Mental Blocking
This term occurs in the Cassiopaea material in the meaning of spiritually holding one's ground or resisting attack. This is described as a fourth density principle which does not have any fixed translation into human actions or attitudes, as the practice will depend on the situation.
We can look at the idea from many different angles:
From Ra:
Confederation. Is it possible to convey any concept of how this battle is fought?
RA: I am Ra. Picture, if you will, your mind. Picture it then in total unity with all other minds of your society. You are then single-minded and that which is a weak electrical charge in your physical illusion is now an enormously powerful machine whereby thoughts may be projected as things.
In this endeavor the Orion group charges or attacks the Confederation armed with light. The result, a stand-off, as you would call it, both energies being somewhat depleted by this and needing to regroup; the negative depleted through failure to manipulate, the positive depleted through failure to accept that which is given.
QUESTIONER: Could you amplify the meaning of what you mean by the "failure to accept that which is given?"
RA: I am Ra. At the level of time/space at which this takes place in the form of what you may call thought-war, the most accepting and loving energy would be to so love those who wished to manipulate that those entities were surrounded and engulfed, transformed by positive energies.
This, however, being a battle of equals, the Confederation is aware that it cannot, on equal footing, allow itself to be manipulated in order to remain purely positive, for then though pure it would not be of any consequence, having been placed by the so-called powers of darkness under the heel, as you may say.
It is thus that those who deal with this thought-war must be defensive rather than accepting in order to preserve their usefulness in service to others. Thusly, they cannot accept fully what the Orion Confederation wishes to give, that being enslavement. Thusly, some polarity is lost due to this friction and both sides, if you will, must then regroup.
[…] The most typical approach of Orion entities is to choose what you might call the weaker-minded entity that it might suggest a greater amount of Orion philosophy to be disseminated. Some few Orion entities are called by more highly polarized negative entities of your space/time nexus. In this case they share information just as we are now doing. However, this is a risk for the Orion entities due to the frequency with which the harvestable negative planetary entities then attempt to bid and order the Orion contact just as these entities bid planetary negative contacts.
The resulting struggle for mastery, if lost, is damaging to the
polarity of the Orion group. Similarly, a mistaken Orion contact with highly polarized positive entities can wreak havoc with Orion troops unless these crusaders are able to
de-polarize the entity mistakenly contacted. This occurrence is almost unheard-of. Therefore, the Orion group prefers to make physical contact only with the weaker-minded entity.
From the Cassiopaeans:
Q: (L) Okay, in the experience I felt a paralysis of my body,
what caused this paralysis.
A: Yes. Separation of awareness. Which is defined as any
point along the pathway where one's awareness becomes so
totally focused on one thought sector that all other levels of awareness are temporarily receded, thereby making it impossible to become aware of one's physical reality along with one's mental reality. This gives the impression of what is referred to as paralysis. Do you understand?
Q: (L) Yes. And what stimulates this total focus of
awareness?
A: An event which sidetracks, temporarily, the mental
processes.
Q: (L) And what event can sidetrack the mental processes to
this extent?
A: Any number.
Q: (L) In this particular case, what was it?
A: It was an eclipsing of energies caused by conflicting
thought centers.
Q: (L) What energies were being eclipsed?
A: Whenever two opposing units of reality intersect, this
causes what can be referred to as friction, which, for an
immeasurable amount of what you would refer to as time,
which is, of course, non-existent, creates a non-
existence, or a stopping of the movements of all
functions. This is what we would know as conflict. In
between, or through any intersecting, opposite entities,
we always find zero time, zero movement, zero
transference, zero exchange. Now think about this. Think
about this carefully.
Q: (L) Does this mean that I was, essentially, in a condition
of non-existence?
A: Well, non-existence is not really the proper term, but
non-fluid existence would be more to the point. Do you
understand?
There are many passages elsewhere in the Cassiopaea material where attack and blocking attack are discussed.
The core idea of mental blocking is to assert one's position and the nature of one's being. This may take many forms. The idea is a spiritual one for which we do not have direct terms or perception, thus we look at it through the example of everyday confrontations.
One aspect of the idea is not to be drawn into the attacker's “world” via curiosity, desire to change the world or the attacker, emotional hooks, self-importance or the like.
Another aspect is to be internally certain and undivided. In a
confrontation, the attacking party generally expects some reaction, either aggression or backing out. In some cases, mental blocking can take the form of giving no response or an entirely unexpected response. The main idea is not to play by the same playbook as the adversary, thus breaking out of a pattern of expected reactions.
Getting entangled into arguments or repetitious interactions with people can be draining and as much as one sees the problem in these, it is very difficult not to be affected, thus at least implicitly accepting the rules of the game. Playing various influence games tends to affect one's FRV and/or one's basic model of reality. Thus getting dragged into hostile
arguments can for example be an attack. Blocking such may involve declining to participate.
Attack often works by playing on pre-existing doubts or divisions within the self or within a group. Recognizing this and being unambiguous and not tempted to be swayed is important. “I don't want to know” is not mental blocking. Knowing things, including the nature and content of the attack is important for an objective view of the world. But once one knows about it, one can decline to again be subjected to the same arguments and simply reject the whole topic as one that has already been seen and dealt with.
Declining a confrontation is not always an appropriate strategy, for example truth cannot be defended by being invisible. It is not possible to give fixed rules for every situation. Recognizing appropriate action depends on
recognizing the deeper dynamic involved, we could say the nature of the asking. Defending truth where there is no interest for it to begin with is simply wasted time whereas standing up for it when there is a possibility of it being accepted can be a service to the participants.
Knowledge of a special kind may itself be a form of protection. Since the battle concerns one's “soul” or FRV, having drawn one's circle and standing firm in it may preempt attack. Human knowledge is never absolutely certain or complete, but knowledge through choice to apply it may become something of a different quality. Information is converted into being by the process of commitment. Mental blocking is not a matter of “true belief” but rather
of asserting one's choice also wile faced with attack. This is generally not an aggressive stance, since attack often expects an aggressive response.
Acting as a group may be important to the process. A single individual may be worn down by continuously defending one's position, also a group may focus “higher energies” more effectively than an individual. This is not a case of mob mentality but of strength in unity of purpose. An isolated
individual's mode of thinking and perceiving may more readily be shifted to match the attacker's, thus diminishing the STO alignment of the attacked.
We are not talking about fighting in a physical or 3D sense, where both antagonists have a similar nature and modes of thinking and responding. In 3D warfare, no matter the specifics, also in asymmetric situations, the combatants still play at a similar game.
In the case of mental blocking, the point is to preserve one's own nature, not to adopt that of the attacker. This is not always applicable to physical 3D conflict. We may think that in the context of higher densities, one's FRV, or polarity along the STO/STS axis determines one's strength and the realm one occupies. Deviating from one's chosen polarity represents loss. Sometimes the battle may be a “staring down contest,” sometimes it may not occur at all if the antagonists are naturally kept separate by their different natures.
Writings of mystics of the monastic traditions describe something like mental blocking when discussing the spiritual attacks confronted by the monks. The devils seek to confuse, to alternatingly flatter and to induce despair. The defense is not in arguing or engaging but in simultaneously acknowledging that the self is weak yet stands firm in giving thanks and glory to God, regardless of temptation or concern for self. The general advice not to talk to apparitions concerns this.
