Spiritual Health Learning Community Center Exploring Life's Horizons   Cassiopaean Hermeneutics - The Fall (From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) In other words, if what we perceive to be Darkness and Evil or Service to Self is NOT a mistake, is NOT an error, is NOT something that can or should be "fixed" in the realm of creation, then WHAT is it? How can we ontologically justify it? Or, leaving side justification, how can we just simply understand it? One thing we note at the beginning here is that the Cassiopaeans have said that human beings chose to experience this reality for a REASON. Q: (L) Are human beings entrapped in physical matter? A: By choice. Q: (L) Why did they make this choice? A: To experience physical sensations. It was a group mind decision. [Comment - To say that it was a group mind decision, when and how did this take place? And, why would everyone had agreed to this, and was it even necessary for them to agree to it since the whole thing may have been programmed into each individual’s ‘destiny’? When the spirits of pre-eternity said yes to alastu bi-rabikkum (Am I not your Lord?)? were they expressing a desire for physicality which, prior to physical existence, they couldn’t possibly have understood. Or, were they responding affirmatively to the Divine challenge of asking whether they would recognize Divinity as their Lord under any and all circumstances, and that physical existence, then, became the opportunity for people to either realize their affirmation or to deny and run away from it.] (From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) Q: (L) Who was in charge of the group? A: The group. ... [Comment - How was the group in charge of the group? How did this work? Why wasn’t God in charge of the group, or was Divinity just an after thought to this whole scenario? There is a pantheistic flavor to a certain amount of what the Cassiopaeans are communicating to Laura and company. Pantheism has a very different metaphysical structure than does monotheism, even though, at certain points, the two perspectives may appear to be saying the same thing.] (From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) Very often, such people cite the "great new research" that supports this view, that man is "creating a new reality." Paul von Ward writes in The Solarian Legacy: "...Patterns are created by consciousness that have the power to shape apparent nothingness into tiny quanta of something. [Comment - How does consciousness create patterns and how does this ‘power’ actually shape nothingness into tiny quanta of something? There is an allusion to an explanation in such statements, without the substantive reality of a clear understanding?] [Paul Von Ward, The Solarian Legacy, 1998] "...The use of conscious intent is a more effective route to human participation in a creative life process, including maintaining health, than purely mechanical manipulation. ...Modern research evidence has been found to support the conclusions of many cultural traditions that human consciousness communicates with and influences the behavior of other life forms. "...Assuming there is an ongoing, reciprocal flow of such behavior-influencing communications among local concentrations of mind (animals, plants, and individual cells), how does the conscious being deliberately intervene in the natural flow to bring about a desired end? The answer - at this point an intuitive one - involves a clarity of focus grounded in definite emotions. The process appears to work in a manner analogous to the progression from "gas" through "liquids" to "solids," i.e., from "amorphous" through "evolving" to "definite." [Paul Von Ward, The Solarian Legacy, 1998] [Comment - None of what has been said above really explains the creative process. Rather, what has been given is a theoretical description which offers nothing in the way of a nuts and bolts explanation of how consciousness generates ideas, creates, or the like. It is verbiage masquerading as an explanation.] (Cassiopaean Communication) Q: (L) At one point we were told that time was an illusion that came into being at the "time" of the "Fall" in Eden, and this was said in such a way that I inferred that there were other illusions put into place at that time... A: Time is an illusion that works for you because of your altered DNA state. Q: (L) Okay, what other illusions? A: Monotheism, the belief in one separate, all powerful entity. Q: (T) Is separate the key word in regard to Monotheism? A: Yes. [Comment - How, specifically, did the illusion of time come into being? Why did it arise at the time of the Fall? What purpose, if any, did such an illusion serve? What does it mean to say that time is an illusion? What kind of an illusion? How does the illusion of time work for us? How does an altered DNA state relate to the issue of time as an illusion? The problem is not with monotheism, per se, but with a particular theory of monotheism - namely, one that depicts God as being removed from Creation. What does it mean to say that God is separate from separate from Creation? Can Creation ever be other than a set of phenomenon which Divinity, in some fashion, underwrites and maintains in existence, and, if so, what is the nature of this independence from Divinity? What makes such independence possible? Isn't is possible that Divinity could be separate from Creation in some senses, but not others? Why must God be exclusively tied to Creation such that no other modality of being apart from Creation is considered possible. Isn't it possible that God is both imminent, as well as transcendent?] (Cassiopaean Communication) Q: (L) Can you tell us a little bit about how these illusions are enforced on us, how they are perceived by us? A: If someone opens a door, and behind it you see a pot of gold, do you worry whether there is a poisonous snake behind the door hidden from view, before you reach for the pot of gold? Q: (L) What does the gold represent? A: Temptation to limitation. Q: Was limitation presented as a pot of gold when, in fact, it was not? A: What is snake? Q: (T) The Lizards? A: Result of giving into temptation without caution, i.e. leaping before looking. Q: (L) So what you are saying to us is that the story of the temptation in Eden was the story of Humankind being led into this reality as a result of being tempted. So, the eating of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil was... A: Giving into temptation. Q: (L) And this was a trick... A: No! Tricks don't exist! Q: (T) Okay, no trick, a trap? A: No! Traps don't exist either. Free will could not be abridged if you had not obliged. [Comment - If traps and tricks do not exist, why maintain that God is the best of deceivers which Laura and company have made specific references to on a number of occasions? Moroever, if deceiving is neither a trick nor a trap, then, what is it? Is Divine deceiving a playing on ignorance and the assumptions that arise out of ignorance and which, in effect, permit people to fool themselves when their intentions are not honorable to begin with? Is this (i..e, "Free will could not be abridged if you had not obliged.") " any different than the Quranic warning that Iblis has no control over anyone except those who give themselves over to him? And, does this not still constitute a trap or a trick, of sorts, much akin to the way in which akido redirects the momentum of the aggressive one to turn uon itself? Ignorance is a problem, but it is not necessarily evil in, and of, itself . What is evil is the intentional context in which ignorance exists or is perpetuated, along with the manner in which people use that ignorance to create paradigms of exploitation, manipulation, and abuse of others. ] (From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) Q: (D) I have a question about... Mankind has found it necessary for some reason or other to appoint time for some reason or other. The only reason I can see is to have a means of telling, like in verbal or written communications... [Comment - How does man “appoint time” or invent it? What is the nature of the illusion concerning time and how does the structural character of humankind play a role in generating such an illusion? Moreover, Does human kind generate the illusion of time, or do they generate an illusion based on their hermeneutical engagement of one of the attributes of Divinity - namely, ‘time’. Perhaps, time, per se, is not an illusion, but, rather, what is illusory, is our understanding of the nature of this Divine attribute.] (Cassiopaean Communication) Q: (L) Where did the souls come from that entered into the bodies on the planet earth? Were they in bodies on other planets before they came here? A: Not this group. Q: (L) Were they just floating around in the universe somewhere? A: In union with the One. Have you heard the Super ancient legend of Lucifer, the Fallen Angel? Q: (L) Who is Lucifer? A: You. The human race. [Comment - According to the Qur'an, there are no fallen angels. Angels are born upon pure good and are incapable of doing other than the Command of God. Of course, Laura may wish to reject the Quranic account as reliable evidence on this issue. However, if she does this, then, one wonders why she quotes from the Qur'an when it serves to shore up her point. Moreover, one wonders why she quotes extensively from Ibn al-'Arabi who accepted the Qur'an as revelation from Divinity, for, surely, if one considers the latter a mistake on the part of ibn al-'Arabi, then, how does one know if the rest of what he has to say is not a similar kind of mistake? Furthermore, why should one reject the Qur'an as channeled Truth, and, yet, accept what the Cassiopaeans are saying as Gospel? Surely, things must be considered on a case by case basis. In any event, the Qur'an indicates that Lucifer, or Iblis, or Satan is a chief of the species of being known as the Jinn, and he was the one who had fallen at that point, not human kind. To say that Lucifer is the human race sounds to me like a bit of displacement or reaction formation on the part of a Jinn who seeks to blame human kind for the mistake of one of the leaders of the Jinn. This is one of many clues in the Cassiopaean communications which suggested the possibility that the Cassiopaeans are actually Jinn who are seeking to confuse, and, thereby, mislead human beings.] (Cassiopaean Communication) Q: (L) Are the souls of individual humans the parts of a larger soul? A: Yes. Close. The One. All who have fallen must learn "the hard way." You are members of a fragmented soul unit. [Comment - According to the Sufi teachings, the One soul from which humanity sprang is the Muhammadan Reality - the ‘ayn al-thabitat or fixed potential which encompassed the entire potential for not only human kind, but all of Creation. The fragmentation of this soul is our individual act of having forgotten our origins, rootedness, and role in that Muhammadan Reality. Adam (peace be upon him) is the initial progenitor of our physical beings. The Muhamadan Reality, however, is the original 'seed' from which all of Creation sprang forth ... including both spiritual and physical possibility.] (Cassiopaean Communication) Q: (L) Are you saying that the act of wanting to experience physical reality is the act of falling? What is it about wanting to be physical is a "fall"? A: Pleasure for the self. [Comment - Did human kind have any idea of what they were getting themselves into when they made the wrong choice and acted against the Command of God? Was this mistake a matter of ignorance and/or forgetfulness and/or rebellion and/or desire (himma) for something ‘else’ in relation to the Divine presence? I’m not convinced that the reason for disobeying God was just ‘pleasure for the self’ unless pleasure is construed in a very wide sense, and this still leaves the problem of how one knows what pleasure is prior to having it.] (Cassiopaean Communication) Q: (L) Does it hurt a plant when we eat it? A: Does it hurt you when a "Lizzie" eats you? Q: (D) If we hurt plants by eating them like the Lizzies hurt us when they eat us, how are we to survive without eating? A: When you no longer crave physicality, you no longer need to "eat." Q: (L) So part of the "fall" into the physical existence and part of the Fall from Eden story where it says "you shall eat by the sweat of your brow," has to do with being physical and needing to eat? A: Lucifer, "The fallen Angel." This is you. Q: (L) So, "falling" means going into physical existence wherein you must feed on other life, other beings, is that it? A: Yes. [Comment - If Laura and company reject original sin, as does Islam, then, why must everyone suffer with physical existence for the mistakes of Adam (peace be upon him) and Eve (may Allah be pleased with her)? Well, one possibility is that physical existence is not a 'Fall', or punishment, or the sin made manifest, but, rather, an opportunity for spiritual growth that was made possible through human error. That is, perhaps the mistakes of Adam and Eve (may Allah be pleased with them both) were the occasion through which Divinity set in motion a spiritual challenge which, if, God willing, was successfully engaged by human beings, would lead to a spiritual condition in which what was only a potential prior to the 'Fall' became a reality that would not otherwise have become manifest without having journeyed through the Divine challenge inherent in the struggles of human existence within the physical realm. As far as the issue of eating is concerned, there have been recorded instances among various mystical traditions (Ibn al'Arabi being one such exemplar) of human beings who have undergone 6 months of continuous fasting (in which neither water nor food is consumed at any point during the fast) actually gaining weight from the Divine sustenance that maintains them during the fast. Nevertheless, I know of no cases of either Prophets nor of non-Prophetic friends of God being able to entirely do away with the 'need' to eat in order to stay alive which makes me wonder if the Cassiopaeans really know what they are talking about. The need to eat may be a condition which has been imposed on human beings by Divinity, and not necessarily the result of self-generated human cravings. If so, then, no matter how much a human being performs austerities with respect to the issue of eating, there will be residual dimensions of eating which will not disappear until one leaves this realm of being.] (From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) Now, we need to remember the story of Lucifer, that he was an Angel of great beauty and glory. The Cassiopaeans have suggested that the legend of Orion is closest to the original version of the story. [Comment - Why would she reject the Quranic version of the fall of Lucifer? Why do the Cassiopaeans say that the closest version is the legend of Orion? On what is this latter legend based, and why should one accept their word on the matter? If one starts from potentially false premises, one has difficulty to arrive at the truth.] (Cassiopaean Communication) Q: Okay, so this realm changed, as a part of the cycle; various choices were made: the human race went through the door after the 'gold,' so to speak, and became aligned with the 4th density STS faction after the 'right brain/female energy' consorted with the wrong side, so to speak. This resulted in a number of effects: the breaking up of the DNA, the burning off of the first ten factors of DNA, the separation of the hemispheres of the brain... A: Only reason for this: you play in the dirt, you're gonna get dirty. Q: What was the motivating factor for playing in the dirt? What essential thing occurred? You said once that it was 'desire based imbalance.' What was it a desire for? A: Increased physicality. Q: What was the objective sought for in this desire for increased physicality? A: Sensate. "Sensate," is derived from a Latin word, "sentire," which means "feel." This suggests not merely physical sensations, but also emotions. The root of the Latin word is, curiously, the Indo-European root "sent," which means "to cause to go, to find out, to discover." Q: How was sensate experienced so that these beings had an idea that they could get more if they increased their physicality? A: Not experienced, demonstrated. Q: Demonstrated how, by who? Demonstrated in what way? Did they say: 'here, try this!' Or did they demonstrate by showing or doing? A: Closer to the latter. More like: "you could have this." Q: What seemed to be so desirable about this increased physicality when they said 'you can have this?' A: Use your imagination! [Comment - The fact of the matter is that unless human beings had been given (by Divinity) the sort of imagination and other potentials (such as nafs) which would permit them to grasp the idea of certain sensate possibilities, then, a demonstration would do them no good. One has to be able to ‘get’ the basic idea that is being demonstrated, and be receptive to it, or resonate with it to some degree, if that demonstration is going to constitute a temptation. Thus, the potential for succumbing to such a temptation had to exist prior to the temptation/demonstration - thus, the fall was not the cause of physicality, but the 'occasion' for that potential becoming manifest and evident in human life.] (Cassiopaean Communication) Q: Okay. The 'Fall' occurred. It seems like, and some of the archaeological studies indicate, that for many thousands of years, there was a peaceful existence and a nice agrarian society where the goddess or female creative forces were worshipped. At least, this is what a lot of present-day books are proposing... A: No. These events took place 309000 years ago, as you measure it. This is when the first prototype of what you call "modern man" was created. The controllers had the bodies ready, they just needed the right soul matrix to agree to "jump in." [Comment - Where did the ‘controllers’ come from, and how did they come into being, and how did they acquire their characteristics, and how did the 'controllers' create or ‘have the bodies ready’, and what was the ‘right soul matrix’ that was necessary to ‘agree to jump in’? And, what verifies whatever responses one gives to the foregoing questions?] (Cassiopaean Communication) Q: So, was there any kind of worship of God, or religious activity in this pre-Fall state; this Edenic, semi- 4th density state? A: No need when one has a clue. [Comment - meaning what?] Q: What I am trying to get at here, what I am trying to understand, is the transition from the goddess worship to the god worship; the change from the understanding of cyclical time as expressed in the feminine cycles, and expressed as the goddess; to the concept of linear time, expressed as the masculine principle. It seems to me that these were stages of inversion of concepts which gradually led to the ideas that have been imposed on us, and it seems that bringing these ideas to fruition is a project 4th density STS beings have been working toward for millennia - the dominator experience which expresses as: "believe in something outside yourself that will save you, otherwise you are damned because the world is gonna end, and you are going to get judged." That is the whole monotheistic concept I am trying to deal with here. Okay, we had these guys; they fell from Eden, but they were still fairly close to the original concepts, in some terms. Once they jumped into the physical bodies, as you put it, what was their level of conceptualization regarding the universe? Did they still retain some understanding at that point? [Comment - This whole thing about changing over from goddess worship to god worship and from cyclical time to linear time is just a lot of conjecture and belief systems masquerading as ontology. Even if, historically, such events did happen, this does not mean that such events constitute a correct hermeneutic of the ontological/metaphysical structure of the universe, and, thereby, how things 'should' have been as a function of who, supposedly, we are as human being, or how we came to be, or what our relationship with Divinity is, or what our spiritual capacity is. Historical cicumstances are being projected as metaphysical truths, when the former is only one of the possibilities which the potential of the latter makes possible. Should there be male-oriented God worship, or goddess worship, or cyclical time or linear time? If time is illusory (as the Cassiopaeans said), then, why to refer to time as being either cyclical or linear? Perhaps both of these ideas of time are illusory, each in its own way? Or, are all of these concepts just belief systems which have imposed different kinds of distortion on to the face of reality?] (From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) Now, we are getting somewhere. "Believing that one source contains all knowledge is contradicting reality." It is "conceptually limited." [Comment - This sounds like she is laying the groundwork for attempting to claim that Divinity is not the source of all knowledge, truth, wisdom, and so on. How does ‘believing one source contains all knowledge’ contradict reality? What reality is she talking about?] (From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) Over the years, many scientists have studied the effects of head and brain injuries. These studies were aimed at understanding the physiological and psychological effects and used a number of experiments to "map the brain." The results have led to theories about two different modes of thinking or "styles of thought," which are generally attributed to the left and right hemispheres of the brain. In general, the left side of the brain controls the right side of the body, and the right side of the brain controls the left side of the body. According to the test results and the developing theory, the right brain is most often associated with direct sensual experience of the five sense organs as well as the "sixth sense" of intuitive thinking. "Feelings" are also associated with this side of the brain, and these feelings are often observed to be the result of the person's "sensation" of the environment. This "sensation" of the environment can be the external world or the internal "state of being." Also, we must note that the Right brain, as the Observer of the external and internal environment, only perceives NOW. The Left Brain is associated with the process of CONCEPTUALIZATION and IMAGINATION in its many forms, including the powers of symbolic imagination and those functions related to the symbols we know as language such as labeling, categorizing, following verbal rules and rules in general. The left hemisphere mode of operation is much like a computer screen on which the whole range of concepts of the mind are portrayed and manipulated in the "mind's eye." One of the main "concepts" we utilize is TIME as in Time future and Time past. Now, this is enormously important to grasp: religions, philosophies, "beliefs" in general, through which we view the world and by which we interact with the world also fall to one hemisphere or the other in terms of how they activate our consciousness. There are teachings that place emphasis on the sensual Right Brain, and there are teachings that place emphasis on the abstract, imaginative Left Brain. [Comment: Consciousness, spirituality, understanding, and thought are not necessarily functions of either the left or the right brain - although the latter may modify, color, orient, and veil such qualities in various ways. Furthermore, perhaps, these modes of modulation are not as neatly categorized as Laura and company wish to suggest. Indeed, a great deal of the left brain-right brain paradigm has been shown to be a lot less sharply delineated than first thought. Among other things there is a plasticity to the brain that can make up for left-right problems of physiological function and trauma . A great deal depends on the nature of the trauma, how quickly it occurs, at what age, and how soon rehabilitation begins following the trauma. More importantly, it may be a mistake to try to limit such issues as consciousness, intellect, spirituality, creativity, and so on, to the confines of the brain. This seems rather like trying to stuff a multi-dimensional 'block' into a hole whose dimensionality is just not adequate to receiving the former without a great deal of distortion being introduced into the matter. There may be teachings which place emphasis on the sensual Right Brain and teachings which place emphasis on the abstract, imaginative Left Brain. However, there is no reliable, proven evidence which shows that, for example, mysticism is, say, a Right Brain function. In fact, if one takes a look at John Lorber's Emergent Properties work with hydrocephaly, one may wonder if any of the so-called higher functions are really a function of brain activity of any kind.] Return to 'Food For Thought' Menu Copyright © 2004 Interrogative Imperative Insitute. All Rights Reserved.