Strieber's "BREAKTHROUGH"

QueenVee said:
That sounds much more reasonable. It goes without saying that one should remain highly suspicious of ANY alien/transdimensional encounter/contact/communication until such time as its "fruits" can be carefully and objectively analyzed and evaluated.
Not just its fruits - everything about it. I mean, once you know the nature of something, you often don't need to "wait for the fruits", you really already know what the fruits will be if you recognize the smell, much like you know what will happen to someone who just blindly runs into traffic without having to wait for the "fruits" to know that it's a bad idea.

QueenVee said:
But it is equally important not to adopt a "black-and-white" attitude based on an inflexible "rule", and to remain open to the possibility that the encounter is potentially valuable.
There is a difference between arbitrary inflexible rules, and inflexible rules based on objective reality. 2+2=4 is an example of the latter. Also, "potentially valuable" has absolutely nothing to do with STS. The most horrific and painful experiences in life brought on by the most cruel psychopaths can be potentially valuable too, but it doesn't make them STO.

QueenVee said:
Else, Laura would have never brought us the C's
Actually, Laura probably had to develop a few "inflexible rules" before she could ever "bring us" the C's. Years of getting the "wrong" thing taught her as much as years of trial and error teaches a mathematician. Open mindedness, in Laura's case, and in everyone else's, brought nothing but garbage. So unlike most people, she actually discovered that it's not enough by itself, and that's when those rules began to take shape, which were founded in knowledge and experience, not any sort of arbitrary assumptions or generalizations.

QueenVee said:
Rueckert/ElkinsMcCarty would never have exposed us to "Ra"
and Jane Roberts would never have opened us to "Seth".
You forgot to add "Else, all those thousands of channelers would never have exposed us to the millions of pages of word salad, lies, and disinformation". Open minded is only good if it's combined with constant accumulation of knowledge, much like an open faucet is only good if it has a filter on it to remove the garbage that will kill you if you drink it.

And much like 2+2=4 is true as long as the conditions are the same, so are most alien/human contacts the same as long as the conditions are the same. The more we learn the more we realize just how difficult it is for a human to get an STO contact, and that for 99.9999% of people, the conditions are such that they will get STS or nothing. It would take years of work to gain the right knowledge and understand the necessary approach before anything else is even possible. And even then, the person might even have to be born with something already in them to even enable a "higher contact" as opposed to some technologically-assisted beaming into the brain, so they might need the "talent" to begin with. This would make the possibility of achieving an STO knowledge-based contact even more unlikely. Also factor in the possibility of 50% of humans being OPS, and that may be another hit to that percentage.
 
ScioAgapeOmnis said:
Open minded is only good if it's combined with constant accumulation of knowledge, much like an open faucet is only good if it has a filter on it to remove the garbage that will kill you if you drink it.
And that is the point. The Queen is not open minded. She is not open minded towards those who may have a different point of view than her. She is semi-open, open to certain things but closed to the knowledge based on logical thinking. To see three dimensionally you need two eyes, one is not enough. To have intelligence you need BOTH non-logical thinking (to make "jumps") AND logical thinking (to follow these jumps). Otherwise we craete noise (if we use only non-logical part) or we are like animals (if we use only how's and forget about why's.
 
QueenVee said:
Actually, Whitley has now come to realize that some of the visitors are well intentioned and many are decidedly not. Much as the C's have told us. They're quite a mixed bunch, like humans. Whitley believes he has interacted with both kinds.
Just to add to the comments that have already been made on this thread I would say that, perhaps, Whitley made a conscious affirmation at one point in his life for Being but with this affirmation there also comes along with it the "thought of Non-Being." It appears to me that along the way he made a conscious choice to go along with this thought of Non-Being and make it a "substantial reality" as is evidenced by his interaction with his 'good' and 'bad' aliens (which in Whitley's reality are really one and the same thing).

http://glossary.cassiopaea.com/glossary.php?id=142

From Secret History on Being and Non-Being:

The great Sufi Shaykh Ibn al-'Arabi explains that "imperfection" exists in Creation because "were there no imperfection, the perfection of existence would be imperfect." From the point of view of Sheer Being, there is nothing but good.But Infinite Potential to BE includes - by definition of the word "infinite" -the potential to not be. And so, Infinite Potential "splits" into Thought Centers of Creation and Thought Centers of non-being. It can be said that Infinite Potential is fundamentally Binary - on or off - to be or not to be. That is the first "division."

Since absolute non-being is an impossible paradox in terms of the source of Infinite Potential to BE, the half of the consciousness of Infinite Potential that constitute the IDEAS of non-being - for every idea of manifestation, there is a corresponding idea for that item of creation to NOT manifest - "falls asleep" for lack of a better term. Its "self observation" is predicated upon consciousness that can only "mimic" death.
http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/evolution_of_souls.htm

Q: (L) You say that you are unified thought forms in the realm of knowledge.
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Al-Arabi describes unified thought forms as being the 'names of God.' His explication seems to be so identical to things you tell us that I wonder...
A: We are all the names of God. Remember, this is a conduit. This means that both termination/origination points are of equal value, importance.
Q: (L) What do you mean?
A: Don't deify us. And, be sure all others with which you communicate understand this too! Source? There is no such thing.
Q: (L) You mean there is no Prime Creator, no origin or source of our existence?
A: You and us and all others are Prime Creator.
Q: (L) But that is so esoteric... I am talking about...
A: The point is: stop filling your consciousness with monotheistic philosophies planted long ago to imprison your being. Can't you see it by now, after all you have learned, that there is no source, there is no leader, there is no basis, there is no overseer, etc... You literally possess, within your consciousness profile, all the power that exists within all of creation!?! You absolutely have all that exists, ever has, or ever will, contained within your mind. All you have to do is learn how to use it, and at that moment, you will literally, literally, be all that is, was, and ever will be!!!!!!!!
 
I'm revisiting this topic after having finished BREAKTHROUGH a few weeks ago...my memory is horrible, but I recall Whitley meditating/praying for the Visitors to commune w/ him in the book. At one point, he's visited by a little fella who stays w/ him for a few days & instructs him. It rides on his back n sleeps in the guest room. But Whitley still can't help but be afraid of it - his fear eventually drives it away. If this was a "good" entity, why would he still be afraid after day n night instruction?
 
Ominous said:
If this was a "good" entity, why would he still be afraid after day n night instruction?
Either because he fears death, or he is consciously(paid?) or unconsciously promoting fear of the unknown.


If the latter, what would be the motivation?
 
QueenVee said:
If Laura had adopted that view, we would never have received the Cassiopaea material....
Not applicable. I wasn't doing the experiment to "chat with aliens." And, in fact, the Cs are NOT "aliens" though they have said that they are "alien" to our perspective. As I wrote (published on our intro page)

After years of working with people's heads via hypnotherapy, I didn't much care whether such things as "past lives" actually existed or not. I only cared that the therapeutic modality worked and gave people relief. My own theory was that it gave them a drama to explain things, to work things out; a way to achieve a resolution by changing the script of the drama. Same with "spirit release therapy."

I incorporated that process in a couple of cases where nothing else worked in the late 80s. I was quite astonished at the results (and was very careful to not contaminate my subjects), and wondered just what the heck was going on? Again, I just explained it to myself that it was a self-created drama that allowed the person to sort themselves out. It didn't matter to me; I wasn't invested in believing any of it. I only cared that it relieved suffering. And it did, every time. It was even a rather simple formulaic process which is why I was so surprised that it worked. Could it be that easy?

My working hypothesis at the time, considering the boring regularity with which subjects from all walks of life came up with the same images, the same types of dramas, the same dynamics in the subconscious mind, was that there was some sort of "field of images," or archetypes to which all human beings were connected in some way. Well, let me make that more precise: people sorted into groups according to which images and dynamics were dominant in their particular case. Jung's work was helpful, but didn't go far enough to explain what I was witnessing. So, I decided that it would be interesting to access this pure field. That's actually what started the whole thing.

Well, how does one access such a theorized field of symbols and dynamics that seems to have some "rule" over people's lives? The obvious answer was some form of "channeling."

BUT, there was a catch: I didn't trust anything - and I mean ANYTHING - that would just come into somebody's head - not even my own. I also wasn't interested in talking to alleged "dead dudes" anymore because, by this time, I'd had quite enough of that and if anybody knows they don't have much of interest to say, it was me, (assuming that it is anything other than a drama in the head of the subject).

One of the more interesting theories I came across regarding so-called "channeling" was developed by Barbara Honegger, said to be the first person in the United States to obtain an advanced degree in experimental parapsychology. Honegger suggested that automatism was the result of "stimulation" of the right hemisphere of the brain so that it could overcome the suppression of the left hemisphere. Automatism, as you might know, relates directly to utilizing a device such as automatic writing or a Ouija board type instrument. It was never entirely clear what was doing the stimulating, however and I could obtain no further information on her research.

Whether or not the information was supposed to come from the subconscious of the individual or "spirits," was not clearly spelled out. But my thought was that, if it was true that some form of automatism could assist in synchronizing the right and left hemisphere of the brain, that even if it did not result in any real "contact," it was still a worthy exercise.

As I have said, there was an open possibility in my mind that such things as "spirits" were merely fragments of the personality of an individual, sort of like little broken off circuits in the brain running in repetitive loops, created by trauma or stress. Perhaps an individual, when faced with a difficulty, entered a narcissistic state of fantasy, created a "dream," which was imprinted in the memory of the brain.

If they then emerged from this state back into dealing with their reality, but not having dealt with the issue itself, it might become locked away in a sort of cerebral file drawer, sitting there, waiting to be triggered by the electricity or neurochemicals of the brain in some random unconscious scan. The same could be said for so- called past life memories; they were merely self-created memory files generated in a state of narcissistic withdrawal due to stress.

Such neurological files could then be downloaded and read by using the conscious bypass method of either automatism or simply allowing the conscious mind to "step aside" as in hypnosis. For that matter, simple psychotherapy could be considered channeling in these terms. Trance channeling is more problematic because it suggests a definite pathological condition. In such cases, the "alter" ego, as either an alternate personality or whatever, is strong and well entrenched enough to establish a far stronger hold on the body of the host than those which can only manifest via automatism or trance.

My theory was that whatever the theorized "source" of whatever might be accessible, the method of automatism could be more safely utilized to access the field of archetypal symbols and dynamics that seemed to be the pool from which all people drew in the creation of their personal dramas, leaving aside the question of whether or not those dramas represented anything factual or not. My idea was that if this field could be accessed directly, after playing out and thereby eliminating via feedback, any personal thought loops or memory files, that a great deal of information about the human condition at large might be available. [...]

I thought it would be interesting to try to access the "pure field of archetypes." I knew it would take time to run out all the loops - whether spirits or just subconscious dramas - and that patience and persistence was important. And so, I settled down to do it, and it took over two years.
And then this, from Ark:

The name Cassiopaea was given by a consciously "channeled source" which Laura accessed in 1994 after two years of experimental work. The source identified itself by saying "we are you in the future." Modern physics does not provide us with practical means for this type of communication, and theories on this subject are not well developed; they are, in fact, inconclusive and controversial.

When interpreting "we are you in the future in an oversimplified way, we are faced with causal paradoxes. On the other hand, from the theoretical papers published in physics journals we can learn that, with a proper and careful interpretation, and taking into account quantum uncertainties, communication into the past cannot be dismissed as impossible. Improbable perhaps is the right word, but there are many things that are improbable and yet happen.

The more improbable is a given phenomenon, the more information is carried by its occurrence, the more we can learn by its study.

That is why we did not dismiss the "we are you in the future" as impossible and therefore ignorable. Instead we decided to continue the "communications" as a form of a controlled experiment in "superluminal thought transfer" – even if it was clear that the term should be considered as a tentative indication of only one out several possible interpretations.

The information received from this experiment is presented in the context of broad ranging historical, scientific and other metaphysical material and offers the clues that have led to the world view and inferences presented by us in our numerous publications on this website and in print. Perhaps it is only our own "subconscious mind" that presents itself as a "source," but even if it is so, does that tell us more? Do we really know what "unconscious mind" is and of what is it capable?

We sometimes ask ourselves if the Cassiopaeans are who they say they are, because we do not take anything as unquestionable truth. We take everything with a grain of salt, even if we consider that there is a good chance that it is truth. We are constantly analyzing this material as well as a great quantity of other material that comes to our attention from numerous fields of science and mysticism. We find it to be quite extraordinary that the Cassiopaean Material is so closely aligned with the teachings of the great Sufi master, Ibn Al-'Arabi, with the Fourth Way Teachings of Gurdjieff, Castaneda, with the Esoteric Christianity of Boris Mouravieff, and even ancient Altaic Shamanism. In this sense, the Cassiopaean Experiment is truly a Fourth Way work.
More:

"We are you in the Future," they said. "We transmit "through" the opening that is presented in the locator that you represent as Cassiopaea, due to the strong radio pulses aligned from Cassiopaea, which are due to a pulsar from a neutron star 300 light years behind it, as seen from your locator. This facilitates a clear channel transmission from 6th density to 3rd density."
What is important to note at the outset is this: the Cassiopaeans are NOT "aliens," nor are they "discarnate entities." From the very first contact:

Q: (L) Are you an alien from another planet?
A: Alien from your perspective, yes.
And...

...the contact is best described by Eugene Canseliet in his Preface to the second edition of Fulcanelli's Alchemical Masterpiece, The Dwellings of the Philosophers:

According to the meaning of the Latin word adeptus, the alchemist has then received the Gift of God, or even better, the Present, a cabalistic pun on the double meaning of the word, underlining that he thus enjoys the infinite duration of the Now.[...]

'In the Kingdom of Sulpur there exists a Mirror in which the entire World can be seen. Whosoever looks into this Mirror can see and learn the three parts of Wisdom of the entire World.
 
Azur said:
Ominous said:
If this was a "good" entity, why would he still be afraid after day n night instruction?
Either because he fears death, or he is consciously(paid?) or unconsciously promoting fear of the unknown.


If the latter, what would be the motivation?
Perhaps because fear of the unknown is the perfect tool for the PTB to use to convince the masses that they need protecting? BTW, way back in 1991 Bill Cooper (RIP) pegged Whitley as working for the CIA. True? IDK. PEACE
 
Back
Top Bottom