Session 23 March 2019

At this point, a legitimate question might be: If there is no such thing as linear time in 4D, there are no frequencies, vibrations or resonances either. Could then the use of those terms by the C’s just be a “figure of speech”?

That's a really interesting point.

On one hand, I think there may still be linear time in 4D in some sense, but the 4D beings are not limited by the 'one-directionness' of it. Like when you watch a movie - the movie has its sequential time line, but you can go to any part of it, rewatch it, and so on. So for things like light, it might still work in a similar way as here. But hell if I know.

On the other hand, the things the Cs usually mention in this sense may be different all together. I think they usually apply this to the mind and emotions and things like that, in which case the 'frequency' might be something a bit different than pulses per time. Not sure how the frequency of emotions or awareness would be measured, but I suppose it doesn't require time.
 

nature

Dagobah Resident
i'm aware of all this remarks, but the late session of march 23th, makes me try to figure out the way the soul anchor to the proteins as Laura develop in her quote, , which proteins are talking about?, all of them?, structural proteins, motor proteins, enzymes, defense?, i try to guess maybe those closer to DNA in each cell. And if the soul is anchor to some protein, how is the way it does, weak bonds, as ionic ones, water bridges...
Where do you want to come to? What is the interest of these questions? You want to kill someone, incognito? :rotfl:
More seriously, I think it doesn't matter to know how the soul anchors proteins and which ones. What matters is knowing the existence of body-mind relations, its biochemical support, and how to ground to our soul, the notion of the receivership capacity. Laura gave us lots of responses through this forum and her books.
 

uhura

The Force is Strong With This One
Where do you want to come to? What is the interest of these questions? You want to kill someone, incognito? :rotfl:
More seriously, I think it doesn't matter to know how the soul anchors proteins and which ones. What matters is knowing the existence of body-mind relations, its biochemical support, and how to ground to our soul, the notion of the receivership capacity. Laura gave us lots of responses through this forum and her books.
knowledge protects... i follow a quote in this session, is important when we knows about the lucid time of people before death, the attach of the soul from the body maybe is linked to the protein, why is important to know, only for the pleasure to knows, my ego is hurt, but is your gift not mine, i don't accept it... i proceed here respectfully... my mistake...
 

goyacobol

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
So maybe rather than "time does not exist", think along the lines of "time is a bit more complicated than we tend to think". The illusion is less in believing there's time and more in believing that time is simple and linear. At least that's how I look at it.

I think that is a good way to think about the difference between 3D time and 4D time perception.

The Cs say when you are in 4D you are freed from 3D perception of time.

Session 4 November 1995:
A: 4th density frees one from the illusion of "time" as you WILL to perceive it.
 

goyacobol

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
knowledge protects... i follow a quote in this session, is important when we knows about the lucid time of people before death, the attach of the soul from the body maybe is linked to the protein, why is important to know, only for the pleasure to knows, my ego is hurt, but is your gift not mine, i don't accept it... i proceed here respectfully... my mistake...

I think you have the right to be curious about these kinds of things as I am curious about practically everything myself.

Here we try to be aware that answering many of these questions can take much effort and energy just trying to answer them.
It might help to explain why you want to know the answer to some questions so others can kind of see where you are coming from so to speak.

I would not wish to discourage anyone from questioning or asking questions. That's how I found this forum.

The gift you are refusing to accept may be more of an alert to how someone else is maybe confused as to why you are asking certain questions and how this will benefit others.

I have noticed that confusion sometimes causes us to respond with a sense of amused bewilderment.
 

goyacobol

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
At this point, a legitimate question might be: If there is no such thing as linear time in 4D, there are no frequencies, vibrations or resonances either. Could then the use of those terms by the C’s just be a “figure of speech”?

It is really not possible for us to fully understand these concepts in 3D OSIT since we won't know until we are in 4D.

The Cs do give us some hints, clues and symbolic examples though:

Session 14 January 1995:
Q: (L) Jan and I are very curious about artistic expression at 4th density. We experience art and music in a very positive and moving way, most of us, in this realm, and sometimes music can be very sublime and very transforming. It can move one in a lot of very unusual ways. What is it like in 4th density?

A: In 4th, you can "see" sounds and "hear" colors, for example.
 
Last edited:

Puma1974

Dagobah Resident
Thanks for the new session

It is interesting the difference that is made between the types of beliefs we have. In my case, I can say that it was a process, to go from the entropic belief to the belief that empowers. I think this is very clear about religion and specifically about Caesar alias Jesus Christ.

As Entropic believer my belief was based on non-historical facts, I believed in the divine Jesus; the carpenter of Palestine who incarnated as a child of God and who promoted an idea of submission to life, "turn the other cheek", in exchange for a reward in the future.

As a Non-believer (another type of entropic Believer). I was cloistered in the material world. I do not believe because I was not satisfied with the miraculous, I do not believe in the existence of other non-physical realities. Philosophers tell us atheist are nihilists. They do not believe because they do not know or are not aware. They have no faith in the sense that FAITH … “is confidence in things not seen”

But I was fortunate to find Laura's work and communications with the C's

With time and research, I was now the empowered Believer. I do not believe in the divine Jesus but in fact the historical Jesus, my belief is based on historical facts, in research, readings etc. As Pierre said: “You can believe AND know. You can believe BECAUSE you know” So to the empowered Believer, Jesus incarnated in the person of a military and political genius who had the will to change things in a brutal and corrupt world. Caesar instead of promoting submission promoted the defense against the oppressor through the laws.

This process Gurdjieff explains when he talked about the Influences we get in life and the magnetic centre:

Q. What is desire to awaken due to? Is it in essence?

A. This is connected with magnetic centre. You will remember that in the first lecture I spoke about magnetic centre and the different influences under which man lives. This brings us to the question of why some people are interested in these ideas, while others are not, what creates this desire to know, the energy to seek; why people who live in similar conditions are so different, for one person is satisfied with ready-made theories and clichés, while another wants to find truth for himself. What is it that explains this difference in people in relation to new ideas, for some people meet with the possibility of acquiring new knowledge and are not interested, while for others it may change the whole trend of their lives? People come to these and similar ideas in different ways. Some understand something, others take them on an ordinary level. The cause of this difference is that man lives in mechanical life under two kinds of influences. What does it mean? It is connected with the idea explained in the beginning, that man is a machine controlled by external influences, by things around him. He may be receptive to one kind of influences and not receptive to another kind. Most of these influences are created in life itself, by people like himself. But among them, mixed with them, there are other influences which are not created in life but come from a different source, from people of a higher mind. They come in the form of religions, science, philosophical systems, esoteric doctrines, art, all sorts of teachings, and so on. They cannot be distinguished from influences of the first kind outwardly, so it depends on the man whether he discriminates between them or not. Man can live only under influences A, that is, influences of the first kind, and disregard influences B, not be interested in them. But if he is interested in these influences of the second kind and has absorbed them in sufficient quantity, a certain process takes place in him. Results of these influences B, the memory of them, collect separately in a special compartment and form what is called a magnetic centre. Magnetic centre is a combination of certain interests and emotional associations which makes him turn in a definite direction. It is a certain cycle of ideas and a certain cycle of emotions. This is the origin of interest in this kind of ideas.

If people have an interest in these influences B, they have a magnetic centre; if not, they have no magnetic centre.

After some time, with the help of magnetic centre, a man may find a school, or if he comes near one he may recognize it. But if he has no magnetic centre, he will not notice it, or will not be interested. And if he meets a school or a man who transmits another kind of influence, influence C, magnetic centre helps him to recognize this new influence and absorb it. If he has rot first absorbed enough influences B, and so has no magnetic centre, or if his magnetic centre is wrong or too weak, a man will not recognize influence C. Or he may meet a wrong school and have wrong instruction and instead of becoming better become worse; instead of acquiring, lose. Influence C differs from influences B in that it is conscious, instead of being accidental, both in its origin and its action, whereas influences B are conscious in their origin but accidental or mechanical in their action. Influence C is school influence

Generally speaking, there is very little chance of finding a right school and many possibilities of wrong schools, because a school must have influences C, that is, ideas that come direct from higher mind. What does 'direct' mean? It means coming not through books, not through ordinary learning accessible to everybody....


Today, when I spoke to my acquaintances of the relationship between Iulius Caesar and the Christ, there are people in my community who turn around and leave.
 

goyacobol

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Generally speaking, there is very little chance of finding a right school and many possibilities of wrong schools, because a school must have influences C, that is, ideas that come direct from higher mind. What does 'direct' mean? It means coming not through books, not through ordinary learning accessible to everybody....

Today, when I spoke to my acquaintances of the relationship between Iulius Caesar and the Christ, there are people in my community who turn around and leave.

You might say the Cs sessions are like part of a school with "C" influences. It was Laura's research on the possibility that the life of Caesar was used as a model to frame the biblical Jesus story that resulted in one session in which Caesar participated to answer questions.

The negative reaction after speaking to acquaintances or family about such ideas has happened to many of us here. Some have found that Gurdjieff's idea of "external consideration" and/or "strategic enclosure" helps to avoid those situations.

As for Gurdjieff's (also Mouravieff's) methods and concepts the Cs do give some insights on the usefulness or accuracy of his teachings.

Your quotes from Gurdjieff relating to the A and B influences and how they relate to the "magnetic center" are further explained in the following session:

Session 13 July 2002:
Q: Mouravieff says that there are two kinds of humans - he calls the "pre-Adamic" and "Adamic," (discussed in book III). The idea is that pre-Adamic human types basically have no "soul" nor any possibility of growing one. This is a pretty shocking idea, but there have been recent scholarly discussions of this matter based on what seems to be clinical evidence that, indeed, there are human beings who are just "mechanical" and have no "inner" or "higher self" at all. [See: "Division of Consciousness"] Gurdjieff talked about this and so did Castaneda. Are these ideas Mouravieff presents about the two basic TYPES of humans, as far as they go, accurate?

A: Indeed, though again, there is a "Biblical Gloss."

Q: Mouravieff says that the "pre-Adamic" humans do not have the higher centers, nor the possibility of developing them in this cycle - which we assume to be the Grand Cycle you have previously described, the length of which is around 300,000 years. Is this an accurate representation of "pre-Adamic" beings?

A: Yes, they are "organic" portals between levels of density.

Q: Based on what Mouravieff has said, it seems to be so that any efforts to try to raise the consciousness of such individuals is doomed to fail.

A: Pretty much. Most of them are very efficient machines. The ones that you have identified as psychopaths are "failures." The best ones cannot be discerned except by long and careful observation.

Some teachings of Gurdjieff were considered to not be correct or accurate such as the theory of Octaves relating to densities.

Session 7 May 1995:
Q: (L) One of the persons who talks of the octave cycle is Gurdjieff, the Sufi teachings, several of the great philosophical teachings talk about the octave effect. There is the cycle of seven and the next cycle is at a higher level and is called an octave like the segments on the musical scale.

A: Who are we?

Q: (L) The Cassiopaeans.

A: Yes, now, we have volunteered to assist you in your development, yes?

Q: (L) So, throw all that other crap out the window?

A: If there were a level eight, do you think we would have failed to mention it at this point?!?

Q: (J) Good point. (SV) They forgot! (J) Oh, by the way, did we mention level eight?! (T) Well, maybe these other people are perceiving the recycling as moving into another octave rather than just doing it all over and over. They just haven't got the information straight yet.

A: There are many who speak, and some who speak the truth!

As for my own way of looking at Gurdjieff I still value many of his ideas and I think he was more like a great psychologist ahead of this time. He is not what I would call a "soul" man.

Session 14 October 2017:
(L) Well, going into a pool is one thing – there is still soul involved even if it is a fragment of a larger soul - but here Gurdjieff had the idea that there is no such thing as soul as we conceive it; a soul had to be “grown” or crystallized in a given lifetime and even then, it was material.

(Mikey) Which parts of Gurdjieff's teachings are still most useful to read?

A: Psychology, up to a point.

The whole session gives a better idea of how Gurdjieff may have been a bit off in the wrong direction.

Also if you haven't noticed it there is this thread on Gurdjieff: Gurdjieff's Primitive Cosmology
 

Christophe

Padawan Learner
Thank you for yet another fantastic session... I will have to read it again as there is so much, in the session itself and in the comments so far.
About the Ra material and distortion, if I remember correctly, this material was directly channeled as opposed to the C's material being channeled via ouija board. I remember reading something from the C's stating that direct channeling is more prone to corruption. Also, it is interesting to notice that most of Ra's interactions, such as when answering/uttering/etc a new phrase, starts with "I am Ra," except in a few (or several) cases. Maybe this is indication of distortion?
 

Chris

Jedi
Session 4 April 2015:


There is a potential genetic relationship of the soul and it's placement.

Session 7 October 1995:


What appears as "life" maybe more based in the life force of the body/container itself although it is also awareness too.


Trying to understand if gravity is involved here as mentioned in the following remarks -

Q: OK, then, does gravity bind the way the phosphate bond binds the carbon atom?
A: These are material. The missing link for all you folks is that gravity is as much antimatter as matter!!

Q: (A) Then, concerning this gravity, and the antimatter, is it a correct picture that there are two such domains; positive and negative, and the gravity has something to do with the exchange between the positive and negative?
A: Gravity is the “fuel”, or “life blood” of absolutely everything that exists!!! Matter/antimatter. One features atomic particle based matter, the other features pure energy in conscious form. Gravity is the balancing binder of it all. First you must get a correct picture of gravity. Gravity is the binder between matter and antimatter.
 

goyacobol

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Trying to understand if gravity is involved here as mentioned in the following remarks -

Well, gravity is a heavy concept...:-P

Do I completely understand it...nope, but the Cs really talk about it quite a bit and I think it is "involved" with practically every thing if what they said is true.

Session 15 June 1996:
Q: (L) I thought that gravity was an indicator of the consumption of electricity; that gravity was a byproduct of a continuous flow of electrical energy...

A: Gravity is no byproduct! It is the central ingredient of all existence!

Session 15 June 1996:
Q: (L) So, gravity is the unifying principle... the thing that keeps things together, like the way all the fat pulls together in a bowl of soup.

A: Gravity is all there is.

Q: (L) Is light the emanation of gravity?

A: No.

Q: (L) What is light?

A: Gravity.

Q: (L) Is gravity the same as the strong and weak nuclear forces?

A: Gravity is "God."

Q: (L) But, I thought God was light?

A: If gravity is everything, what isn't it? Light is energy expression generated by gravity.

Q: (L) Is gravity the "light that cannot be seen," as the Sufis call it: the Source.

A: Please name something that is not gravity.

Q: (L) Well, if gravity is everything, there is nothing that is not gravity. Fine. What is absolute nothingness?

A: A mere thought.


Gravity is mentioned when asking about reincarnation in the following:

Session 22 June 1996:
Q: (L) If, at 5th density a person has timeless understanding, what is it about them that determines that they will "recycle" as opposed to moving to 6th from 5th?

A: Contemplation reveals needed destiny.

Q: (L) So, being united with other beings on 5th, you come to some sort of understanding about your lessons....

A: Balanced. And this, my dear, is another example of gravity as the binder of all creation... "The Great Equalizer!"

Q: (L) In this picture in my mind, the cycle moves out, in dispersion, begins to accrete and return to the source. Is this correct?

A: Close.

Q: (L) Is it, in fact, that exactly half of all that exists, is moving into imbalance, while the other half is moving into balance?

A: Close.

Q: (L) All the cosmos? All that exists?

A: Yes.

So, yes I think "Gravity" is "involved".
 

Chris

Jedi
Well, gravity is a heavy concept...:-P

Do I completely understand it...nope, but the Cs really talk about it quite a bit and I think it is "involved" with practically every thing if what they said is true.

Session 15 June 1996:


Session 15 June 1996:



Gravity is mentioned when asking about reincarnation in the following:

Session 22 June 1996:


So, yes I think "Gravity" is "involved".


Yes thank you, but also in a very simplistic sense, if gravity is akin to life force in the body, it may be the binder of the soul (antimatter in the sense of pure consciousness) and the body (matter) and the antennae on proteins would be a communication mechanism between the soul and the body as in a mobile device (body) with a cellular network (soul/information field).
 

goyacobol

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Yes thank you, but also in a very simplistic sense, if gravity is akin to life force in the body, it may be the binder of the soul (antimatter in the sense of pure consciousness) and the body (matter) and the antennae on proteins would be a communication mechanism between the soul and the body as in a mobile device (body) with a cellular network (soul/information field).

My thoughts are very similar. I think that might be the bridge between matter and antimatter.

Session 21 December 1996:
Q: (L) Alright! I get the point! I was just trying to help. (A) I would like to know if there is a separate field beyond electromagnetism and gravitation, something similar to the Sheldrake concept of a morphological field or morphogenetic field?

A: Yes, and it is very close to that. It is apparent that Sheldrake was "in tune," as are you, Arkadiusz. But you must have faith in your thoughts, as sometimes they are assisted.


Q: (A) When you speak of an upcoming wave, it is a wave of what?

A: Think of it as a wave of reflection from the beginning and end point.

Q: (L) Can you clarify that in more 3rd density terms?

A: No, see what the response is. It is his question, after all!

Q: (A) Is DNA acting as a superconductor?

A: Yes!!!
 
Top Bottom