Session 9 September 1995

[Kisito]

Thank You guys!!!

This sentence was not clear for me. I should have search better on the forum as I found this one precious thread nearby . I am sorry for noise.

https://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,38306.15.html

Hello Mikael, I see that this subject obsesses you, because cest the second time when to speak to you about it. I too, thought a lot on this matter for two years, and I do not know if I have to progress. But this is what I think:
We need feelings to progress, because the emotion it is the information and the knowledge. However when we possess, suffisament of 3D knowledge, we do not any more need to fall in the torments of the feelings (emotions). Our emotions are more refined, and more serene. Our emotions are close to the fullness. The emotional storms train no more veils (illusion), our vision is not more " lilmitée ", but "unlimited", we perceive the next density. I do not see otherwise..

 

[Sebastião II]

And, also we would suggest that it would not be advisable to seek to cause physical harm to any particular species.

And yet we eat some of them...

 

[goyacobol]

And yet we eat some of them...

If taken in context I think the Cs were talking about species such as the Grays.

Q: (L) I have a paper here that talks about the Grays and says that they have two brains: an anterior brain and a posterior brain; and that if you shoot one - this is what it says, I am not suggesting that I want to shoot anybody - that if you shoot one, and only shoot one part of the brain, that it does not die; that you have to shoot it in a special way and get both brains in order to kill one. Is this a correct concept?

A: Well, it is rather puzzling. Brings up a lot of questions. One question that comes to mind is: why would one seek to shoot anything.

Q: (L) Well, I didn't suggest that I wished to, this is just what this paper says here.

A: The physical description is accurate in terms of one variety of what is referred to as the Grays. It does have an anterior brain. However, this is secondary to all other issues. And, also we would suggest that it would not be advisable to seek to cause physical harm to any particular species. Therefore, it may be advisable to disregard the information contained in the work that you are describing.

I don't think we eat Grays even though some of us are carnivores/omnivores.

However; It seems the Grays do use humans for nourishment sometimes.

Session 16 July 1994:

Q: (L) Bob Lazar[5] referred to the fact that aliens supposedly refer to humans as containers. What does this mean?
A: Later use.
Q: (L) Use by who? How many:
A: 94 per cent.
Q: (L) 94 per cent of what?
A: Of all population.
Q: (L) What do you mean?
A: All are containers; 94 per cent use.
Q: I don't understand.
A: Will be used. 94 percent.
Q: (L) Used for what? You mean eaten?
A: Total consumption.
Q: (L) What do you mean by consumption? Ingested?
A: Consumed for ingredients.
Q: (L) Why?
A: New race. Important. 13 years about when happens.
Q: (L) Why are humans consumed?
A: They are used for parts.
Q: (L) We don't understand. How can humans be used for parts?
A: Reprototype. Vats exist. Missing persons often go there and especially missing children.
Q: (L) Do we have any protection?
A: Some.
Q: (L) How can we protect ourselves and our children?
A: Inform them. Don't hide the truth from children.
Q: (L) How does truth protect us?
A: Awareness protects. Ignorance endangers.

The vats are for bathing to absorb the nutrients so "eating" is a bit different for them as described in other sessions.

And yet we are not advised to cause physical harm any particular species. That is kind of food for thought I think.

 

[thorbiorn]

The quote from this Session 9 September 1995

A: The problem is not the term "love," the problem is the interpretation of the term. Those on third density have a tendency to confuse the issue horribly. After all, they confuse many things as love. When the actual definition of love as you know it is not correct either. It is not necessarily a feeling that one has that can also be interpreted as an emotion, but rather, as we have told you before, the essence of light which is knowledge is love, and this has been corrupted when it is said that love leads to illumination. Love is Light is Knowledge. Love makes no sense when common definitions are used as they are in your environment. To love you must know. And to know is to have light. And to have light is to love. And to have knowledge is to love.

Appears with commentary in these articles by Laura, though the date sometimes is listed as September 2 rather than 9.

Transient Passengers

In recent weeks, the relationships of higher density beings to “one another,” (if there is such a term in relation to 6th density) has come up over and over again. I have to admit that …

cassiopaea.org

The Wave Chapter 65: The Way of the Fool

As the Wave advances, a number of very interesting dramas have been enacted. So interesting and so relevant that we shall jump away from the present story for the remainder of this volume to explor…

cassiopaea.org

The Wave Chapter 72: The Nonlinear Dynamics of Love and Complex Systems: Debugging the Universe

Now, I would like to make some other comments before we move on. I would like to talk a little bit about “love.” Many readers seem to have grossly misunderstood the Cassiopaean remarks about love, …

cassiopaea.org

There is also "illumination comes from knowledge", used in:

The Wave Chapter 23: Lucifer and the Pot of Gold or The Quest for the Holy Grail of No Anticipation

We are still asking “why?” We have peeled the onion, layer by layer, and have come to the center and found nothing there. Or, is that altogether true? It may take a little time to put the puzzle ba…

cassiopaea.org