there certainly can be other substances that act in a synergistic way to maximize the nicotine benefits. Smoking is THE most efficient way to get the needed nicotine (directly into the bloodstream as you're smoking). But other methods of getting nicotine into the system may be better than nothing, but again, for those who have the genetic profile.

Hi Seekin Truth, after read your answer about nicotine I think have something to share here..
.. some knowledge about my favourite and different tobaccos.
I use to have and smoke different kind of natural tobacco here in Ecuador.. Daily (and all day ;) )I smock different "Chamico(s)" is the name they use here for their natural tobacco, I buy different pounds of different "tabaqueros" and mix it, so I can change the taste with suitability..
But the most strong that I have buy here around and that I smoke right now is the peruvian "Mapacho"
My post is just for present it..
He have 20 time more nicotine than normal blond tobacco and is the one the shamans of North peru, close to here (Pucalpa, Iquitos, Tarapoto) use in the ceremonies..
I have a lot of info about on it in spanish and you can find it easy on the web.. and also somethings in english like this small presentation
http://www.salvialight.com/nicotiana-rustica.htm and more..
presentation in spanish http://cultivodetabaco.com/comunidad/temas/mapacho-o-tabaco-de-pota-nicotiana-rustica.3/
and some site where you can buy
https://www.heavenly-products.com/cart/index.php?cPath=156_129_113 but very expensive.. I buy here for less than 15$ the pound.
The rolls (what we call "guanglia" here) must have between 1 and 2 pounds

Is just a pleasure to share it, here :cool: :cool2:
 
Back
Top Bottom