Session 4 April 2015

[Richs]

Sitting and Goyacobol,

When someone advises, gives me the opportunity to look at the situation from a different perspective. I have a choice I can do that or not.

When someone force, he is a force, a milder form of aggression and violence, and that every free will "fall into the water."

When someone cooperates has a choice: who, where, how, when.....
When someone serve then it must be on the "rules of service", there is no free will.


Therefore, I think, that the Cs want to emphasize; if we accept one of polarity we are somehow giving up free will and we must serve according to some rules.

One of the major things the C's say we are here in 3D Earth for is to choose which polarity we wish to align with in the future world of 4D - assuming that one is going to reach the 4D level. In either case, whether STS or STO, there will be "service". The only question which one has to answer is whether one will serve 'self' or 'others'. There is no in-between possible as a person will either be one or the other.

Yes Kika, there are 'rules' of a sort but not in the way you are describing them. They are for STO: "give all to those who ask", and for STS they are: "get everything you can for yourself". This would be all that would be expected for those of either polarity. As far as "free will" is concerned, one has the ability to freely choose which polarity they feel is their path. No one 'forces' you in either choice. It is entirely up to each individual.

You do not have to believe me, but if you know a lawyer, ask how important it is and what are the consequences if the contract does not use the words with true, real meaning.

This is undeniably true!

My "problem" with the real meaning of the word is as follows. When someone uses a word that has meaning and then used a lot of other words, to prove that this word has a different meaning, I become suspicious. Especially if it a different meaning, has its own word that describes it. In most cases, it appears that word means what it means, and all those "mental exercise" was manipulation.

Yes, in some cases this is so, but you should understand that many people do not know the exact meaning of many words, and in an effort to clarify what the meanings may be or in an attempt to express what they 'think' the word means they may attempt to substitute other words for them to explain what they think the word really means.

It is often just this lack of understanding which causes confusion and dissent in many cases. You should also be aware that those who have such misunderstandings are usually quite certain about what they think is so, even if it is not. So, please try to understand that people who say these things are not in most cases purposely attempting to 'twist' things but have a bit of a problem with exact meaning of words.

It is also true that there are many here who are not native English speakers and have erroneous ideas as to a word's meaning, but it is evident that there are also native English speaking persons who have wrong comprehension too.

discovered my own "holy cow", and that is:
How can people, if they know the true meaning of the war, to make and accept the following statement:
"Let's start a war to make peace".
Especially if this war, starting in a foreign country, other people's yards, someone else's house.
I see nothing honorable and positive.

Neither do us here.

I this discussion will not spread further.
Anyone who wants to understand, this is understood, and who is not, will not understand, or if I write a doctoral thesis.
Case closed.

That's really not the way we operate here. The only way a topic here becomes "Case closed" is if the moderators or list owner closes the thread. Otherwise, the topic is always open for additional discussion of ideas and issues and anyone may contribute their ideas and comments as long as it is done with good manners and respect for others here.

 

[sitting]

I have to admit I didn't fully understand what you were talking about, which is the fundamentals of the micro scale rather than the macro which we can readily observe. I will also admit I do not have any ability to understand how things would be in a 4D environment. So, in a sense, there is the possibility you may be correct.

Then again, even at the subatomic level there would probably be some sort of duality. Electrons/Positrons, etc. Perhaps it just depends upon the point of view as has been mentioned. I guess we will know the answer when (and if) we get there.

Hi Richard S,

I believe that is a good place to look--in search of duality. Matter versus anti-matter.

Question I have is the nature of this relationship. Is there symmetry? And exact opposition?
Seth once mentioned that our understanding of electromagnetism does not apply in the universe of anti-matter. And that "thought travel" (directed by consciousness) into the anti-matter zone will encounter problems. But the travel itself (via great imagination?) is indeed possible.

Talk about strangeness.

PS
The C's have indicated the ease of entry (and exit) into alternate universes. I do not recall them saying same for the anti-matter universe. But I could've missed it.

 

[sitting]

Sitting and Goyacobol,

When someone advises, gives me the opportunity to look at the situation from a different perspective. I have a choice I can do that or not.

When someone force, he is a force, a milder form of aggression and violence, and that every free will "fall into the water."

Okay, if you frame it in those terms, in isolation, then I have to agree.

But in the context of our conversation--which had its emphasis on idea conveyance, then you were a little bit side-tracked by this concern. It just was not the central issue.

 

[sitting]

I'll add to that by saying:

.... that the realization of unity is the foundation of 4D -

Hi electrosonic,

That sounds a bit too easy, if that's all it is.
But then maybe it isn't that easy after all.

It takes a perceiver with sufficient knowledge, enhanced receivership, lively imagination, and deep faith to see and to function within this unity. And that is not easy.

It seems this all revolves around mind ... and mindfulness. Perhaps this is to be expected--as it's mind that gives recognition to the new condition of existence.

Thank you for your excellent comments.

 

[Sol Logos]

That its all one, while in theory could be true, is often just a blanket statement many new-agers like to use to cover over difficult problems or personal responsibility. You can transcend duality from the comfort of your living room while watching Oprah interview Erchart Tolle, and do it in a yoga tree-pose, envisioning the law of attraction to take away world hunger and vote in the first woman President, Hillary Clinton. I don't doubt some try just that.

 

[Ðekel]

I'll add to that by saying:

.... that the realization of unity is the foundation of 4D -

Hi electrosonic,

That sounds a bit too easy, if that's all it is.
But then maybe it isn't that easy after all.

It takes a perceiver with sufficient knowledge, enhanced receivership, lively imagination, and deep faith to see and to function within this unity. And that is not easy.

It seems this all revolves around mind ... and mindfulness. Perhaps this is to be expected--as it's mind that gives recognition to the new condition of existence.

Thank you for your excellent comments.

Agree.
I'd add that balance is also necessary. What is being "done" ? Is there trying ? what is being attempted ? etc'
I think paying attention to reality left and right is probably a good place to start.

 

[Al Today]

[...]

You do not have to believe me, but if you know a lawyer, ask how important it is and what are the consequences if the contract does not use the words with true, real meaning.

This is undeniably true!

Just to muddy the water al little bit, let me tell you what a lawyer friend use to joke about and say to me:

"What One Paragraph Givith, The Other Paragraph Taketh Away"...





edit: spelling, as usual... :)


oh, and btw...

[...]
Now do i have to explain that again? And do you understand now what theory i really mean?
[...]

Awe geeze... I love this forum...

 

[goyacobol]

I'll add to that by saying:

.... that the realization of unity is the foundation of 4D -

Hi electrosonic,

That sounds a bit too easy, if that's all it is.
But then maybe it isn't that easy after all.

It takes a perceiver with sufficient knowledge, enhanced receivership, lively imagination, and deep faith to see and to function within this unity. And that is not easy.

It seems this all revolves around mind ... and mindfulness. Perhaps this is to be expected--as it's mind that gives recognition to the new condition of existence.

Thank you for your excellent comments.

sitting, electrosonic and Al Today,

Since this is related to what will it be like transitioning to 4D and how it may relate to balance/unity, I thought that it help help to look at some of the concerns Laura voiced and the Cs describe here just some paragraphs that they "Givith" (you decide what to take away):

The Wave Chapter 25

Q: (L) I am in a little bit of a quandary here because, here we are talking to you guys who are supposed to be “us” in the future; here
we are in this period of time on this planet, where things are in a very strange state; there is some kind of huge transition going on,
and I am just wondering what is the whole point? Why are we talking to you? What’s the point?
A: It is the lesson. Do you not understand still? The lesson, the lessons, that is all there is. They are all immeasurably valuable.
Q: (L) Okay, we are having these lessons. You have told us what is going on. We see it going on around us. I am convinced that
what you have said is so from a LOT of other evidence as well as the research of others who have come to the same conclusion
and, DAMN IT, IT’S UGLY! DO YOU UNDERSTAND ME?! IT’S UGLY!
A: That is your perspective.
Q: (L) Well, as C** said on the phone the other day, what are we supposed to awaken to? Are we supposed to just awaken to the
fact that we can SEE all this stuff going on?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Okay, once we wake up and SEE it, why can’t we just check out at that point? If you know what the script is, you don’t have to
watch the movie!
A: But then you miss out on the experience.
Q: (L) So, we are all here to experience being munched and crunched…
A: No.
Q: (L) Imprisoned, controlled, being treated like rats in a cage in a laboratory…
A: Ecstasy, remember?
Q: (L) Ecstasy?! WELL SWELL! We can just ALL be BURNED AT THE STAKE! I understand that is QUITE an ECSTATIC
experience! I’m sure William Wallace felt perfectly ecstatic when they castrated him and removed his bowels and burned them in a
brazier in front of his face!
A: Not so long ago, your face smashed upon the pavement… 1
Q: (L) Was that an ecstatic experience?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) So, when you say “ecstatic” you could just be talking about jumping out a window and croaking? You gotta understand here!
The perspective here on third density! You don’t have faces to smash on pavements!
A: Neither will/do you/us.
Q: (A) You say knowledge protects. It protects against what?
A: Many things. One example: post transformational trauma and confusion.
Q: (L) So, knowledge is going to protect us against post transformational trauma and confusion. You are implying that this transition
to fourth density is going to be traumatic and confusing. Do you mean transformation from third to fourth density, or third to fifth
density, i.e., death?
A: Both.
Q: (L) So, if one does not have the shock and trauma and the confusion and so forth, one is then able to function better?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Well, you said “both”. That implies that persons can transition directly from third to fourth density without dying. Is that correct?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) How does that feel? How is that experience…
A: Alice through the looking glass.
Q: (A) Okay, you say that knowledge is supposed to protect from trauma and confusion. On the other hand, all is lessons, so trauma
is a lesson. Why are we supposed to work to avoid a lesson?
A: You are correct, it is a lesson, but if you have foreknowledge, you are learning that lesson early, and in a different way.
Q: (L) So, if you learn the lesson in a different way, does that mitigate the need or the way or the process of the way of learning at
the time of transition?
A: Yes. Smoother.

This is not an "easy" concept to understand to say the least. I do think about it quite often. I am still thinking about the implications. :/

 

[Richs]

That its all one, while in theory could be true, is often just a blanket statement many new-agers like to use to cover over difficult problems or personal responsibility. You can transcend duality from the comfort of your living room while watching Oprah interview Erchart Tolle, and do it in a yoga tree-pose, envisioning the law of attraction to take away world hunger and vote in the first woman President, Hillary Clinton. I don't doubt some try just that.

I usually don't make off-topic posts, but envisioning in my mind your colorful descriptions above made me laugh pretty good. Thanks for the 'cheer up'!

 

[electrosonic]

That its all one, while in theory could be true, is often just a blanket statement many new-agers like to use to cover over difficult problems or personal responsibility. You can transcend duality from the comfort of your living room while watching Oprah interview Erchart Tolle, and do it in a yoga tree-pose, envisioning the law of attraction to take away world hunger and vote in the first woman President, Hillary Clinton. I don't doubt some try just that.

Yeah true, but it can never be done from 3D, no matter how many courses they attend lol.
In fact, surely it would be STS to even try to attempt to change things to suit yourself through the power of the mind in this dimension?

 

[sitting]

You can transcend duality from the comfort of your living room while watching Oprah interview Erchart Tolle, and do it in a yoga tree-pose, envisioning the law of attraction to take away world hunger and vote in the first woman President, Hillary Clinton. I don't doubt some try just that.

Really?

I think you've moved beyond dismissive--and into the realm of the silly. Good for a few laughs (to some)--but contributing little to the discussion.

A bit disappointing. FWIW.

 

[Ðekel]

That its all one, while in theory could be true, is often just a blanket statement many new-agers like to use to cover over difficult problems or personal responsibility. You can transcend duality from the comfort of your living room while watching Oprah interview Erchart Tolle, and do it in a yoga tree-pose, envisioning the law of attraction to take away world hunger and vote in the first woman President, Hillary Clinton. I don't doubt some try just that.

Yeah true, but it can never be done from 3D, no matter how many courses they attend lol.
In fact, surely it would be STS to even try to attempt to change things to suit yourself through the power of the mind in this dimension?

Yeah.. another attempt to serve a "self". Who are they to try to force a world in which no one is allowed to be hungry ?
Just because it doesn't fit in with their current view on what should and shouldn't exist ?

It would take a really big ego i think to assume that all the hungry people are just sitting there waiting for your specific fragrance of love and light..

 

[Al Today]

[...]
This is not an "easy" concept to understand to say the least. I do think about it quite often. I am still thinking about the implications. :/

At least we discuss this, think of this. I could not imagine the trauma, perhaps sheer horror of going through any transition such as described unannounced, unexpectedly and perhaps without warning... So many times "seeing" allusions of eating, drinking and being merry... When va-va-voom... Your worlds is gone. Definitely "A: Alice through the looking glass." to be sure...
Although we may Not know what is to come, at least we have a watchful eye and our experience may not be a so surprising direct smack in the face.

 

[goyacobol]

[...]
This is not an "easy" concept to understand to say the least. I do think about it quite often. I am still thinking about the implications. :/

At least we discuss this, think of this. I could not imagine the trauma, perhaps sheer horror of going through any transition such as described unannounced, unexpectedly and perhaps without warning... So many times "seeing" allusions of eating, drinking and being merry... When va-va-voom... Your worlds is gone. Definitely "A: Alice through the looking glass." to be sure...
Although we may Not know what is to come, at least we have a watchful eye and our experience may not be a so surprising direct smack in the face.

Al Today,

Yes, I think that's why the Cs ended it with:

Q: (A) Okay, you say that knowledge is supposed to protect from trauma and confusion. On the other hand, all is lessons, so trauma
is a lesson. Why are we supposed to work to avoid a lesson?
A: You are correct, it is a lesson, but if you have foreknowledge, you are learning that lesson early, and in a different way.
Q: (L) So, if you learn the lesson in a different way, does that mitigate the need or the way or the process of the way of learning at
the time of transition?
A: Yes. Smoother.

Laura uses the word "mitigate" which I think implies a less harsh lesson but a lesson nonetheless. For those who are not expecting "dramatic change" and are not watchful I think it will be a "direct smack in the face". It reminds me of the parable of the wise virgins vs the foolish virgins who do not store enough "oil".

 

[wanderingthomas]

The Cassiopaean warnings seem vague at times but boy are things truly heating up in April! Sott has been absolutely full of *literally* groundbreaking news lately. Things are sure heating up and their heating up fast. We can pretty much feel the lawn mower right above our heads.

If things are this dramatic right now globally it is chilling to imagine how much further the situation will escalate.