Right there with you.And how does Mouravieff know what he knows? Does he believe what he has been told And taught or has he experienced first hand one or all of the ways? And in what lifetime? He speaks with authority and certainty. From whence? And whatence? We believe him because... ? It resonates in some way? With what we already know?
It seems all I have are questions.
Here's what I could find in relation to anything discussed on Mouravieffs accuracies:
Session 22 June 2002 said:Q: We have recently been working with some material from Boris Mouravieff. We can see many relationships. I would like to ask about some of his political views, his ideas about creating some elite corps to help the world graduate to what he calls the cycle of the Holy Spirit. How accurate are those views of Mouravieff?
A: Mouravieff, like many who have protected and passed on the "tradition" are merely carriers and not interpreters of the capacity of a Master. The True Master understands the nature of the "worlds" in terms of real, Hyperdimensional Interpenetration. Thus Mouraveiff and others misunderstand and misinterpret, thinking in 3rd density Hierarchical terms which simply do not apply.
Session 13 July 2002 said:Q: We have recently been working with some material from Boris Mouravieff. We can see many relationships between that work and so many of the clues and hints scattered throughout the C's transmissions. What seems to be important is his information about the Centers - three lower and three higher that are not "seated" in the body. Then, he talks about the difference between "A" influences and "B" influences, and the necessity for assimilation of "B" influences in order to fuse the "magnetic center" which then enables the soul - or higher centers - to "seat" in the body. Is the information from Mouravieff about these matters fairly accurate?
A: Not just fairly. It has been preserved from the time of the "Fall."
Q: Mouravieff states clearly that this teaching is a "thin thread" of an oral tradition, and that the monks themselves - in various locations - admit that it has not only not been put into writing, but has not ever even been "gathered together" in a single place. This is, of course, problematical, but it seems that Mouravieff has made a sincere effort to present the material of the Tradition itself, even if he has spent an inordinate amount of time trying to weave through it some of the occult traditions of Europe that have been so very popular for so long, particularly the synarchic views of Guenon and so forth. In seems that, in this respect, Mouravieff has interpreted many things in an "A influence" sort of way. And then, there is Mouravieff's presentation of the "worlds." It seems to be very similar to the teaching about "densities," though without the balance of STS and STO.
A: If it is understood in the original context of hyperdimensional realities. Also, there are some distortions and gloss on the subject of the "worlds" and "notes." But even this is only minor.
Q: Mouravieff says that there are two kinds of humans - he calls the "pre-Adamic" and "Adamic," (discussed in book III). The idea is that pre-Adamic human types basically have no "soul" nor any possibility of growing one. This is a pretty shocking idea, but there have been recent scholarly discussions of this matter based on what seems to be clinical evidence that, indeed, there are human beings who are just "mechanical" and have no "inner" or "higher self" at all. [See: "Division of Consciousness"] Gurdjieff talked about this and so did Castaneda. Are these ideas Mouravieff presents about the two basic TYPES of humans, as far as they go, accurate?
A: Indeed, though again, there is a "Biblical Gloss."
Q: Mouravieff says that the "pre-Adamic" humans do not have the higher centers, nor the possibility of developing them in this cycle - which we assume to be the Grand Cycle you have previously described, the length of which is around 300,000 years. Is this an accurate representation of "pre- Adamic" beings?
A: Yes, they are "organic" portals between levels of density.
Q: Based on what Mouravieff has said, it seems to be so that any efforts to try to raise the consciousness of such individuals is doomed to fail.
A: Pretty much. Most of them are very efficient machines. The ones that you have identified as psychopaths are "failures." The best ones cannot be discerned except by long and careful observation.
Q: Do the "centers" as described by Mouravieff relate at all to the idea of "chakras?"
A: Quite closely. In an individual of the organic variety, the so-called higher chakras are "produced in effect" by stealing that energy from souled beings. This is what gives them the ability to emulate souled beings. The souled being is, in effect, perceiving a mirror of their own soul when they ascribe "soul qualities" to such beings.
Q: Is this a correspondence that starts at the basal chakra which relates to the sexual center as described by Mouravieff?
A: No. The "sexual center" corresponds to the solar plexus.
Q: Are the levels of initiation and levels of the staircase as presented by Mouravieff fairly accurate?
A: Yes, but different levels accessed in other so-called lives can relieve the intensity of some levels in "another" life.
Q: (L) So work on the self in different incarnations - assuming one is not an organic portal - can be cumulative? You can pick up where you left off if you screw up?
A: Yes. To some extent. For now, then, good night.
Session 31 July 2002 said:Q: (Brainwave) Well, God they've been food for the Moon for a long time. (L) So has everybody else. (S) It's the same for all of us though, so is there anything special about them or different than anybody else?
Q: (Perceval) So their genetics...it's a function of genetics... (A) I would ask if there is any other say nation or tribe of similar make-up? (S) Yeah, maybe there's a tribe in every section of the world, or something.
A: There is a "spectrum" as Mouravieff suggests, however the Zulu compose a sort of "drone" tone.
Q: (S) So is this something they do deliberately or is it something unconscious?
A: It is a function of the 4th density energies they "represent."
Q: (A) Okay, so it is a drone tone. That is the main tone which is foundational to the harmonics. You build the music on this infrastructure, so to say. (L) There's the drone, there's the bass, there's the melody. (Brainwave) Listen to his voice, what does his voice sound like to you? I don't know...(Perceval) Yeah, there is a resonance. (Brainwave) Yeah, in his voice. (Perceval) They said a spectrum as in Mouravieff, the spectrum of the genetics able to carry light or to act as a light for transition. I'm not really sure on how that...(L) I think they're talking about a soul tone. (Brainwave) That singing that they do, that special kind of singing is it symbolic of that drone tone.
A: Indeed, as is all of reality symbolic of things at other levels and "depths" of being.
Session 14 September 2002 said:Q: (L) Okay, now we have a couple of questions we want to get to here. You said before that OP's were originally intended as a bridge between second and third densities and that they were used. Is Mouravieff right about the potential for OP's to advance being dependent upon souled beings advancement to STO at the end of this cycle?
A: Not exactly. A soul imprint can grow independent of the cycle. However, it is more likely for a soul to "grow" when interacting with 4th Density STO. STS tends to drain energy for its own use.
Session 26 July 2014 said:(fabric) One thing we were worried about is in the event of a communications breakdown, would the board be able to be used to communicate with other groups? Like let's say the Château and the Tobacco House, to get a message across? Would that work if there was no power and no way of communicating with each other? Or would we just end up talking to dead dudes unless we grooved a channel?
A: Not likely and not advisable. We have mentioned before what is needed: Connect chakras by proper networking.
Q: (Perceval) Does that mean that essentially people who have their chakras connected by proper networking would essentially be inspired or moved to do what's needed to be done as a part of the network without necessarily having to be told?
A: And more. There will also be enhanced telepathic ability when the frequencies change. If you work on "receivership capability," all else will come naturally.
Q: (L) And how do you work on receivership capability?
A: Awakening conscience and tuning the centers as described by Mouravieff.
Session 18 May 2019 said:(Pierre) Another thing that helps this normalization of chaos is that the evolution is not linear. It's not like you have 10 tornadoes, then 15, then 20. Sometimes there are periods of calm. So it helps the wishful thinking part.
(L) Yeah. That's the way it works. I guess that's why people are easily led astray or they're led to think that this is the worst it's going to get and so they can go along and live a normal life. I suppose in some ways, you COULD live a normal life... and we do encourage people to do what they can in the world as long as it doesn’t beat them down or suck them into complacence or sleep.
A: One thing to consider is this: Is the so-called "normal life" one of expansion of STO or is it one of contraction to STS?
Q: (Artemis) That depends on the perspective of the person. A normal life for a normal person I guess is more STS.
(L) Well, I think the biggest problem for some people trying to just live a normal life is that when they do that, they're surrounded by other people just trying to live a normal life according to the materialist paradigm. That tends to make it impossible for them to open up, communicate, share, and do all the things on this list we've made. They can't really do it with most people out there because most people are not attuned that way. Therefore, they fall into confluence like Mouravieff said. They become less and less awake and aware, and their antennae shut down. They spiral down into kind of an STS black hole.
(Joe) Of course, they tell themselves that that won't be the case.
So as we can see from all the above, Mouravieff (despite not being an ‘interpreter’) has his hits, misses, glosses and inaccuracies. I suppose unless we could know for certain on the accuracies of his concept of the ‘Film’ of Man’s life in relation to Time-Loops, best to just take it with a grain of salt.