(From Cassiopaeans) Q: (L) But, just a clue: how does thought become matter?
A: Bilaterally. Dual emergence.
Q: (L) Emergence into what and what?
A: Not "into what and what," but rather, "from what and to what."
Q: (L) What emerges from what?
A: The beginning emerges from the end, and vice versa.
Q: (L) And what is the beginning and what is the end?
A: Union with the One. 7th density, i.e.: all that is, and is not.
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) The TWO FUNDAMENTS OF ALL THAT IS. The most important concept of all to grasp in order to know how to "grow" or "ascend" to higher realms.
The One that IS Two in One. It is only in the dynamic between them that there even IS a "Third Man." The Third Man is the Created Cosmos.
[Comment - What is the nature of this 'dynamic'? What is the nature of the Two? Is there really two, or is there only the One giving rise to a multiplicity of manifestations? Is the 'Third Man' or Created Cosmos not just the collective potential of Created Being made possible by the One?
If everything is One, then, there is no beginning and there is no end ... there is only the One, which includes whatever the capacity and possibilities of the One encompass, and however the experience of the One is set-up. If there is no time, as the Cassiopaeans say - i.e., time is an illusion - then, the idea of a beginning and an end are also illusions because ‘beginning’ and ‘end’ are temporal terms in this context.
What does it really mean to say that the ‘beginning emerges from the end, and vice versa? Anyone can come with mysterious sounding phrases that have no substantive truth to them and which can never be verified or be verified only after one is dead - if then.
Another issue is how do we know that the 7th density encompasses all that is - both Being and Non-being? How do we know that there aren’t levels beyond 7th density?
The Cassiopaeans are, supposedly, 6th density Beings. Why should we believe that they know and understand it all? If they did, wouldn’t this imply that they are something more than 6th density beings? And if they are not, then, aren't they really making claims which go beyond their experience and understanding?]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) The thing is, since it is a "cycle," this means that not everyone is "ready" at any one time! Those who ARE ready have a profound sense of "mission." And for some, that "mission" is to assist those who are VERY CLOSE to awakening to be able to do so. But, even those with a "mission" must awaken to it
[Comment - There is often a quality of mania to those who believe they are on a mission from God, and this mania often closes them off to a lot of issues and possibilities. It is one thing to say that we all have a unique purpose and our challenge is to search for, discover, and fulfill that purpose. It is quite another thing to claim that we are, somehow, special and chosen, and, as a result, we believe that we, alone, somehow understand the truth and are in a position to help others - provided that they see things our way.
As far as awakening to the challenge or purpose or mission, yes, we do have to struggle. Yet, Who places in us the desire, courage, and strength to struggle, and Who blesses struggle with success?]
(From the Cassiopaeans) Q: (L) Well, fine! I want to know! Is there some place that gives out orders up there?
A: You will know when it is right, and not before!
Q: (L) I want you guys to know that I sometimes feel a wee tiny bit like a pawn on a chessboard!
A: You should, you inhabit 3rd density STS environment.
Q: (L) I was at least hoping that if I was a pawn, that some of the players were good guys. Is that asking too much?
A: Yes. The "Good guys" don't play chess.
[Comment - While it may be true that the ‘Good guys’ don’t play chess, this doesn’t preclude the possibility that the Cassiopaeans are playing a chess game according to their understanding of things, and, therefore, seeking to manipulate the situation. In other words, the Cassiopaeans may not be the ‘Good guys’ even though they speak the truth when they say that such beings do not play chess.]
(From the Cassiopaeans) Q: (L) But there have been so many strange events, so many synchronous events. Is that the good guys helping or the bad guys leading me astray?
A: Neither. It is Nature running its course.
[Comment - What does it mean for Nature to be running its course? What is Nature, and why does it have the structural character that it does? Is Nature random, and, if so, then, from whence does the necessity of seeking to become STO arise? Or, is there an order or design to Nature, and, if so, then, what is the 'nature' of this order or design, and how or why did Nature come to be?]
(From the Cassiopaeans) Q: (L) Okay. One of the sensations I have experienced is that I have had it up to the eyebrows with the negative energies and experiences of 3rd density, and I have thought lately that this feeling of having had enough, in an absolute sense, is one of the primary motivators for wanting to find one's way out of this trap we are in. I want out of it. Is this part of this "nature" as you call it?
A: Yes. When you see the futility of the limitations of 3rd density life, it means you are ready to graduate. Notice those who wallow in it.
Q: (L) Some people obviously wallow in extreme materiality. And there seems to be another kind that is more subtle, which has to do with saying that you want to grow and become enlightened, and yet such a person is unable to pierce the veil of their own illusions about how to become enlightened, and then they wallow in the illusion that they are really making progress...
A: Wallowing takes many forms. More often, the sign of wallowing is someone who does not feel alienated by the obvious traps and limitations of 3rd density.
[Comment - As a Sufi shaykh once replied to someone who was complaining about the manner in which life is filled with obstacles, exploitive forces, and problems - ‘what you are complaining about is exactly what I find helpful to spiritual growth'. The Sufi shaykh knew the character of the world. The shaykh knew about the world's traps, limitations, illusions, delusions, and predatory character, and, yet, this knowledge was a primary means for struggling toward spiritual growth. The shaykh did not feel alienated by knowledge of how the world works or how the nafs or carnal soul of human beings works, but, instead, the shaykh understood and used such knowledge as it was intended (by Divinity) to be understood and used as a catalyst for spiritual work.]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) In practical terms, how do we "grow stronger" in our polarity? If it is to be of the Service to Others alignment, isn't it just necessary to give? Isn't that the only key? And don't the Service to Self polarized beings just take?
Well, it IS that simple, and it is more complex.
From one perspective, it would seem that the most accepting and loving thing to do would be to love ALL - to surround all those of the Service to Self alignment with Love and Light so that they would be enclosed and permeated with this love which would then transform them to the Service to Others alignment.
But note immediately that, in these terms, the sending of love is intended to CHANGE, to TRANSFORM, to DENY FREE WILL. And thus, by simply doing this, one is aligning with the very Orientation that seeks to deny Free Will, i.e. STS. The result is that the very love energy being sent IS Service to Self Forced Oscillation!
And what will it then do? It will AMPLIFY the STS frequency in the person or situation it is being sent to transform. It will do the opposite of what is wanted, but exactly what is INTENDED.
Service to Self seeks to dominate and take all to stuff in its black hole of fear. To send love (or to give anything) with the intention of changing, transforming or to make anything different than what it is, is to seek DOMINATION.
For the Service to Others polarity to allow itself to be manipulated by deceptive teachings of "sending love and light to transform the world," amounts to the ipso facto acceptance of dominance. The damping of its own frequency; the loss of amplitude.
Service to Others seeks to give ALL of self to others. But, because the chief thing it wishes to give is Free Will, it only gives when ASKED.
[Comment - Sometimes help is given when it has not been asked for because of (1) a need which exists (will one not offer food and water to someone who is thirsty and hungry but is too proud or humble or polite to ask for what is needed?), or, because, (2) God puts in one’s heart the inclination to help someone - not with the intent of changing them against there will or getting them to believe this or that but with the intent to help stabilize their situation so that they will be in a position to make informed choices or be in a position to actively take on the challenge of life.
In addition, a person may realize that he or she needs authentic knowledge, and, yet, not know who can be trusted to be approached for such understanding - and, consequently, there may be a good reason for someone not asking in such circumstances.
One might agree that we must be very careful in situations where something is given when nothing has been asked (and leaving aside the possibility that the heart is asking even if the person’s mind and tongue are not) and that human beings are very vulnerable to the impulse to help someone and have expectations about how people should or ought to respond to such help. One also might agree that one should not interfere with a person’s capacity to choose or capacity to intend to align themselves with STO and STS orientations. Notwithstanding the foregoing several acknowledgments, God can give to whomsoever Divinity pleases through whatever locus of manifestation and whatever time and set of circumstances Divinity pleases, and it is important for us to be aware of these currents within us - and charity (what is the transmission of correct knowledge but an act of charity) is not a bad thing to do when it is done with the correct intentions, understanding, and adab (spiritual etiquette) concerning a given situation.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) has said to deprive a person who can benefit from knowledge is to do an injustice to that individual, and to give knowledge to someone who cannot benefit from it is to do an injustice to the knowledge. One needs to have the requisite insight to differentiate those who might benefit from those who are not ready to benefit.
In addition, one must accurately assess whether one actually has the sort of legitimate, authentic knowledge which can actually help someone. Even when someone asks, if what one has to offer is disinformation, or false information, or a problematic understanding, or misleading information, then, one is not doing a STO act when one gives such information to another human being who has asked for help, only to receive misinformation.
To be willing to give when one is under the delusion that one actually has something of value to give - i.e., true knowledge about the nature of Creation, human potential, methodology, purpose, and so on - this is really not STO (it is more akin to spiritual abuse) and it is not necessarily Love. Love can only arise from Divinity and is channeled through a particular locus of manifestation, and in order for that locus to be able to transmit or channel such Love without distortion or corruption, then, the interior character of the transmitting ‘device’ (i.e., the human being) must be purified, calibrated and active.]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) The idea that those of the STO frequency must not give without being asked is a subtle thing. The concept inherent in "asking" is that of willing exchange. The asking is the giving of the asker. The response is the giving of the askee. If there is anything in either of them that expects any change OTHER than the explicit asking and giving, the interaction falls into STS and not STO.
[Comment - The very act of giving carries with it a hope or prayer that what is given will help change a person’s life in some beneficial, constructive fashion. The very act of accepting such help is done with a parallel prayer that what is accepted will bring about a beneficial change of some sort.To be sure, there should be no expectation that such a change will or must take place, and there should be no disappointment when no change does occur, and there should be no manipulation to try to force change through what is given or accepted, but the giving and accepting consists of more than the giving and accepting, and there is a reason why something is given, and there is a reason why something is accepted.
Furthermore, there would seem to be nothing inherently wrong with the following - namely, if someone assessed a situation carefully, reached the conclusion that someone might benefit from a certain kind of help and, then, made an offer which is couched in a context where acceptance or rejection is easy to do, and where the potential recipient is not put in a vulnerable or exposed or pressured situation to feel obligated to accept what is offered. To make a judgment that anyone who behaves in the foregoing manner is automatically operating out of an STS framework, appears to give expression to a form of flawed thinking and, as well, seems to presume knowledge about the interior character of another human being which allegedly demonstrates that the offer was not sincerely and honestly given without desire for reward and without expectations.
In addition, although the Cassiopaeans claim that Laura asked for their help - she really didn’t, because she didn’t even know about the existence of the Cassiopaeans before they contacted her. Furthermore, the kind of help she really may have been seeking may not have been what the Cassiopaeans had to offer, and for the Cassiopaeans to say that she asked for the help they gave her involves a certain amount of re-framing and spinning the matter of what constitutes ‘having asked’- especially, when is not even certain of what one is getting.
Finally, Laura has asked for help many times and she has been put off with such things as: ‘you are not ready for this’ or ‘you wouldn’t understand’ or ‘this will come at the right time’ and so on. Consequently, it would appear to be rather obvious that there are more considerations involved in the giving of assistance other than just whether someone has asked.]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) The end result of giving Love energy to the STS polarity is to gradually deplete the STO polarity in the self as well as in the grander scheme of things, and eventually, to deprive all those of that polarity from shared, symbiotic sustenance. One has then, by default, become part of the STS hierarchy and has lost any usefulness in terms of Service to Others. And if you are seeking to polarize in the STO mode, you must gain energy by alignment and amplification to move OUT of the STS realm into an STO dynamic where all give to each other and there is multiplication of force in the act, rather than depletion.
[Comment - Why assume that the Source of Love is Finite (which is the implication of: "giving Love energy to the STS polarity is to gradually deplete the STO polarity in the self as well as in the grander scheme of things")? Why assume that life is a zero-sum game? Why assume that Love is an issue of either energy or non-renewable materiality? Why assume that Love is a function of wave dynamics?
Why assume that an amplification is needed, when God is quite sufficient when Divinity wishes for something to be, God merely says ‘Be’ or ‘Become’? Why assume that things depend on human beings or the human race even though the latter may have their roles to play and their responsibilities?
The Cassiopaeans have not offered anything which indicates that any of the foregoing assumptions are warranted. Laura has not offered anything which demonstrates that such assumptions are warranted.]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) Another way of saying it is that the true object of the STO dynamic is to give to God in the role of the CREATIVE or FREE WILL FUNCTION; to establish frequency resonance in this dynamic.
The true object of the STS dynamic is to give to God in the role of Death and the Destroyer - the Thought of Non-being, to deny Free Will to Create or BE.
[Comment - What makes Laura think that anything can be given from any direction without the permission or leave of Divinity? STS do not give anything to God, and neither do STO beings.
Both STS and STO are loci of manifestations that are receptive to certain kinds of manifestation which give expression to some complex ratio of Divine Names and Attributes that serve God’s purpose or Himma. The manifestation of the jalali names through which destruction, mis-guidance, and so on, enter into Creation is done in accordance with Divine Will.
However, woe to the one who offers himself or herself up to be a willing locus of manifestation for such jalali manifestations. God’s intention is sincere, but the intention of such loci of manifestation are not, and it is the character of the intention which makes the human act evil, not the act of destruction or misguidance itself which has been authorized by Divinity for Divinity’s own purpose.]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) We can choose "living water" that becomes "a spring of water welling up continually within," to "eternal life/creation," or we can choose the water from the "well of Jacob the supplanter," which will leave us thirsty again and again. And it is in this choice that we come to the remark of Don Juan "... As awareness reaches levels higher than the toes, tremendous maneuvers of perception become a matter of course."
Such a choice is a "maneuver of perception,"
[Comment - Perhaps, we cannot maneuver perception through choice. On the other hand, we may be able to intend that our perception be altered in a particular direction by seeking to align ourselves with the forces, agents, and catalytic properties (i.e, barakah operating through natural principles) which will open us up to the possibility of becoming aligned - God willing - through a merging of horizons, on some level, with a given perceptual possibility, orientation, or perspective. Our choices may not causally change our perception, but, rather, align us with some dimension of the One which makes such a perception possible, if God should so will it.]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) Further maneuvers of perception amount to the ability to make every choice based on "seeing the unseen." Every time we choose, based on knowledge/love, rather than chemical/emotional love or assumption/wishful thinking love, we are giving a push to the swing of amplifying our Frequency Resonance Vibration. And such amplification increases our polarization and we "grow."
The problem is, in the beginning, when we begin to use discipline to try to "see the unseen," we are like a blind man stumbling through a maze. We are Theseus in the lair of the Minotaur, guided only by the thread of Ariadne. Our ability to perceive the Noumenal world, the activities of 4th density, requires great attention, great discipline, and an ability to "face with serenity odds that are not included in our expectations." We have to learn the art of "facing infinity without flinching." And it is this process that the Cassiopaeans are facilitating. What they tell us about the Noumenal world, the 4th density realm, is not supposed to terrify us in the end, it is supposed to wake us up to the odds that are facing us that are NOT according to our expectations.
[Comment - Whether the Cassiopaeans are, on the one hand, facilitating the process of being able to face infinity without flinching, or, on the other hand, are facilitating a process which enanbles one to face the Cassiopaean re-framing of things without flinching remains to be seen. The two, foregoing possibilities ae not necessarily co-extensive.
Moreover, why should one suppose that it is 4th density that is the noumenal world? Every existing thing, level, realm, world, being, and dimension is a veil of the One who is the Source of all phenomena across all the realms and worlds - not just 4th density.4th density consists of manifestation and these are phenomenal expressions of noumenal tajalli arising from a much deeper dimension of Being.]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) One thing I am finally realizing in spite of decades of religious and social training to the contrary, is that we all have only one decision to make, just one. At any specific moment, we are all faced with the opportunity to invoke an STS or an STO approach to the specific lesson at hand. By placing focus on this specific choice of the moment instead of fretting about a lifetime of "wrong" choices and carrying the weight of redemption/salvation via an outside source who demands that you pay them money so they will "speak nicely about you to their lord in an afterlife," coupled with the Cassiopaean's insistence that there is no "right or wrong," just lessons, makes the "task" of being an STO candidate sooooooo much easier.....
[Comment - Doing justice or giving everything its due, is not just a matter of STO but, also, is a matter of treating the Self through STO with adab (spiritual etiquette) as well. One will be in a position to do STO only to the extent that proper service has been rendered to one’s essential Self and to the extent that one resists and does not align oneself with the nafs (the seat of our rebellious tendencies concerning the truth), Iblis/Satan, dunya (worldly entanglement of our collectively interacting egos), and/or unbelievers (an unbeliever is someone who may accept the idea of God but just does not act using such a premise as a basis for one's choices).
Life is more than the choice between STS and STO, it is about coming to know and realize and fulfill the purpose of one’s being at all. The choice of alignment (that is, whether STS or STO) is part of the methodology, but one must gain knowledge and understanding first, and, one cannot do this without, in the short run, benefitting oneself, even if no one else benefits.
First and foremost, STO must be to the Truth, for as long as we are not who we are in essence, then, the Truth is Other, and it is only by doing service to the Truth that one can learn how to do Service to the Truth of human beings as a function of who, in essence, we are, and why we were created, and what our unique spiritual capacity encompasses . Service to the Truth (STT) is worship, whatever the particular character of the acts are through which such worship is rendered.]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) And that is the essence of the matter. A choice made in the present moment - ANY present moment - excluding all the outside influences, with ONLY the consideration of whether it ALLOWS Free Will to all involved, changes the nature of all choices ever made!
[Comment - The mystics consistently indicate that this sort of discernment only comes from God. We are not capable of such discernment on our own. We have the capacity to intend to not control, manipulate, exploit, maneuver, dominate, or change other people, but only if God permits will our intentions be of the requisite purity and strength to be in a position to give expression to constructive assistance rather than problematic assistance.
Freedom is not the process of making a choice or having an intention which is independent of all influences, but, rather, it is to align ourselves with the dimensions of Self which are likely, God willing, to lead in the direction of true freedom. True freedom is an expression of who, in essence we are, and to give expression to our unique spiritual capacity unencumbered by anything other than who we are in essence.]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) This means that the ability to support Free Will in others which lies in the STO pathway MUST remain pure and must NOT be subsumed into the STS alignment or Free Will for all could cease to exist in our present reality...
[Comment - Free will does cease to exist just because we use it to enslave ourselves. As long as we choose to enslave ourselves to restrictive conditions that veil ourselves from our Self, then, we are exercising free will.
Freedom is something different from free will. Freedom is to be who, in essence, we are, and we exercise free will in the hope that we will achieve the station of freedom.
Enslavement does not negate free will, but rather, enslavement only negates freedom. When we choose to align ourselves with the wrong forces, we lose our freedom, and when we continue to choose to align ourselves with the wrong forces, we continue to be enslaved - even as we are freely choosing such enslavement.
Under such circumstances, we choose to be aligned with forces that do not operate in our best interests. Nothing forces this choice except our own inclinations, condition, personality, and understanding - all of which we have chosen to accept as our working hypothesis concerning the nature of reality, its possibilities and problems.]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) By taking away every hope and dream of outside salvation you ever thought you could cling to, I am stripping your bones bare. Not only am I stripping your bones, I am boiling your flesh. And, to those who are truly ASKING, it is an essential function I am performing for you. It is the Shamanic Initiation. You cannot be "reborn" unless you die. And, "unless a man be born again," he can have no "eternal life."
[Comment - While the idea of salvation may be a theologically loaded term, nevertheless, unless one gets help, one cannot make the transition to STO from STS. To be brought to an understanding that one must change one’s orientation is to have received help in the form of all the experiences which have led to that point, and in the form of all the critical contemplation concerning the significance, meaning and value of such experiences, and in the form of Divine support which permits one to see and have faith in what one understands to be part of the Truth. One needs to be opened up to enough of the Truth that one develops an aspiration to seek more of the Truth which is connected to the little piece one has been opened up to and with which one has merged by the Grace of God.
The operative word in the foregoing is Grace. No Grace, no change. We are entirely dependent on Divine assistance - although this assistance may be manifested in many different forms and shapes.
Now, if, theologically, one experiences a cetain uneasiness in referring to the presence of such Grace in one's life as constituting salvation, so be it. But, whatever one calls it, Grace is necessary.]
Return to 'Food For Thought' Menu
|
