STS Protection vs Free Will

[Shorty]

So, odd question that I thought I would throw out there to see what others thoughts are.

Let’s say hypothetically that you are psychically attacked through an STS entity. You become aware of it and through force if will back it off. Would this be the proper defense against such an attack? If Free Will prevails as Universal Directive, would forcing your will on such an STS entity not be violating their Free Will and therefore align yourself with STS? While it certainly can be effective, what would the ramifications be? That got me thinking about the best to protect oneself. Obviously knowledge protects as True Knowledge increases perceptions and therefore awareness.
I remember the C’s saying something about just projecting emotions that would taste “sour” to such an entity.
Anyone have any thoughts?

 

[jemand]

Well, it may be the right of the free will STS entity to attack you in any form, but it is also the right of your free will to defend yourself in any form. After all, the right to self-defense is also enshrined in our human laws. So the question is not whether you ally yourself with STS for defense or impose your will on the attacking entity, but what knowledge do you need to repel this attack and how do you apply it. Laura has already reported several times about such attacks, with the search function you will certainly find what you are looking for.

 

[whitecoast]

If Free Will prevails as Universal Directive, would forcing your will on such an STS entity not be violating their Free Will and therefore align yourself with STS?

You're not forcing your will on STS. From a higher perspective they're not really even forcing their will on you. They are free to attack and you are free to defend, and it transpires because there is a vibrational match and a lesson opportunity for both of you. It is also worth saying that we as physical beings have needs, and assert ourselves to have those met. Whether we are happy being STS, or wish to change to STO in 4D once we master enough simple karmic understandings in 4D as STO Candidates, that is a necessary condition for learning karmic lessons as we are here and now. It doesn't mean everything we want and pursue is necessary for us or in our highest interest, since we have a lot of unnecessary addictions to manage the holding patterns that disengage us from reality, but it does mean that we have a right to exist and engage with the question of freely choosing what we pursue. So wherever you heard the idea that it is not spiritual to have needs and to look after yourself and take care of yourself (which is an act of love), it can safely be left behind.

 

[seek10]

Free will has to be associated to some thing. Generally we do it to soul. But soul can have any number of parallel world lives or past/future life selfs. In your question, you are talking about self's of new different soul's.

In the case of eclipsing of reality scenario Laura wrote in Wave series, it is a battle between her current self against her other selves ( past/future) selves. This reminded of me this quote. It is "not acting against" some body to assert your right to work towards your growth/destiny/act . May be you need to resist to show the lesson to other entity trying to violate your free will. who knows?

1997-05-03

Q: (L) Why is it that it seems to be one of the primary things about us that prevents us from acting against such situations, is our fear of hurting another person? That was the chief thing that kept me in my marriage for so long. And, only when I knew that it was hurting the kids more to stay, did I have the power to get out. Why are we so afraid of hurting someone's feelings if they are hurting us?

A: Not correct concept. You do not need to "act against them," you need to act in favor of your destiny.

Q: But, when you do that, these persons make you so completely miserable that there seems to be no other choice but a parting of the ways.

A: Yes, but that is not "acting against." Quite the contrary. In fact, remember, it takes two to tango, and if you are both tangoing when the dance hall bursts into flames, you both get burned!!!

Q: Why is it that when one tries to extricate from such a "tango," why is there is such violent resistance to letting you go when it is obvious, clearly obvious, that they do not have any feeling for you as a human being?

A: It is not "they." We are talking about conduits of attack.

 

[Bluegazer]

From my point of view, "he who warns does not betray".

How is this? Well, let's suppose for a moment that your body, your being and your soul suppose a kind of kingdom with its borders. In the borders of the same you put in the full extent of this warning indicating that anyone who is not invited, and dares to cross the borders, will suffer the consequences.

Now there are several things here. When you post such notices, on the one hand you affirm your position that you DO NOT WANT to be invaded and that is your free will. It sends a strong signal to the universe. As for the potential invader and his free will to invade (and here is the trick) if the message reaches the invader, he is left in full AWARENESS that his act will have consequences and therefore he must exercise deliberation, i.e. he must make a CHOICE. In that sense you respect his free will because you give him the opportunity to CHOOSE.

In the warning and in the opportunity you give him to choose there was no deceit, you spoke the truth. If the aggressor CHOOSES to attack, you are fully justified in defending yourself.

To make it clear: Even if the attacker is STS and you give him the opportunity to CHOOSE, by respecting his free will the universe takes note of this and in the balancing act your free will is respected, so self-defense is not a violation, even if the attacker dies. It is assumed that he CHOSE that fate and you have done an act of service. It remains to interpret whether it is one of service to self or service to others, because the context in which it happens can be a much more complex dynamic.

 

[Alejo]

Let’s say hypothetically that you are psychically attacked through an STS entity. You become aware of it and through force if will back it off. Would this be the proper defense against such an attack? If Free Will prevails as Universal Directive, would forcing your will on such an STS entity not be violating their Free Will and therefore align yourself with STS? While it certainly can be effective, what would the ramifications be? That got me thinking about the best to protect oneself. Obviously knowledge protects as True Knowledge increases perceptions and therefore awareness.

I think it is proper,

They have freely chosen to attack and you have freely chosen your reaction to said attack. Saying no to a threat of an attack is a form of making it clear to the attacker that, if they proceed you will react, and so by defending yourself, you're not imposing your will upon theirs, you're giving them what they're asking for, you're allowing their free choice to carry through to its conclusion.

Think of it in a different scenario: "if you come to work, I will pay you". It's different than saying: "I want to pay you so why don't you come to work?" It's a choice, a self serving one on both ends, but a choice nonetheless. So it would be defending oneself against an attack, it is self serving, but it is not imposing on anyone else. IMHO

It reminded me of a story I heard once:

Once there was a wise saint who lived in an ashram. He had several devotees who studied under him. Every day, he would teach them things about God and about the world it has created.
"Where is God?" asked the disciple.

God is Everywhere

"Everywhere, in everyone and everything," said his Guru.

Later, as the disciple was going home, he saw an elephant charging towards him.

"Get out of the way, get out of the way," shouted mahout (the elephant-driver). "He has gone mad! But the disciple thought: "God is everywhere. He is in the elephant and he is in me. Would God attack God? No, therefore the elephant will not attack me.""

He stood where he was. The elephant picked him up in his trunk and flung him aside. Fortunately, he landed in a haystack and was not too badly hurt. But he was terribly shaken and confused.

When the Guru and the other disciples came to help him and take him home, he said, "You said God is in everything, but see what the elephant did to me!"

"It is true that God is in everything," said his Guru. "He is in the elephant, but he is also in the mahout who kept telling you to get out of the way. Why didn't you listen to him?"

I think one has to learn or attempt to recognize these nuances and subtleties in order to be able to respond properly to reality.