Syphoning

[sun-toon´]

Windows auto updated and restarted the computer while writing my post and when it rebooted it left only fragments posted. I've deleted it all and will return to Sun-Toon's post later.

Once again I find support for my hypothesis that the true nature of evil has been coded into Windows. I hope you'll eventually repost milk and honey...I apologize if I reacted strongly to your post, but you pushed my buttons when I couldn't find a way of reading it that didn't seem condescending.

Originally Posted by Czymra

I think we're all agreeing on this one, it's just semantics.... dude the terms for all this are all over the place. To one the 'spirit' is the 'source' and to the other 'spirit' is just hocus pocus, is emotion a part of the illusion or is it divine?

I don't really think we're all agreeing on this, though it appears that at least you and I are.

Originally Posted by Czymra

I agree with this, as well. I think Baxter is onto something but she has a growl in her writing.

I hear the growl, but not constriction. All this peace, light and love stuff we're constantly exposed to in the name of higher consciousness tends to cloud the concept that we just might need to be warriors...perhaps of a different sort than has been in the mix before, but warriors nonetheless. If you look further into her writing the issue of fear is addressed, as well as a lot on the law of attraction, and how she believes we can manifest reality through personal empowerment.

Dakini, I don't think it's her fear you're seeing, but more likely your own. Please don't take me wrong, I see you as owning a very evolved consciousness, but I've been outside of the traditional spiritual paradigms for some time, and I do understand where fear would come from. I think it should be there. I've experienced it every time I expand, and almost every time I've been threatened with expansion. I've experienced it over this very issue, and at more than one level. Bronte hasn't brought that out of me, since I was mostly in her camp already, but it's built into the process, and the bursting of our bubbles of awareness would be much more dangerous without it. The idea that we should be beyond fear is BS. It's a tool for exploration and growth and a necessary one.

From Chapter 10 of Bronte Baxter's blog:

If consciousness creates the outer reality, then consciousness is king. Thought is king. We can think and create unconsciously and get more of the same old thing. Or, we can think fresh thoughts, dream bold dreams, and talk ourselves into a finer state of existence. Whether we live on purpose or on autopilot, we are creating and/or allowing everything that appears in our path. Once we know this – our power to choose, our power of permission – we move from passive victims to masters of living.

Karma is a lie that keeps us enslaved to the past. Our future is not determined by what we did but by what we presently choose to think and experience. Karma only exists in the mind, in the ancient attitudes that keep us enslaved to tired-out negative patterns. Karma dissolves when we change our thinking, first consciously, then subconsciously.

When conscious and subconscious agree, and take their direction from the harmonious Infinite within, life opens out into beauty and miracles. This is the new consciousness humanity is moving into. When we arrive there, we’ll transform the world into paradise.

Her paradigm is about freedom and personal sovereignty...a different connection to the divine than the Oneness doctrines of Eastern mysticism or new age hyperbole. It's a warrior's path, and I have to say I like it.
I'm not totally on the same page with everything she has say. There are intuitions which she accepts that I never would unless I had them myself. Avoiding assumptions is always good policy IMO. Overall however, this seems as expansive as Wingmakers, actually quite similar, though from a completely different angle and with less drama.

Originally Posted by Czymra

I may not be as persistent as sun-toon' when it comes to the rejection of all old means, but I must admit that after long periods of introspection, every time I return to this attitude.
There's just too much BS out there.

I think it's safe to start with the premise that something is very, very wrong here on planet earth and with the direction of the evolution of consciousness of its principle freewill species. The "old means" was fine back before we were on the brink of global annihilation. There was plenty of time to sit in caves or monasteries and contemplate the nature of Being. I'm sure it seemed to those mystics that there was time for everything...another thousand lifetimes perhaps, and who cared if they were being siphoned, if it was the Way.

It's clear that this is no longer the case. We're on the cusp of something profound, and at the least this is a gigantic opportunity for the discovery of the true nature of our selves. The idea that such a discovery might include the knowledge that there is a matrix here on the physical plane (indisputable at this point), and that it's an extension of an astral plane matrix, which is an iteration of what the mystics believed was the whole of existence, and that the Whole is an iteration of...the Real Universe...
Is this really such a stretch?
(OK it is, give it time to integrate...I have a feeling that there's much more stretching to come.)

[Czymra]

Maybe I'm notactually getting what you're trying to say but I don't think it's a stretch at all. Maybe I'm blessed by being young in this life and have been brought up in a complete disorder of post-modernity.

I don't think it's my point to drive this conversation further at this point, so I'll wait for windows to stop throwing his fit and see what good milk and honey brings in.

However, I do like to say that I fully agree with the concept of the warrior.
Yes indeed, it's not the killing machine we're all told it is, as little as the true path can be a matter of only love and light. Rather, I think we're being drawn into the extremes of yet another balance issue.
I wonder if Paulo Coelho's "The Warrior of Light's Handbook" has been corrupted.... or rather... how much...

Nothing has been more true in my experience than the concept of love and strictness combined.... it may be a thing path but it's the one of a clear conscience..

[Czymra]

One more thing actually, regarding the warrior perception and integrating the dark... there are some amazing posts toward this (current) end of this thread:

http://www.projectavalon.net/forum/s...ad.php?t=11773

[milk and honey]

Apologies for disappearing again. I'll be another few days in exile but will return to this thread. Cheers.

[Dakini]

Originally Posted by sun-toon´

I hear the growl, but not constriction. All this peace, light and love stuff we're constantly exposed to in the name of higher consciousness tends to cloud the concept that we just might need to be warriors...perhaps of a different sort than has been in the mix before, but warriors nonetheless.

Tend to agree that in the process of all the kicking up of dust - the talk all over the place of one's expansion or how to do it, or best things to focus on etc., etc., it is all diversion - it can cloud the inevitable of just plain doing the Work. Well, I'm OT>
Ok - yes, And warriors have always been needed; we each have our place in the Scheme. Even Joan of Arc, mythical Athena - warriors. Some fight with swords, some with minds, some with other mechanisms.

Originally Posted by sun-toon´

If you look further into her writing the issue of fear is addressed, as well as a lot on the law of attraction, and how she believes we can manifest reality through personal empowerment.
Dakini, I don't think it's her fear you're seeing, but more likely your own. Please don't take me wrong, I see you as owning a very evolved consciousness, but I've been outside of the traditional spiritual paradigms for some time, and I do understand where fear would come from. I think it should be there. I've experienced it every time I expand, and almost every time I've been threatened with expansion. I've experienced it over this very issue, and at more than one level. ....The idea that we should be beyond fear is BS. It's a tool for exploration and growth and a necessary one.

Well, I totally agree that fear presents itself for the ones who are choosing to participate in active expansion. And because of that factor, one must be courageous in its face if one is to progress. So have I felt fear? Abso - fricking - lutely. I'm glad you brought this up!
Here is something I keep bookmarked from "Will and Spirit" by Gerald G. May to remind me...

"The 'knowing' of divine love occurs only in the atmosphere of 'unknowing.' The conclusion that must be drawn here is that spiritual seekers are in a no-win situation with regard to fear. I think this is totally accurate. There is no way to avoid fear, GREAT fear, in the course of spiritual growth. The only saving quality is that in an atmosphere of willingness the experiences of love and fear come together. Where terror is encourntered, the sense of divine love is always available. If it were not for this, our spiritual journeys would invariably be short-lived and abortive."

Originally Posted by sun-toon´

I think it's safe to start with the premise that something is very, very wrong here on planet earth and with the direction of the evolution of consciousness of its principle freewill species. The "old means" was fine back before we were on the brink of global annihilation. There was plenty of time to sit in caves or monasteries and contemplate the nature of Being. I'm sure it seemed to those mystics that there was time for everything...another thousand lifetimes perhaps, and who cared if they were being siphoned, if it was the Way.

Time was not the essential thing to them - Divine Union was the thing; and they made great sacrifices for it; throughout history the greats were killed when they spoke out about visions, worked miracles, etc. Is it any wonder that gifted people today stay silent, make up screen names, and don't show their faces when they express their intuitions or visions? True, we live in a different time, and will we ever have many Mystics of this ilk on the face of the earth again? It is very rare, and so a new paradigm is emerging and within that, the new consciousness is evolving. We know this. It is supposed to be so.

But I would interject that even in this new Earth time, there are still some mystics here, who have not particularly elected to 'sit in caves or monasteries and contemplate the nature of Being,' but have found themselves instead chosen by something Bigger, and have in fact been taken out of their ordinary lives by its power, have spent much time in an alternative, non-mainstream spiritual way of life that they would otherwise not have chosen because of its sacrifices.

Originally Posted by sun-toon´

It's clear that this is no longer the case. We're on the cusp of something profound, and at the least this is a gigantic opportunity for the discovery of the true nature of our selves. The idea that such a discovery might include the knowledge that there is a matrix here on the physical plane (indisputable at this point), and that it's an extension of an astral plane matrix, which is an iteration of what the mystics believed was the whole of existence, and that the Whole is an iteration of...the Real Universe...
Is this really such a stretch?
(OK it is, give it time to integrate...I have a feeling that there's much more stretching to come.)

No stretch. Some are beyond this cusp; the Matrix - you may have in fact seen it, felt it, tasted it already...

Let's be done discussing Baxter - she can and all of us can manifest away; those techniques are ancient and for reasons are being dug up again.
Sometimes I think manifestation itself is needed so humans can see the potential of what our small minds can deliver.

"reclaim our sovereignty" < who ever knew that we were ever sovereign?

If we are a spark of the source (created), we are unified already,not individual sovereigns... and we feed the Ultimate Creative Intelligence only because we have a delusional perception of an individuated Self. Perhaps we don't really exist at all, er, that our perception of self as a sovereign individual is a delusion.

We are "food" whether conscious or not and ultimately it does not matter HOW it is, but THAT it is.... food for the ultimate creative intelligence that we are part of.

Might true sovereignty mean 'self created', and as self created, would that not imply being separated?

ok... it's CLEAR to me that I must tune in to this dialog more frequently, as playing catch up has so Many thought provocative ideas coming thru and this quick rely window times out on me... forgive me for this, perhaps, out of sync reply.

Very interesting discussion, for sure one of the best here at Avalon!

Quote from above: "Do we take our individual sovereign consciousness and become actual co-creators".
I've noticed from others also... this sovereign idea often written together w/the word co-creator.
Hmmm... it's a bit of a hurdle for me not really know a writer's definition of certain terms that are loosely spoken by many of us, though usually it's not such a problem... this thread it is.
As in spirit & soul... to me, Spirit is That Which Animates. Soul is that which embodies .
Co-Creator implies creating w/another (the source?).
SOVEREIGN: pasted from online dictionary-
adjective
1. A sovereign state or country is independent and not under the authority of any other country. usu ADJ n
2. Sovereign is used to describe the person or institution that has the highest power in a country.
noun
1. A sovereign is a king, queen, or other royal ruler of a country.

[sun-toon´]

Originally Posted by Dakini

Well, I totally agree that fear presents itself for the ones who are choosing to participate in active expansion. And because of that factor, one must be courageous in its face if one is to progress. So have I felt fear? Abso - fricking - lutely. I'm glad you brought this up!

I should probably clarify what I mean when I keep bringing up the expansion/integration thing, though I think you already understand me. Expansion almost always means dealing with fear...especially if it's profound. All the castles we build around our paradigms are made of sand, and at the least it's disturbing to have new realizations wash them away leaving us vulnerable to unpredictable cosmic weather. Sometimes expanding can be ecstatic...and I've experienced that, but often information comes in that's more on the order of shocking and disorienting.
The biggest part of integrating is building a new castle with the best protections we can innovate for whatever new level of knowledge we've absorbed. In other words, finding ways to be less afraid of the agoraphobia that comes with a greater vision of the vastness of reality.

Originally Posted by Dakini

...we live in a different time, and will we ever have many Mystics of this ilk on the face of the earth again? It is very rare, and so a new paradigm is emerging and within that, the new consciousness is evolving. We know this. It is supposed to be so.

But I would interject that even in this new Earth time, there are still some mystics here, who have not particularly elected to 'sit in caves or monasteries and contemplate the nature of Being,' but have found themselves instead chosen by something Bigger, and have in fact been taken out of their ordinary lives by its power, have spent much time in an alternative, non-mainstream spiritual way of life that they would otherwise not have chosen because of its sacrifices.

Everyone on the mystic path can only do their best, and we're all building on the foundations that have been laid before us. I do however think that much of what was learned and discovered has been buried, misdirected and subverted by the PTB throughout time, so that it's hard to see many of the mystic visions clearly...as they've been so woven into pre-existing archetypes. We only have to look as far as Jesus to see the extremes of a hijacked vision. It's the results of mysticism having been amalgamated into this pre-matrix program that I'm minimizing.

I agree that we're now swimming in mystics, with a 100x more of them than have ever inhabited earth at the same time before, plus we have the new analog to telepathy...the internet, in play, so it's easy for them/us to connect. IMO, anyone who's now sitting in a cave, thinking the whole deal is about their personal evolution, is not cutting the mustard of the title of "mystic"...they're just dreaming. This is a global manifestation, and a global awakening is necessary to sort it out...though of course it's centered around an awakening of individuals.

Originally Posted by EpiphaMe

Quote from above: "Do we take our individual sovereign consciousness and become actual co-creators".
I've noticed from others also... this sovereign idea often written together w/the word co-creator.
Hmmm... it's a bit of a hurdle for me not really know a writer's definition of certain terms that are loosely spoken by many of us, though usually it's not such a problem... this thread it is.
As in spirit & soul... to me, Spirit is That Which Animates. Soul is that which embodies .
Co-Creator implies creating w/another (the source?).

Well, here's what I mean when I'm using those terms:
Sovereign- that as entities, we're fragments of the prime creator, iterations of the One Mind that constitutes the fabric of reality. There are many different types of entity, some ancient and closer to the creation process...the "progenitors" for example, being the universal "design team" who have then fragmented further into other iterations of sovereign entities. Now I'm seeing that the demons and deities are nothing more than large entities, ones who are composed of many smaller sparks which they have absorbed along the way. The may be massive and powerful, but they're no more sovereign that the rest of us, and in no way deserving of worship.
If we're truly sovereign then we are "independent and not under the authority of any..." body. We have unlimited free will, but also the responsibility that comes with it.

Co-creator- I can't wrap my mind around all the law of attraction theories which insist we're each the sole creators of our realities. I think everything is a push and pull of power, and that this occurs among all creatures...especially if we're all made of the same primordial energetic "substance". I can create what I want, but it will not manifest unless I can fit it into a space in the fabric of reality, or unless I can overwrite a reality that already exists. If I want to replace a reality that exists in a space I inhabit, I have to have enough power to insert it, or find a way to reshape the fabric so mine will find the means to manifest.

It's 6 billion humans who are co-creating the human morphogenic field, and while some have more power to mold that field, all participate. Even at that, humans aren't the sole creators here...Gaia, the elementals and devas, other awakening sentient beings, formbuilders, and every other spark of life energy in the vicinity plays a part. And Gaia isn't the sole creator of Earth, the sun has a part...and so on, layer upon layer.

[RedeZra]

Some are doing work beyond the scopes of ordinary men

Man can tend a garden but a Sage can tend the stars
Does it matter if the watch is from a cave or from a castle

Some are doing work beyond the scopes of ordinary men

Man can care for family but a Saint can care for life
Does it matter if the hands are from a sovereign or from a slave

Some are doing work beyond the scopes of ordinary men

[Czymra]

Co-creator- I can't wrap my mind around all the law of attraction theories which insist we're each the sole creators of our realities. I think everything is a push and pull of power, and that this occurs among all creatures...especially if we're all made of the same primordial energetic "substance". I can create what I want, but it will not manifest unless I can fit it into a space in the fabric of reality, or unless I can overwrite a reality that already exists. If I want to replace a reality that exists in a space I inhabit, I have to have enough power to insert it, or find a way to reshape the fabric so mine will find the means to manifest.

I think that if we transition from syphoning to manifestation, as they both are two sides of the same coin, then we really should be looking into this issue.
I full heartedly agree with sun-toon' here. I may be able to attract myself a brand new sports car if I find the right paths of that manifestation, or rather, if I am focused enough then that car will eventually find it's way to me. It's always been that way for me. However, I think that system of manifestation is often another dose of 'soma' as most people will manifest money or whatever it is they crave for.

This of course goes hand in hand with the idea that life will throw the lessons at you that you need/are ready for. Is that also manifestation by the individual or is this just because of the rules of the game?

I do believe that if we are entities of one thing, yet fragments as sun-toon' says, then it makes sense that there is (in a 3d interpretation) a load of (light) tentacles protruding from a common body. The ones who understand to move closer to the original body would then of course have more 'leverage'.

Whichever way it is, my point is that the archetypes as outlined above aren't just stereotyping the mystics, but also the ways of creation. I mean, go and manifest something that you haven't stolen from somewhere else, try to grasp one of those thoughts out there that IS new.

And as there is no thinker behind the thoughts, how is it we attract them to our consciousness?

[sun-toon´]

Originally Posted by Czymra

I think that if we transition from syphoning to manifestation, as they both are two sides of the same coin, then we really should be looking into this issue.

Czymra, I think you're right on it with this two sides of the same coin idea. We're always manifesting something, but not usually anything novel. Instead, the "consciousness farmers" have seeded us with the memes they want us to tend for them, for later harvest. The other side of the coin is that we become of aware of these machinations and grow what we want...to the point of intentionally co-creating reality that's unpalatable for them.

Originally Posted by Czymra

I full heartedly agree with sun-toon' here. I may be able to attract myself a brand new sports car if I find the right paths of that manifestation, or rather, if I am focused enough then that car will eventually find it's way to me. It's always been that way for me. However, I think that system of manifestation is often another dose of 'soma' as most people will manifest money or whatever it is they crave for.

The factor which law of attaction devotees rarely seem to address, of if they do they deny it, is that often times that brand new sports car was pulled away from someone with lesser power (or focus). The Abraham/Hicks information emphasizes abundance, and this is probably true to an extent, but I do think we're generally manifesting reality out of the finite substance that makes up this realm, and there's not enough of the materials of every possible desire to go around. Therefore, we may create that perfect job by taking it away from someone who needed it more. [Or we can use up the Earth's resources in a couple hundred years by making it into junk and then throwing it away.]
This can lead to paralyzing thinking, until we become like the monks who worry continuously about stepping on a bug, but to be balanced we only need to remember that it's essential to manifest mindfully.

Originally Posted by Czymra

I do believe that if we are entities of one thing, yet fragments as sun-toon' says, then it makes sense that there is (in a 3d interpretation) a load of (light) tentacles protruding from a common body. The ones who understand to move closer to the original body would then of course have more 'leverage'.
And as there is no thinker behind the thoughts, how is it we attract them to our consciousness?

I like the way your mind works... and especially because it seems different from mine. I think the "light tentacles" image is cool, and yes...the original body, or "First Source" would be where we draw from. Or, we can step down a level and open a stronger connection to the light body of Earth, the being who seems in most peril at this time. This is another way to starve the beasts...overwrite the matrix programming by co-creating in a fully loving relationship -- where the will of humanity is in union with Earth and it's already designed evolutionary framework. There's no way that program includes having it decimated by human tools of parasitic entities.

I've always thought this was the main issue, but now I'm wondering if it's possible that it's secondary to the loss of our Selves to the "brahman's" appetite.

Originally Posted by RedeZra

Man can care for family but a Saint can care for life
Does it matter if the hands are from a sovereign or from a slave

Some are doing work beyond the scopes of ordinary men

RedZra, "sovereignty" as I'm using it, isn't affected by material world status, such of freedom or slavery. It's a component of our very being, and can't be taken away by other men, or even gods...though it can be given away through free will.

[Czymra]

Czymra, I think you're right on it with this two sides of the same coin idea. We're always manifesting something, but not usually anything novel. Instead, the "consciousness farmers" have seeded us with the memes they want us to tend for them, for later harvest. The other side of the coin is that we become of aware of these machinations and grow what we want...to the point of intentionally co-creating reality that's unpalatable for them.

Wow, okay, if I am being facetious - and we may the masses forgive me - that means that the very concepts that are being visualised in the Nexus might be of an archetype that is old and thus completely unfitting. If we carry that theory further, is visualising the earth with a blue light possibly exactly the wrong thing?
If this is really so then of course whatever is necessary to focus on must just be presented in a fantastic way, which explains the horrendous sums that are used for making movies. Just imagine all the memes that are in our heads from that source.
How does it interface with the genetic mind?
Quite a revelation. o_o


I'm not sure if we draw from the finite or the infinite but it's definitely an issue to consider. I think what you are onto is balance and in that sense, yes attracting everything to you is probably no better than what is happening right now, whichever means are used.

However, could you explain this more?

There's no way that program includes having it decimated by human tools of parasitic entities.

Do you mean the program of archetypical self-propagation? And does 'include' then refer to some kind of defence mechanism (which in this case isn't there.)?
Human tools of parasitic entries? You mean our rewriting the archetypes or inserting new ones?
Where is asteram. It's time to hack the genetic mind!

But still, as there is no thinker behind the thoughts, how do you come up with a really new idea? How do you draw an idea out of hyperspace that hasn't been here yet. This probably includes the attraction of a distant idea through a rather close veil of old ideas (if you imagine them like floating in space and the known one's enveloping you as in a veil).

[RedeZra]

Originally Posted by sun-toon´

RedZra, "sovereignty" as I'm using it, isn't affected by material world status, such of freedom or slavery. It's a component of our very being, and can't be taken away by other men, or even gods...though it can be given away through free will.

What is the nature of this sovereignty

Does it have a name and a form
Where did it come from and where does it go
Does this sovereignty have a purpose
If it is sovereign then whos the servant
How is the relation between this sovereignty and a human being
How come if it is sovereign but still can be given away

In which way does this sovereignty in me differ from that sovereignty in you

[avyaktam]

Originally Posted by Dakini

She also says, [I]"Brahman is that consciousness that feeds and depends on physical matter, creating and devouring it at will, as humans breed then slaughter animals on a farm for food.

After reading **** like this it's simple for me. Baxter in the wastebasket. Next!
It is not Brahman that is the sucker.

Many of us have been impregnated with the idea that the Creator created this world from nothing and this miracle proves his omnipotence. And then this Monster watches the mess and enjoys. But from nothing nothing can come. There is only one thing in this world. If there is a Creator or Creatrix then he/she/it, or whatever forms it ( and that is Brahman), is also the Creation.

The great freedoms proclaimed are just hidden forms of slavery if we look more carefully.

And fyi I chose the path of surrender. And I have faith in what I am surrendering to. And i know very well that the surrender part is massively unpopular, especially in the west. I am as the bull in my avatar, trying to become the perfect instrument. I'm not interested in your poor 'creations', you can keep them all. We can only truly become creators or co creators when we are one with Self or Source or whatever else u like to name That, or at least are guided by it. All the rest is just adding up to the mess.

[sun-toon´]

Originally Posted by avyaktam

After reading **** like this it's simple for me. Baxter in the wastebasket. Next!
It is not Brahman that is the sucker.

Many of us have been impregnated with the idea that the Creator created this world from nothing and this miracle proves his omnipotence. And then this Monster watches the mess and enjoys. But from nothing nothing can come. There is only one thing in this world. If there is a Creator or Creatrix then he/she/it, or whatever forms it ( and that is Brahman), is also the Creation.

And fyi I chose the path of surrender. And I have faith in what I am surrendering to. And i know very well that the surrender part is massively unpopular, especially in the west. I am as the bull in my avatar, trying to become the perfect instrument. I'm not interested in your poor 'creations', you can keep them all. We can only truly become creators or co creators when we are one with Self or Source or whatever else u like to name That, or at least are guided by it. All the rest is just adding up to the mess.

It appears that you're projecting these ideas from within a holographic reality that some of us, "Baxter in the Wastebasket" included, are trying to see through. Are we sure of this "outside" -- do we know exactly of what we speak? Well, not really, but I venture to say that you don't either, and substitute faith for a fearless exploration of all possibilities. It's our choice to explore these ideas as free and sovereign manifestations of the prime creator behind the purported creators. As evidence (such as it is) accumulates, it seems more and more likely that the dream which you're selling is a dream within a dream...a matrix which contains multitudes of matrices, and which is perhaps one worth waking up from.

The naming of our gods as impostors pushes buttons, and the emotional reaction which that provokes is worthy of examination. Baxter is using "Brahman" to represent all the myriad gods of the hologram. Personally, I like the analogy, as well as her argument that Brahma is also Allah, Yahweh, the Christian god who was dreamed into existence by Christ's followers, and host of other gods and lesser gods...all manifestations of the holographic reality that contains what we've been led to believe is All. But if we are sovereign, why would we surrender and become slaves to other pieces of the One who were made of the same stuff that we are?

Why, if we're created as iterations of Source Consciousness, and charged with the ability to co-create within the realms of the One mind, would we want to be subjugated to any particular other aspect of that mind? You're calling that mind "The Brahman", I'm saying it's bigger than "B"...or "Y", "A" or all them together.

Originally Posted by avyaktam

The great freedoms proclaimed are just hidden forms of slavery if we look more carefully.

Explain...you're the one, who by his own admission, has surrendered.

To be sure, it's another great expansion to even entertain the thought that the gods we believe in may be no better than superminded versions of ourselves, and that their claims of being Source Consciousness are lies of a heavenly magnitude. I'm not afraid to think that thought, and I'm not afraid to resist surrender, the path of least resistance.
It is like stepping off a cliff. My faith is that we have wings we've never used, having been sold on the idea that we must be carried. If that's how it turns out, that we're actually weak babies who need a deity to cart us around, we'll find out soon enough. It's clear to me that this domain is a parasitic enterprise and it appears that the self-proclaimed creator of it is a parasite as well. I don't feel comfortable in the role of a parasite, or in emulating or promoting a parasitic overlord; so empowered by that intuition, I choose to peel another layer off of the onion.

Originally Posted by RedeZra

What is the nature of this sovereignty

Does it have a name and a form
Where did it come from and where does it go
Does this sovereignty have a purpose
If it is sovereign then whos the servant
How is the relation between this sovereignty and a human being
How come if it is sovereign but still can be given away

In which way does this sovereignty in me differ from that sovereignty in you

No name, no beginning we can see, no end to our dreaming.
No masters, no slaves, only an eternal expression of free will that honors All Life. It's ours to live, but free will also allows the choice of slavery.
The difference between my sovereignty and yours is no greater than the intent to manifest it.

[sun-toon´]

Originally Posted by czymra

...is visualising the earth with a blue light possibly exactly the wrong thing?
If this is really so then of course whatever is necessary to focus on must just be presented in a fantastic way, which explains the horrendous sums that are used for making movies. Just imagine all the memes that are in our heads from that source.

That's pretty funny...it just about sums up all my feelings about the guided meditations. There are so many now, it's liking renting a movie or something. I don't really get it, so I'm not qualified to judge whether "blue light" is a good place to be, or the worst thing that could be dreamed into the planetary field. So, how do the meditation authors know that everything they feel good about is safe for everyone, and also useful for the intended purpose? This has been my objection all along with the Nexus deal...the lack of transparency about this primary level of the creative/magical process.

I'd never thought about the correlation before, but there is one between these guided mind trips and movies. Besides the outrageous money being spent to inject memes into movies, there's also the factor of the increasing intensity and complexity, not only of fantastic imagery, but also the levels of horror and violence that are endlessly working to top last year's excesses. There's no doubt that movies are both subliminally and overtly affecting global consciounsess. It stands to reason that meditators are even more open to manipulation than movie viewers.

Originally Posted by czymra

However, could you explain this more?

Do you mean the program of archetypical self-propagation? And does 'include' then refer to some kind of defence mechanism (which in this case isn't there.)? Human tools of parasitic entries? You mean our rewriting the archetypes or inserting new ones?
Where is asteram. It's time to hack the genetic mind!

All I meant is that humans are the acting as the agents, or tools of the parasitic controllers. In that capacity, we're consuming the Earth, which for some reason doesn't seem matter to the controllers as long as the loosh farm is in full production.

The Earth itself has an evolutionary program that's been going on for some 4.5 billion years...the dream of the Gaian mind. It may have been corrupted and subverted by temporary overloads and their slave races, but if we think about the survival mechanism that all physical beings carry, and imagine where that comes from...the survival mechanism of Gaia itself must be an enormous reserve of power. Humans are frail and temporary manifestations of that dream. The fact that we've become a threat to the very survival of Earth is really, really not in the best interests of us having much of a future here...at least as people.

Where tf is asteram? Somebody's going have to bump the Genetic Mind thread before it expires.

QUOTE: "But still, as there is no thinker behind the thoughts, how do you come up with a really new idea?"

I would like that expounded upon please... as I've missed something about this along my journey. I see that the real essential 'me' is not my thoughts, but the witness of them... is that close to what you mean?

thank you. I'm so tired, full day, just need the above quote clarified.

[RedeZra]

Originally Posted by sun-toon´

...The difference between my sovereignty and yours is no greater than the intent to manifest it.

So Source Counsciosness is supreme sovereign in me you and all of us
Also supreme sovereign in stones stars and in all that we can see and in all that we cannot see because nothing can exist without Source Counsciosness

If so we all exist within this supreme sovereign Source Counsciosness which is One
And is the same in me and you and all of us
How then can Source Counsciosness not know Itself as supreme sovereign
Does It need a human beings perfect intent to perfectly manifest It before It will know Itself as supreme sovereign Source Counsciosness
Or does It reign sovereignly within us and Conscious of how we use our free will

[avyaktam]

Dear Sun Toon ´

I accept your invitation to this discussion, or at least part of the discussion.
Your invitation was in the form of assuming all kinds of things about me.

Let me start with my original post about defining and re-defining the Brahman concept.
What you are actually talking about is Brahma, the Hindu god, which could be defined as the Power of the Divine, which creates the worlds by the Word. He is part of the so-called trimurti (having three forms), the hindi trinity of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva (or Rudra), representing the creative, preservative and destructing processes of the cosmos.
-By the way Shiva’s body as represented in my avatar at the left is black because he ‘siphones’ the poison of the world, kind of your local garbage man.-

For Brahman a complete different defining exists next to it’s meaning of the creative Word going in the direction of: the Eternal; the Absolute; the Supreme Being; the One besides whom there is nothing else existent, the one Reality which is not only the spiritual, material and conscious substance of all the ideas and forces and forms of the universe, but their origin, support and possessor, the cosmic and supracosmic Spirit.
Or in a poetic way:

He is the Maker and the world he made,
He is the vision and he is the seer;
He is himself the actor and the act,
He is himself the knower and the known,
He is himself the dreamer and the dream.
-Savitri

In this paradigm there is as you can see no place for an ‘outside’, as I tried to explain in my post above, although it leaves ample room for negations, oppositions, contradictions, ‘impossibilities’, etc

Then let’s go back to Baxter’s redefinition of Brahma as the pantheon of hindu gods that are just using and abusing their powers to feed on humans. (Maybe not entirely precise, but that is about what I got from it.) My immediate question then is where did she get the discernment from to know whether what she was dealing with where these very gods, or appeared to be these gods? And here we get confronted with this immense problem, towards you also rightfully point, that things are not always what they appear to be. Spiritism, channeling, guides, voices. Hoe can we really trust them, should we immediately fall for their flattering and high sounding words or their half-truths. I understand your reserve there and share it. And here Baxter is right, it is not only malevolent, but also so-called benevolent entities that try to use the human for their purposes.
From the Intermediate Zone http://www.projectavalon.net/forum/s...ad.php?t=12017

Or there is the opposite danger that he may become the instrument of some apparently brilliant but ignorant formation; for these intermediate planes are full of little Gods or strong Daityas or smaller beings who want to create, to materialise something or to enforce a mental and vital formation in the earth life and are eager to use or influence or even possess the thought and will of the sadhak and make him their instrument for the purpose. This is quite apart from the well-known danger of actually hostile beings whose sole purpose is to create confusion, falsehood, corruption of the sadhana and disastrous unspiritual error. Anyone allowing himself to be taken hold of by one of these beings, who often take a divine Name, will lose his way in the yoga.

You might also take a look at the anecdote of the being that guided Hitler, that I posted in the Savitri-thread. http://www.projectavalon.net/forum/s...ad.php?t=12115

What Baxter has named Brahman in my terminology would be called the Titan.
Obviously I have not studied Baxter, but an irony creeps up that she is exactly embarking on the way she is scoffing at. The way of the Titan. Again from Savitri:

Haste not towards Godhead on a dangerous road,
Open not thy doorways to a nameless Power,
Climb not to Godhead by the Titan’s road.
Against the Law he pits his single will,
Across its way he throws his pride of might.
Heavenward he clambers on a stair of storms
Aspiring to live near the deathless sun.
He strives with a giant strength to wrest by force
From life and Nature the immortals’ right;
He takes by storm the world and fate and heaven.
He comes not to the high World-maker’s seat,
He waits not for the outstretched hand of God
To raise him out of his mortality.
All he would make his own, leave nothing free,
Stretching his small self to cope with the infinite.
Obstructing the gods’ open ways he makes
His own estate of the earth’s air and light;
A monopolist of the world-energy,
He dominates the life of common men.
His pain and others’ pain he makes his means:
On death and suffering he builds his throne.
In the hurry and clangour of his acts of might,
In a riot and excess of fame and shame,
By his magnitudes of hate and violence,
By the quaking of the world beneath his tread
He matches himself against the Eternal’s calm
And feels in himself the greatness of a god:
Power is his image of celestial self.
The Titan’s heart is a sea of fire and force;
He exults in the death of things and ruin and fall,
He feeds his strength with his own and others’ pain;
In the world’s pathos and passion he takes delight,
His pride, his might call for the struggle and pang.
He glories in the sufferings of the flesh
And covers the stigmata with the Stoic’s name.
His eyes blinded and visionless stare at the sun,
The seeker’s Sight receding from his heart
Can find no more the light of eternity;
He sees the beyond as an emptiness void of soul
And takes his night for a dark infinite.
His nature magnifies the unreal’s blank
And sees in Nought the sole reality:
He would stamp his single figure on the world,
Obsess the world’s rumours with his single name.
His moments centre the vast universe.
He sees his little self as very God.
His little ‘I’ has swallowed the whole world,
His ego has stretched into infinity.
His mind, a beat in original Nothingness,
Ciphers his thought on a slate of hourless Time.
He builds on a mighty vacancy of soul
A huge philosophy of Nothingness.
In him Nirvana lives and speaks and acts
Impossibly creating a universe.
An eternal zero is his formless self,
His spirit the void impersonal absolute.
Take not that stride, O growing soul of man;
Cast not thy self into that night of God.
The soul suffering is not eternity’s key,
Or ransom by sorrow heaven’s demand on life.
O mortal, bear, but ask not for the stroke,
Too soon will grief and anguish find thee out.
Too enormous is that venture for thy will;
Only in limits can man’s strength be safe;
Yet is infinity thy spirit’s goal;
Its bliss is there behind the world’s face of tears.
A power is in thee that thou knowest not;
Thou art a vessel of the imprisoned spark.

QUOTE=sun-toon´
Explain...you're the one, who by his own admission, has surrendered.


No, I said I have taken the path of surrender, it is not something you do once, it is part of an attitude and progression, and not at all as easy as you suggest. It is often confused with sacrifice and loss of individuality, but true surrender can only be accomplished in full freedom, there must be an exclusive self-opening to the divine Power; there must be a constant and integral choice of the Truth that is descending, a constant and integral rejection of the falsehood of the mental, vital and physical Powers and Appearances that still rule the earth-Nature.
Surrender is to give room to the Divine Powers to help you to become more and more what you really are, what we really are, That, That expressed in a multiple of forms and beings a creation full of endless possibilities living out the potentialities hidden in Avyaktam, the Unmanifest. I am a human becoming, help me become. So if help arrives you should at least give it room, that means surrender.

To understand better what place surrender takes in this path that is called Integral Yoga you can listen to the three mp3’s that are uploaded in the Savitri thread.

I won’t start now on the problem of freedom, karma and other matters you brought up, to keep this post within reasonable length.

The discernment of what is good or bad, true or false, divine or undivine is one of our jobs here for which we can only find the answer within. We have a great freedom to choose every second what we accept and what we reject. Freedom is an essential attribute of this Manifestation, victory and defeat are possible at every turn. A challenging game, would’t you prefer that after a couple of billion universes. A future more interresting than a choir of harp playing angels.

I hope you appreciate my contribution just as I appreciate yours, Milk and Honey’s, Czymra’s and Dakini’s.

[Czymra]

Avayaktam, as always the problem here is a matter of semantics. Call it Brahman or God or call it none of it, and man, I guess the very fact of naming it, is what makes the squirrel scurry away once more.

I agree wholeheartedly however that the "Baxter predicament" might lead to self-destruction through the very things one fights against. It's basically a lack of trust too profound, as opposed to the naivety we're discussing here.
Yet again there is a balance to be found. What tools does man even have left for discernment?

Originally Posted by EpiphaMe

QUOTE: "But still, as there is no thinker behind the thoughts, how do you come up with a really new idea?"

I would like that expounded upon please... as I've missed something about this along my journey. I see that the real essential 'me' is not my thoughts, but the witness of them... is that close to what you mean?

thank you. I'm so tired, full day, just need the above quote clarified.

EpiphaMe, this was a quote uttered, I do not remember by who but it was on Avalon (at least my conception of it). It's become one of the truest concepts for me, that all my thoughts seem to be merely more memes that I attract through my attitude.
The question is, I guess, not who's thinking, but why.... or rather, why does there need to be an entity that thinks? I have the feeling that our horizon is clogged full of thoughts and concepts that the more rare ones, possibly the more valuable ones at that, are beyond our reach.
I do not know if there is a finite or infinite amount of thoughts. But there surely seems to be those that are more remote, suppressed and thus almost non-existent.

[sun-toon´]

Originally Posted by RedeZra

So Source Counsciosness is supreme sovereign in me you and all of us
Also supreme sovereign in stones stars and in all that we can see and in all that we cannot see because nothing can exist without Source Counsciosness
If so we all exist within this supreme sovereign Source Counsciosness which is One And is the same in me and you and all of us
How then can Source Counsciosness not know Itself as supreme sovereign
Does It need a human beings perfect intent to perfectly manifest It before It will know Itself as supreme sovereign Source Counsciosness
Or does It reign sovereignly within us and Conscious of how we use our free will

RedeZra...I read through your thread yesterday, and though there were several comments I could have made, I chose not to, feeling that anything I said would have been disruptive to the flow of dialog there. I do not share your paradigm of a god who lives outside of myself, nor do I have much interest in the adoration of saints.
My main interest lies in seeing the physical Earth survive the current infestation of a parasitic consciousness that's been brought into this realm through the vehicle of humanity. Beyond that, I'm interested in the nature of reality and how my little sparkle is a part of it.

In answer to your question, maybe Source Consciousness does need small creatures such as human beings from which to explore new avenues of reality and the novel, co-creative expressions of both Self and Selflessness that are only available through free will and the limited points of view that we, as humans, have access to.

Originally Posted by avyaktam

Dear Sun Toon ´
I accept your invitation to this discussion, or at least part of the discussion.
Your invitation was in the form of assuming all kinds of things about me.

I hope you appreciate my contribution just as I appreciate yours, Milk and Honey’s, Czymra’s and Dakini’s.

avyaktam...I'll address what you've written and pasted here, but with the links and all that you've posted, it will have to wait until I have a bit more time to integrate your information.

Thanks to czymra's original question, I think this thread is a solid attempt to get to the heart of the problem we're faced with in the here and now/planet Earth 2009...which is, why are humans being coerced into a global and self destructive modality? Who, and what is behind this obvious state of affairs, what is their objective, how do they go about accomplishing this task on an etheric level (czymra's query), what do they gain from it and how do we put a stop to the process before there's nothing left of ourselves and/or the world we're visiting?

With that in mind and approaching 3000 views of this thread, it seems that more people would be interested in contributing their insight, because if this subject is as far out on the fringe as it appears to be...judging by the interest here, we may be in even worse shape than I had originally thought. In any event, bringing in the Baxter material, which definitely applies, but which is also explosive and potentially destructive to many of our conceptions of reality, was an attempt to push a few buttons and draw more minds into this discussion.

So...I very much appreciate that you have a button to push and that you've contributed. I think that you've spoken eloquently on the behalf of (at least, in these later pages of the discussion) Milk and Honey and Dakini. I agree with czymra, that much of what you've written appears to driven by semantics, but I also think that there's not so great of a distance between us as it may seem.

[sun-toon´]

Originally Posted by avyaktam

Let me start with my original post about defining and re-defining the Brahman concept....

He is the Maker and the world he made,
He is the vision and he is the seer;
He is himself the actor and the act,
He is himself the knower and the known,
He is himself the dreamer and the dream.
-Savitri

In this paradigm there is as you can see no place for an ‘outside’, as I tried to explain in my post above, although it leaves ample room for negations, oppositions, contradictions, ‘impossibilities’, etc.

avyaktam - If this true in any sense, then this what the Brahman says about the Brahman. How is this any different from what any of the "One God" entities say about themselves?

If you want to give energy to this, or these deities, that's your choice. Just by using these names you align yourself with archetypal patterns and every action which has ever been done in their names. I want nothing to do with any of it. Simply naming the primal energy of existence reduces our perception of it. To describe it in any way reduces it further. If we give it a face and talk to it, personalize it, pray to it, ask for assistance and blessings...all these actions help to co-create a force which is outside of ourselves, an entity which we are forming and shaping within our minds. I'm not saying that this is what you're doing with the Brahman...that would be an unfair assumption based upon what you've written, but it is what most people do with their gods.

So you want to believe that the Brahman = Prime Creator or Source Consciousness? Fine...have at it. Baxter, and some of us in this thread are asking questions as to whether this axiom is correct. Maybe it's semantics and they are the same, maybe not...but just the fact that the pantheon of lower deities claims integration with the Brahman, would indicate that there may be substance to the claim of an "outside". You question Baxter's ability to discern...she questions the ability of humanity to discern, and she has the hell that is the present earth to show as evidence for her case.

Source consciousness does not need adoration or worship, it doesn't need our return or ascension, it doesn't need anything. But, if that force is truly what we're made of, then we must be endowed with it's attributes. We are Mind and we are immortal. We're filling up eternity with experience. We create because we need a constant flow of novel experience to Be what we are...and we are co-creators of the universe. We're driven to act as source consciousness does. Through this fragmentation and the infinite iterations of that force, reality exists in both in it's structure and in all it's convoluted wonder.

So let's come back to Earth. What's wrong with this picture? Who has hijacked the bus? You fear to call it the Brahman, a name sacred to you, but you don't have a problem calling it by the names of the lesser deities.

Haste not towards Godhead on a dangerous road...

Yes...there's a warning for us. Don't step off of the proscribed path. Do not think outside of the box.
It is a dangerous path. My intuition tells me that many of us have put ourselves at great risk simply by coming into this realm at this time. If it takes another 25,000 years to escape it, or worse, so be it. I have to assume it was an informed decision.

Originally Posted by avyaktam

The discernment of what is good or bad, true or false, divine or undivine is one of our jobs here for which we can only find the answer within. We have a great freedom to choose every second what we accept and what we reject. Freedom is an essential attribute of this Manifestation, victory and defeat are possible at every turn. A challenging game, would’t you prefer that after a couple of billion universes. A future more interresting than a choir of harp playing angels.

Well, I'm with your there. It's no goal of mine to hang out on a cloud with with angels for eternity. Eternity is for adventure, and we're certainly having one here.

[RedeZra]

Originally Posted by sun-toon´

...I do not share your paradigm of a god who lives outside of myself, nor do I have much interest in the adoration of saints.

Source Consciousness is quite capable to project a God in the Heavens for the Sake of the Saints : )

Source Consciousness is like intelligent electricity Nature the flowing current Beings the bulbs to shine appreciate and express it
Some shine stronger than others less resisting its Source

Reality here in this metaphor is electricity Rest is fashion

[sun-toon´]

Originally Posted by RedeZra

Source Consciousness is quite capable to project a God in the Heavens for the Sake of the Saints : )

Source Consciousness is like intelligent electricity Nature the flowing current Beings the bulbs to shine appreciate and express it
Some shine stronger than others less resisting its Source

Reality here in this metaphor is electricity Rest is fashion

Or it works the other way around, with "saints" using the abilities inherent with source consciousness to project a god into the heavens due to some need of their own. Not being a saint, I have no need for the heavenly god, nor do I understand it.

Really, I think sentient beings create the god they need. They make it/Him exactly like they would be if they were god, based on the limits of the evolution of their consciousness. I can't tell if gods animate themselves out of the energy of the dreams of their believers, of if entities come along and align themselves with those thoughtforms, for the benefit of both the believers and themselves.

I like your analogy about the bulbs. Less resistence...

[RedeZra]

Originally Posted by sun-toon´

...Really, I think sentient beings create the god they need. They make it/Him exactly like they would be if they were god, based on the limits of the evolution of their consciousness...

Rings like truth to me

Source Consciousness comforms accommodates echoes and mirrors sentient beings level of awareness of It and gives guides and comforts accordingly

Say no to It and It echoes no no no
Say yes to It and It echoes yes yes yes

Saints are more aware of It
Supreme God is perfectly aware of It

Supreme God is acting from the full depth of Source Consciousness
Supreme God is like Source Consciousness - Being Aware Bliss
Supreme God is Omnipotent Omniscient Omnipresent

Omnipotent - Able to do everything and solve every knotty problem perfectly
Omniscient - Knows it All and Knows us better than ourselves
Omnipresent - Resides as the Essence of Everything

Supreme God is the I in all of us - the Alpha and the Omega of Everything
Surly He is worthy of adoration and worship