Session 6 July 2024

[Ricardo]

Perhaps is not so much a black and white thing. Maybe the question would be: how much of a “system B” in a person can be separated from the system A? Because, the 2 systems always are going to be present in some capacity whether someone have or don't some type of inner experience. Maybe someone who doesn’t have a type of inner experience could have the 2 systems almost combined?

The book basically has the general idea of the observation of these 2 systems acting together and by observing this in ourselves, we can take more control of our “programs”, in detecting how your act or react to things, which system takes control or not depending which situation.

One of the things, could be for example an automatic emotional reaction to something without really consciously taking control over it, and following that example; would be like when someone takes food away from you and your system A reacts from it, anger, trying to take it back, etc but your mind (system B) might be thinking; why is he/she doing that? How dare “him/her”?, perhaps some people don’t rationalize the “why that happened” but only see it as “that just happened” and that’s it, OR perhaps someone can rationalize what happened but just to a minimal level. So there could be a clue in there..

I don’t think a person who it’s not able to have any type of inner experience would be able to observe and for that, detect and separate these 2 systems ever.

But on this subject, there is another book I was beginning to read but stoped a while ago because started reading other books (I need to get it together ) but reminds me of Hurtbult’s work somehow, the name of the book is The Road to Character by David Brooks. You might also want to check that one out.

That book focus on how to build your character by analyzing your inner personality, weakness and struggles, but if we translate that to the bigger picture, it may have clues on perhaps how people who can’t experience any type of inner struggles, build their personalities or “character” to survive.

This reminds me of what a religious book says about turning the other cheek ( keeping its reading according to the tradition) , and , that i long have suspected to be mostly mis-read, ie that humans are 3 centered , and , those are 2 centered , thus , not " turning" , more like "moving with another center" , as such avoiding the weeping , but able to prevent those that wil gnash teeth. makes sense ?

 

[MJF]

MJF,

I would like to add my thanks for your concise synopsis of the powder keg situation in Britain. I’ve been picking up the pieces f the events there from various sources. You gave a clear run down that is easy to follow. Much appreciated.

The rioting seems to have died down for the time being except in Northern Ireland. Instead pro-refugee groups and anti-racist groups have been taking to the streets to protest against the so called "right-wing thugs". However, many of these anti-racists belong to extreme left wing groups such as the Socialist Workers Party who are no strangers to violent protest themselves. It transpires that the intelligence report that there would be over 100 far right protests up and own the country the other night may have emanated from a left wing source. If so, it was no doubt to help promote the marches the left had organised against what turned out to be non-existent right wing protests. In doing so, they garnered lots of publicity in the press who naturally portrayed them as agents for peace and they even won praise from the King.

As to political developments, the Labour Government is talking about bringing in a new "hate crime" of "Islamophobia" and implementing 'operation scatter' whereby refugees and asylum seekers will be more widely distributed around the country and not accommodated in hotels and hostels as they are at the moment. This will involve using stocks of public housing such as empty care homes. How this will play with indigenous people on long social housing waiting lists will be interesting to see. The last Conservative Government had looked at introducing a crime of Islamophobia but shied away from proposing such legislation since it is difficult to define the term. However, such a move may be indicative of an increasingly more authoritarian approach by the current Labour administration who are now overturning a Conservative piece of legislation that was brought in last year to stop the de-platforming of speakers at universities and colleges in what is a clear blow to free speech. This new crime of Islamophobia will undoubtedly find favour with the Mayor of London Saddique Khan though who has recently spoken of how he does not feel safe in London as an openly Muslim politician following the riots that have rocked the UK over the last week - see: Sadiq Khan ‘does not feel safe as a Muslim’ after far-right riots

This is strange coming from a Labour Mayor who, when he appeared on Iranian public television in 2009, was happy to use a derogatory slur against fellow Muslims by calling them "Uncle Toms"* in order to describe certain moderate members of the Muslim community:

*An expression which many Americans will be familiar with but for those not familiar with it, it means a derogative term for a member of an oppressed minority who supposedly choses to be subservient to their oppressors.
​

In the footage, he describes his work as minister for community cohesion in the then Labour government and said he was talking to all members of the community whether he agreed with them or not.

He said: “I can tell you that I've spent the last months in this job speaking to all sorts of people. Not just leaders, not just organisations, but ordinary rank and file citizens of Muslim faith - and that's what good government is about, it's about engaging with all stakeholders."

“You can talk about articles in the newspapers about what an organisation might get but the point is you can't just pick and choose who you speak to, you can't just speak to Uncle Toms.”

No doubt his remarks played well with his Iranian hosts who are known for their hard-line Islamic militancy.

See: https: //www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/sadiq-khan-under-fire-after-footage-emerges-of-him-using-derogatory-term-to-describe-fellow-muslims-a7012286.html

But are Moslems in London, like Saddique Khan, the only ones with reason to fear judging from this YouTube video post of a recent GB News report on a serious public order disturbance in Croydon, London the other night, which also carries a report on an attack on a Catholic Church in Wembley, North London - see:

Saddique Kahn, as Mayor of London, is responsible for London's policing. At the present time, London is experiencing an epidemic of knife related crimes. Kahn has been ambivalent at times about using the police power of 'stop and search' where knife crime is concerned out of fear of upsetting certain ethnic minorities. As a result, several teenagers (mainly black) have ended up being stabbed to death in recent years in turf wars that are primarily drug related. Indeed, my youngest son was almost a victim of a stabbing in Tottenham, North London the other year, when an unknown assailant tried to stab him in the back. Kahn shouldn't just be worried about Moslems but about everyone who lives in, works in and visits London, a city which is becoming increasingly unsafe under his administration.​

 

[irjO]

This reminds me of what a religious book says about turning the other cheek ( keeping its reading according to the tradition) , and , that i long have suspected to be mostly mis-read, ie that humans are 3 centered , and , those are 2 centered , thus , not " turning" , more like "moving with another center" , as such avoiding the weeping , but able to prevent those that wil gnash teeth. makes sense ?

Yeah it does. I think you would also enjoy the book The Road to Character which it’s more related to something like that.

 

[Ricardo]

Thank you , surpring to find such an attitude in Mr. David brooks , ( someone that i'd otherwise , in glancing, describe as an apparatchik for the ptb ) , but he's orthodox (something ) , so thats always a plus in my book ( as an orthodox pastafarian ) :)

 

[Artisan Well]

You’re welcome, and yes, Don killing himself is definitely an “in your face” lesson on the dangers of denying reality, in my opinion.
The Ra material is kinda special to me, as it was some of the very first channeled information I read, this was back in the 70’s, last century.
The newsletters of the latest channeled material, came via snail mail, all laboriously typed out on a manual typewriter.
My friend and I would spend hours discussing the messages.

Did you read Jane Robert's Seth material? That was my first.

 

[Artisan Well]

I asked my 3 children as well. Two of them visualize routinely and didn’t realize others couldn’t just as myself. One could not visualize. She realize this when she was three and was asked to count sheep to go to sleep. She was very upset she could not see the sheep. I postulate that all OPs cannot visualize. But, perhaps some souled individuals do not as well. Perhaps it’s not an either/or. My daughter who cannot visualize is one of the most empathetic people I’ve ever met in my life. I find it hard to believe she does not have a soul.

I agree that we may not fully understand OP's, perhaps the empathy comes from a lower center. If I understand correctly, OP's have the lower centers (which I think of as the lower 3 chakras even though I believe that is not exactly correct) and that in place of higher centers, they connect to a group center. There is an X account "Nature is Amazing" that shows videos of animals, many of which seem to show empathic behavior. One in particular that I'm thinking of shows a bird moving a fish, that was flopping around in shallow water, to deeper water so it could swim. There are so many others too.

 

[MJF]

Did you read Jane Robert's Seth material? That was my first.

In case you are not aware, here is what the C's said about the source of the Seth material in the session dated 7 November 1994:

Q: (L) Who was Seth, channelled by Jane Roberts?

A: Higher plane earth spirit.

Q: (L) Were the teachings in the Seth material accurate and was that a good source?

A: Yes but rapidly becoming obsolete as you move toward new reality.

In that same session, the C's made some remarks about visualisation, which makes me think of recent comments on this thread about those who can visualise in their minds and those that can't:

Q: (L) There was a very famous case of haunting called the Bell Witch case, can you tell us about it?

A: Inform, ask and we will access.

Q: (L) Is that why we have to ask every question in such detail?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) When we ask a question how does it enable you to access the information?

A: Puts in visual image.

So it seems that the C's even at 6th density use visualisation.

 

[Debra]

Did you read Jane Robert's Seth material? That was my first.

Oh yes, I have studied a lot of the Seth material.
Man, the mind blowing memory’s, the excitement when I got my hands on those first books, is so incredible to remember.
I had read Cayces trances, a bunch of random “woo-woo” publications, but this material from Jane was different.
If you’re interested, here’s a research paper done on Jane Roberts and her journey into “channeling”.
It’s got a lot of food for thought, and documents the historically relevant dates and progression of “Seth”.
It contains a very intelligent discussion on who, or what “Seth” was, in my opinion.

https://www2.rivier.edu/faculty/pcunningham/Research/Problem_of_Seths_Origin.pdf