Session 4 April 2015

[Approaching Infinity]

I always thought of us humans as souls occupying a body, instead of a body carrying a soul. What's up with that now?

I'm not sure what you mean by differentiating the two. How do you see "occupying" and "carrying" a soul? In other word, what are the differences for you?

Does that mean that if, at this moment, I am not the first soul my body has carried, that the memories I keep within are not actually mine?

I think you might be making assumptions and jumping to conclusions. Where was it suggested that a body 'carries' more than one soul in succession?

 

[goyacobol]

I always thought of us humans as souls occupying a body, instead of a body carrying a soul. What's up with that now?

I'm not sure what you mean by differentiating the two. How do you see "occupying" and "carrying" a soul? In other word, what are the differences for you?

Does that mean that if, at this moment, I am not the first soul my body has carried, that the memories I keep within are not actually mine?

I think you might be making assumptions and jumping to conclusions. Where was it suggested that a body 'carries' more than one soul in succession?

I may be wrong but I had to think about that phrase myself and I am wondering if the difference is our perception. If you say your soul is "occupying" you might have the sense that the body has always been yours and no one Else's but if you begin to think that your body is just "carrying" a soul then your perception of your body may have changed owners?

The question of when the soul "seats" in the body could apply only to a one time event (in the case of OPs a very long wait or never) or it could be related to the concept of "walk-ins".

The Cs kind of hint at a possibility of "walk-ins" mentioning the book Strangers Among Us by Ruth Montgomery here.

A: Strangers among us refers to the phenomenon identified by Ruth Montgomery as "Walk-Ins."
Q: (L) But, you have said in previous sessions that this rarely occurs.
A: Rare is relative.
Q: (SV) Ruth Montgomery also said that sometimes walk-ins don't realize who or what they are.
A: Rare also may be transitory in nature.
Q: (J) You mean walk in and walk back out again?
A: No. Frequency is not necessarily static according to the time line, as you measure time.
Q: (T) I have not done a lot of research on walk-ins, what is the definition of a walk-in?
A: A walk-in, as described by Ruth Montgomery, is a soul that has chosen to take over the body that
was vacated by another soul that has chosen, at some level of awareness, to depart for varying
reasons. In this way, a higher level entity can enter into the body that was previously occupied by a
different level entity, in the form of a soul, that is to say.
Q: (T) A fourth level soul can then enter the body of a third level?
A: Or perhaps a fourth level soul... remember, as we have described to you before, levels one through
four, more appropriately density levels one through four, all involve short wave cycle recycling, or, as
you refer to it, reincarnation. Because, each and every one of these density levels has a soul and a
physical body marriage, as it were, in progressive life experiences. Each and every one of these density
levels involves movement to the fifth level of density for contemplation during the cycling process. It is
level six, which is the first level where short wave cycle recycling is no longer necessary because there
is no more physical orientation. Therefore, all levels, one through four have a soul reflection of the
physical body at all times when in physical state. And, therefore, reincarnation of various types, is at
various points on the short wave cycle always possible, and, in fact, quite probable. Do you
understand?

I do think the session above is an example of Where was it suggested that a body 'carries' more than one soul in succession? FWIW

 

[riclapaz]

I always thought of us humans as souls occupying a body, instead of a body carrying a soul. What's up with that now?

I'm not sure what you mean by differentiating the two. How do you see "occupying" and "carrying" a soul? In other word, what are the differences for you?

Does that mean that if, at this moment, I am not the first soul my body has carried, that the memories I keep within are not actually mine?

I think you might be making assumptions and jumping to conclusions. Where was it suggested that a body 'carries' more than one soul in succession?

I may be wrong but I had to think about that phrase myself and I am wondering if the difference is our perception. If you say your soul is "occupying" you might have the sense that the body has always been yours and no one Else's but if you begin to think that your body is just "carrying" a soul then your perception of your body may have changed owners?

The question of when the soul "seats" in the body could apply only to a one time event (in the case of OPs a very long wait or never) or it could be related to the concept of "walk-ins".

The Cs kind of hint at a possibility of "walk-ins" mentioning the book Strangers Among Us by Ruth Montgomery here.

A: Strangers among us refers to the phenomenon identified by Ruth Montgomery as "Walk-Ins."
Q: (L) But, you have said in previous sessions that this rarely occurs.
A: Rare is relative.
Q: (SV) Ruth Montgomery also said that sometimes walk-ins don't realize who or what they are.
A: Rare also may be transitory in nature.
Q: (J) You mean walk in and walk back out again?
A: No. Frequency is not necessarily static according to the time line, as you measure time.
Q: (T) I have not done a lot of research on walk-ins, what is the definition of a walk-in?
A: A walk-in, as described by Ruth Montgomery, is a soul that has chosen to take over the body that
was vacated by another soul that has chosen, at some level of awareness, to depart for varying
reasons. In this way, a higher level entity can enter into the body that was previously occupied by a
different level entity, in the form of a soul, that is to say.
Q: (T) A fourth level soul can then enter the body of a third level?
A: Or perhaps a fourth level soul... remember, as we have described to you before, levels one through
four, more appropriately density levels one through four, all involve short wave cycle recycling, or, as
you refer to it, reincarnation. Because, each and every one of these density levels has a soul and a
physical body marriage, as it were, in progressive life experiences. Each and every one of these density
levels involves movement to the fifth level of density for contemplation during the cycling process. It is
level six, which is the first level where short wave cycle recycling is no longer necessary because there
is no more physical orientation. Therefore, all levels, one through four have a soul reflection of the
physical body at all times when in physical state. And, therefore, reincarnation of various types, is at
various points on the short wave cycle always possible, and, in fact, quite probable. Do you
understand?

I do think the session above is an example of Where was it suggested that a body 'carries' more than one soul in succession? FWIW

Thank you for bringing this issue is confusing for me to understand this, I have a question, attachments counted as one more soul in a physical body?

 

[goyacobol]

I do think the session above is an example of Where was it suggested that a body 'carries' more than one soul in succession? FWIW

Thank you for bringing this issue is confusing for me to understand this, I have a question, attachments counted as one more soul in a physical body?

riclapaz,

In the session above it is talking about "walkins" who walk into or trade places with a soul that willfully wants to vacate the body. Attachments are a topic that has been discussed in other threads and that is a good question to ask I think. Laura has described them sometimes as "dead-dudes". I don't know if you could say they fully share a physical body. Maybe they just kind of hang around us and try to influence us sometimes.

Laura mentions how this relates to exorcism here.

 

[riclapaz]

thanks Goyacobol for your answer, my confusion lies in the answer given by Cs, in this specific question Galatea:

Session Date: April 4th 2015


(Chu) Yeah, sometimes.

A: Sometimes. The individual may notice inside or an observer may notice.

Q: (L) So, people can change, and sometimes even change dramatically?

A: Yes

]Q: (Galatea) Can a person hold more than one soul sometimes?

A: Yes

Q: (Galatea) Weird. Does that make people have multiple personalities sometimes?

A: Sometimes.

The question was using the word "sometimes", with this in mind, I wonder what would be the purpose of a soul, or more, to be in the same physical body, having the ability to embody in another physical body individually and continue learning?

 

[goyacobol]

thanks Goyacobol for your answer, my confusion lies in the answer given by Cs, in this specific question Galatea:

Session Date: April 4th 2015


(Chu) Yeah, sometimes.

A: Sometimes. The individual may notice inside or an observer may notice.

Q: (L) So, people can change, and sometimes even change dramatically?

A: Yes

]Q: (Galatea) Can a person hold more than one soul sometimes?

A: Yes

Q: (Galatea) Weird. Does that make people have multiple personalities sometimes?

A: Sometimes.

The question was using the word "sometimes", with this in mind, I wonder what would be the purpose of a soul, or more, to be in the same physical body, having the ability to embody in another physical body individually and continue learning?

I think you have answered you own question with the above quote. The C's seem to be saying "Yes" there can be more than one "sometimes". Is there any particular reason you asked?

 

[riclapaz]

Well I hope I'm not having problems with google translator here, if so, I apologize Goyacobol, and thank you for your time in answering.

I think you have answered you own question with the above quote. The C's seem to be saying "Yes" there can be more than one "sometimes". Is there any particular reason you asked?

My question is, Cs, saying that a physical body can sometimes have several souls, refer to dead people who did not go to the light and join the physical body of the person, assuming that these have an individualized soul ?

 

[dankhiar]

I always thought of us humans as souls occupying a body, instead of a body carrying a soul. What's up with that now?

I'm not sure what you mean by differentiating the two. How do you see "occupying" and "carrying" a soul? In other word, what are the differences for you?

Does that mean that if, at this moment, I am not the first soul my body has carried, that the memories I keep within are not actually mine?

I think you might be making assumptions and jumping to conclusions. Where was it suggested that a body 'carries' more than one soul in succession?

The way I meant it was that occupying a body looks at it from a soul's point of view, and carrying a soul looks at it from a body's point of view.

And to answer your second question, I was actually referring to this same transcript. Here:

Q: (L) Okay. Well, that's enough of that. I have another question here. The other question that people were a little curious about on the forum that I noticed was: they wanted to know at what age or stage of development does the soul of an individual enter into the body of a baby that's about to be born?

A: It cannot be set in stone; remember that about half of all babies never house individualized souls. In some cases it can be very early, and others, as late as early adulthood.

Q: (Pierre) Wow.

(Galatea) So I guess they're waiting around the body's frequency to change.

(L) So, is that true? A soul can be hanging around, and there's, say for example, a body that's close to the frequency they need, but not quite, and they have to wait until something happens or changes?

A: Yes

Q: (L) What can change frequency?

(Perceval) Experience.

(Pierre) Knowledge.

(L) Yeah, puberty, thought, experience.

A: Yes

Q: (L) Perspectives change via experience I think.

A: Yes

Q: (Galatea) Awareness of something?

(L) All kinds of things can change frequency.

(Galatea) Does that mean it's possible for something else to take over the body in the meantime?

A: Yes

Q: (Galatea) Does it get kicked out when the soul comes?

A: Yes

Q: (L) Well, you once talked about things like vaccinations and things changing the frequency, which causes negative potentials. Does that factor into this process?

A: Yes

Q: (Galatea) Can a soul literally get kicked out of a body if the frequency is not matching the soul?

A: Yes

Q: (Galatea) You can be made into a soulless monster eventually!

A: Yes

Q: (Chu) And technology would have the same effects as we've seen...

A: Yes

Q: (Perceval) Is that why there are these people who go for operations and then they wake up with a different personality or speaking a different language...?

A: Yes

Q: (Pierre) For an individual, when the soul attaches to the body or leaves, is it noticeable?

(Perceval) That's what I just said.

(Chu) Yeah, sometimes.

A: Sometimes. The individual may notice inside or an observer may notice.

Q: (L) So, people can change, and sometimes even change dramatically?

A: Yes

Q: (Galatea) Can a person hold more than one soul sometimes?

A: Yes

Q: (Galatea) Weird. Does that make people have multiple personalities sometimes?

A: Sometimes.

Thanks for that, goyacobol

(...)
The question was using the word "sometimes", with this in mind, I wonder what would be the purpose of a soul, or more, to be in the same physical body, having the ability to embody in another physical body individually and continue learning?

I think it lies in the fact that they can't transition to 5D for whatever reason so they stick around. The C's have said that they may not necessarily have ill intentions going in a body that is already occupied. It's just that sometimes the frequency resonates with them and attracts them.

 

[goyacobol]

....

The way I meant it was that occupying a body looks at it from a soul's point of view, and carrying a soul looks at it from a body's point of view.

And to answer your second question, I was actually referring to this same transcript. Here:

....
Q: (L) So, people can change, and sometimes even change dramatically?

A: Yes

Q: (Galatea) Can a person hold more than one soul sometimes?

A: Yes

Q: (Galatea) Weird. Does that make people have multiple personalities sometimes?

A: Sometimes.

Thanks for that, goyacobol

(...)
The question was using the word "sometimes", with this in mind, I wonder what would be the purpose of a soul, or more, to be in the same physical body, having the ability to embody in another physical body individually and continue learning?

I think it lies in the fact that they can't transition to 5D for whatever reason so they stick around. The C's have said that they may not necessarily have ill intentions going in a body that is already occupied. It's just that sometimes the frequency resonates with them and attracts them.

Thanks for clearing that up D'Ankhiar I think the last remark makes sense to me too.

To tie this together some and answer riclapaz questions I'll add this:

Well I hope I'm not having problems with google translator here, if so, I apologize Goyacobol, and thank you for your time in answering.

I think you have answered you own question with the above quote. The C's seem to be saying "Yes" there can be more than one "sometimes". Is there any particular reason you asked?

My question is, Cs, saying that a physical body can sometimes have several souls, refer to dead people who did not go to the light and join the physical body of the person, assuming that these have an individualized soul ?

Sorry, riclapaz. I didn't answer the part about "what would be the purpose of a soul, or more, to be in the same physical body, having the ability to embody in another physical body individually and continue learning?"

For the "walk-ins" I think it is a continuation of their soul journey and learning by mutual agreement with the soul that is tired and wants to leave the body. Since I have read the Ruth Montgomery book Strangers Among Us I feel more comfortable answering that the walk-in scenario seems to have a possible positive purpose.

As for multiple souls inhabiting the same body I don't have a specific idea of what the purpose of that would be exactly. It reminds me more of possession or multiple personalities which the C's do mention in more than one session.

Just as a general reference to the more negative side of the spirit/soul connection here one I found:

Session 3 December 1994

Q: (L) I received an article from Piers about experiments by a fellow named Persinger who has been
trying to duplicate the "abduction" experience by subjecting people to EM fields in a sensory deprivation
chamber. I would like comments on that, and second...
A: Nonsense, some have closed mind inspired by fear.
Q: (L) My concern is that if he is doing this to people, and we have talked about electromagnetic
energy blowing holes in the dimensional boundaries, my concern is that this experimentation could be
detrimental to the persons being experimented on; is this a possibility?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) What could be the results of subjecting someone to these electromagnetic fields?
A: Cessation of body.
Q: (L) In other words, it could kill them?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Could it also open doors between dimensions and allow other things to enter in?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Could they be subjected to spirit or demonic possession by this method?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Could they also be subjected to further programming by aliens through this method?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Anything else you wish to say on this?
A: Always keep open mind.

This is a topic that covers many situations so I am trying to be brief for now.

 

[Laura]

Well I hope I'm not having problems with google translator here, if so, I apologize Goyacobol, and thank you for your time in answering.

I think you have answered you own question with the above quote. The C's seem to be saying "Yes" there can be more than one "sometimes". Is there any particular reason you asked?

My question is, Cs, saying that a physical body can sometimes have several souls, refer to dead people who did not go to the light and join the physical body of the person, assuming that these have an individualized soul ?

A spirit attachment is only rarely a "full occupation and takeover" of a body. More often it's rather like a peripheral that is plugged in somewhere and can "influence" but not control.

 

[Chu]

A spirit attachment is only rarely a "full occupation and takeover" of a body. More often it's rather like a peripheral that is plugged in somewhere and can "influence" but not control.

Regarding this topic, I think that watching Laura's third part of the Knowledge and Being series can give you a lot of answers. She gives multiple examples there of dealing with attachments, and how they are attracted to a host, where, why, etc.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

I always thought of us humans as souls occupying a body, instead of a body carrying a soul. What's up with that now?

I'm not sure what you mean by differentiating the two. How do you see "occupying" and "carrying" a soul? In other word, what are the differences for you?

Does that mean that if, at this moment, I am not the first soul my body has carried, that the memories I keep within are not actually mine?

I think you might be making assumptions and jumping to conclusions. Where was it suggested that a body 'carries' more than one soul in succession?

The way I meant it was that occupying a body looks at it from a soul's point of view, and carrying a soul looks at it from a body's point of view.

In that case, then I think it's just 2 ways of looking at the same thing. Some 'bodies' never truly carry a soul, but they still have a point of view. For example, OPs aren't total robots: they have some sense of 'self', of experience.

And to answer your second question, I was actually referring to this same transcript.

I'd say it's probably a pretty rare phenomenon, and like the Cs said, can resemble some form of MPD. In extreme cases of dissociation, for example, one 'personality' may do a lot of things that the other personality or personalities are not even aware of. They are totally separate 'points of view'. But perhaps there may be some bleed-over or sharing of memories, like you see in some MPD cases.

 

[riclapaz]

(...)
The question was using the word "sometimes", with this in mind, I wonder what would be the purpose of a soul, or more, to be in the same physical body, having the ability to embody in another physical body individually and continue learning?

I think it lies in the fact that they can't transition to 5D for whatever reason so they stick around. The C's have said that they may not necessarily have ill intentions going in a body that is already occupied. It's just that sometimes the frequency resonates with them and attracts them.

Thanks for your answer D'Ankhiar, Laura mentions in videos that Chu recommended, some people can have spirits attached to them, almost like a full bus.

 

[riclapaz]

My question is, Cs, saying that a physical body can sometimes have several souls, refer to dead people who did not go to the light and join the physical body of the person, assuming that these have an individualized soul ?

Sorry, riclapaz. I didn't answer the part about "what would be the purpose of a soul, or more, to be in the same physical body, having the ability to embody in another physical body individually and continue learning?"

For the "walk-ins" I think it is a continuation of their soul journey and learning by mutual agreement with the soul that is tired and wants to leave the body. Since I have read the Ruth Montgomery book Strangers Among Us I feel more comfortable answering that the walk-in scenario seems to have a possible positive purpose.

As for multiple souls inhabiting the same body I don't have a specific idea of what the purpose of that would be exactly. It reminds me more of possession or multiple personalities which the C's do mention in more than one session.

Just as a general reference to the more negative side of the spirit/soul connection here one I found:

Session 3 December 1994

Q: (L) I received an article from Piers about experiments by a fellow named Persinger who has been
trying to duplicate the "abduction" experience by subjecting people to EM fields in a sensory deprivation
chamber. I would like comments on that, and second...
A: Nonsense, some have closed mind inspired by fear.
Q: (L) My concern is that if he is doing this to people, and we have talked about electromagnetic
energy blowing holes in the dimensional boundaries, my concern is that this experimentation could be
detrimental to the persons being experimented on; is this a possibility?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) What could be the results of subjecting someone to these electromagnetic fields?
A: Cessation of body.
Q: (L) In other words, it could kill them?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Could it also open doors between dimensions and allow other things to enter in?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Could they be subjected to spirit or demonic possession by this method?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Could they also be subjected to further programming by aliens through this method?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Anything else you wish to say on this?
A: Always keep open mind.

This is a topic that covers many situations so I am trying to be brief for now.

Thanks again Goyacobol, I agree is a complex issue, and a lot of assumptions.

Well I hope I'm not having problems with google translator here, if so, I apologize Goyacobol, and thank you for your time in answering.

I think you have answered you own question with the above quote. The C's seem to be saying "Yes" there can be more than one "sometimes". Is there any particular reason you asked?

My question is, Cs, saying that a physical body can sometimes have several souls, refer to dead people who did not go to the light and join the physical body of the person, assuming that these have an individualized soul ?

A spirit attachment is only rarely a "full occupation and takeover" of a body. More often it's rather like a peripheral that is plugged in somewhere and can "influence" but not control.

Thanks Laura for your answer, if I understand correctly, sometimes in a physical body there are more than a soul, this agreement was made during the stay in 5D, as a kind of team, with one goal "x",could be my assumption proper?

 

[Chu]

I was re-reading In Search of the Miraculous these past few days, and there is a small bit that reminded me of this session, and in particular this part:

A: The "Wave" is in process. Remember your principle of scale.

Q: (L) You mean the one that I wrote when I was doing Noah?

A: Yes

Q: (L) Okay, that principle of scale was basically that when a quantum wave collapse occurs at the atomic scale, it's like nearly instantaneous because of the smallness of the system.

(Pierre) Macro scale takes more time.

(L) Yes. A wave or a phase transition at the macrocosmic scale would take place over a period of time. So, that reminds me of the session back I think it was in 1995, because I just recently re-read it, and it was about the dying off of the frogs. We were talking about frogs dying off because somebody had reported that frogs were disappearing. We asked about this, and the answer was along the lines that that was a precursor or an effect of the Wave. In other words, what we're seeing from our perspective are incremental events that, in a larger perspective, would be more or less instantaneous.

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Is that the principle of scale we're talking about here?

A: Yes. And those who do not realize this will "go under".

Q: (L) So somebody's who's waiting for a specific date for some kind of big flash to happen and suddenly they're gonna go from one world into another, they're simply not grasping the cosmic scale of thing?

A: Exactly! We once said that it was a grand example of cosmic "Pomp and Circumstance". You simply do not have the full perspective!

Q: (L) So that means that we are talking about changes on such a huge scale that our perspective is that of...

(Perceval) Here's an example. They said it's a creative cosmic process, so it's basically like a giant cosmic rototiller coming through the universe and turning over the soil and spreading fertilizer for new growth to maintain the universe like a good gardener. We're like one little tiny grain.

(Chu) We're like the worms who see the rototiller approaching for hours. [laughter]

(L) We're a microbe in a hundred thousand acre farm.

(Pierre) And we feel the vibrations of the coming rototiller for our whole lives, and just now, the rototiller is coming closer.

(Galatea) And some of you are gonna stick to the rototiller blades and get blasted up into space!

It says:

The conversation began with my question: "Can war be stopped?" And G. answered: "Yes, it can." And yet I had been certain from previous talks that he would answer: "No, it cannot."

"But the whole thing is: how?" he said. "It is necessary to know a great deal in order to understand that. What is war? It is the result of planetary influences. Somewhere up there two or three planets have approached too near to each other; tension results. Have you noticed how, if a man passes quite close to you on a narrow pavement, you
become all tense? The same tension takes place between planets. For them it lasts, perhaps, a second or two. But here, on the earth, people begin to slaughter one another, and they go on slaughtering maybe for several years. It seems to them at the time that they hate one another; or perhaps that they have to slaughter each other for some exalted purpose; or that they must defend somebody or something and that it is a very noble thing to do; or something else of the same kind. They fail to realize to what an extent they are mere pawns in the game. They think they signify something; they think they can move about as they like; they think they can decide to do this or that.

But in reality all their movements, all their actions, are the result of planetary influences. And they themselves signify literally nothing. Then the moon plays a big part in this. But we will speak about the moon separately. Only it must be understood that neither Emperor Wilhelm, nor generals, nor ministers, nor parliaments, signify anything or can do anything. Everything that happens on a big scale is governed from outside, and governed either by accidental combinations of influences or by general cosmic laws."

Anyway, just thought it worth sharing here, since it's also about the principle of scale.