• From: The Singularity
  • Registered: 2005-09-23

Re: Creating One's Own Reality - The Deception Of The "New Age"

Poffo wrote:
tenetosce wrote:

For "true" YCYOR, I think we need to look to 10D, which is frankly quite outside my perception.  What I can say is this involves complete awareness, or omniscience.  Only from that level of awareness could one claim full responsibility for reality creation on all levels.

Hey tenetosce, any chance you could expand on that 10D concept as it seems to fit outside the traditional octave of densities as described by the sources that first made the idea available.  I think I may understand what you mean by 10D but it's probably slightly different.  I see the number 10 as a completion of the original cycle of 1 and 0 after going through the illusion of the numbers of 2-9 that lay between the original 1 and the resulting 10 at the end.  10 is simply a 1 and 0 and 1+0=1.  Are you saying that the manifested 1 as 10 is the "true" creator because of its inherent containment of all the illusory single digit numbers between 1 and 10?

I would describe it like this:

"In the Beginning" there was the Void (0), and the Creator (1).

The 10th dimension represents the unification of the Creator and the Void  Like you said, 10 = 1 + 0. 

The dimensions that we evolve in (2-9) are not illusory so much as they are not whole.  They are fractal dimensions, which is why they are holographic.

10D is a point as well, but it is a "post"-Creation point.  We can think if it as "Supreme" God with all of its infinite fractions having passed through the Void and reintegrated, in contrast to the "Creator" God from which everything came.  But really, it's not a "before" and "after" thing.  It is timeless.

So, in the very moment that the Creator God (1D) decided to make the universe, the Supreme God (10D) came into being, and appears to us as a force from the future moving backwards in time to this moment.

Kind of like the Oversoul of the Universe. 

Does that make sense?  I'm really straining for words here. .

It is not for us to understand love, but simply to make space for it.
  • Registered: 2005-12-20

Re: Creating One's Own Reality - The Deception Of The "New Age"

tenetosce wrote:

The 10th dimension represents the unification of the Creator and the Void  Like you said, 10 = 1 + 0.

Wow...thanks for that One.  You just helped me make a connection, !  10 is literally 1 and 0 united, and I think in "motion", whereas 1 and 0 as separate entity/non-entity are at the "beginning" of the complete cycle (ascending octave), containing the octave (law of 7) and the law of 3 (passive, active, neutralizing) and 1. 7 and 3 are 10, but with another 1 is 11.....what is 11? 

The dimensions that we evolve in (2-9) are not illusory so much as they are not whole.  They are fractal dimensions, which is why they are holographic.

Aren't they illusory because they are not whole? 

What do you mean by they are holographic because they are fractal dimensions?  I would like to know more but I have some troubles conceptualizing it, any more info would be great.

10D is a point as well, but it is a "post"-Creation point.  We can think if it as "Supreme" God with all of its infinite fractions having passed through the Void and reintegrated, in contrast to the "Creator" God from which everything came.  But really, it's not a "before" and "after" thing.  It is timeless.

So, in the very moment that the Creator God (1D) decided to make the universe, the Supreme God (10D) came into being, and appears to us as a force from the future moving backwards in time to this moment.

Kind of like the Oversoul of the Universe. 

Does that make sense?  I'm really straining for words here. .

Understandably as these are not really concepts that easily explainable in this format, let alone this realm and awareness level.  Telepathy would be a much nicer format.

I believe at this point that what you're saying makes sense and that makes me happy.  You have served muchly.  Good going.  I can foresee my future self checking your post again later to re-interpret the concepts better.  Being awareness in this illusion thing is just  getting crazy, I can't wait for what's next in the now!

It's official, I'm in love with Noble Realms.  It's the 1, consciousness of us being and becoming united, through the 0, the matrix of potentiality of internet and material life.  It nurtures the One by allowing for knowing itself better, in this case at an unusually high quality and speed.  For this realm anyway. The "ascension" is being born anew, the ascending path, pheonix from the flames, all that crazy esoteric archetypal stuff. wink  We've been given some clues, with a lot of crap in the way, but we're gonna be alright, he he. I think... Christ...The cosmos is pregnant....

  • Registered: 2006-12-08

Re: Creating One's Own Reality - The Deception Of The "New Age"

I decided to bring this up from the first page to clarify some things.

tenetnosce wrote:

1.  It is just a reincarnation of gnosticism which has some very interesting points but has problems as well.  Specifically I think the concept of a single evil "demiurge" is a cover for a race of negatively-oriented beings which seeks to control the planet.

2.  I think her cosmology is very fatalistic and leaves little room for hope or escape from the current situation.

3.  I just get bad vibes from the followers of Amitakh.  Seems a bit cultish to me.

Tenet i suggest you read her writings on the "eight evil minds" (on xeeatwelve) if you want to try to understand her explanation of the origins of evil. The reptilian anunnaki, the race of beings who i believe you are referring to, body's and concioussness's are creations of the evil, are not the source of the evil, but servants of the original evil concioussness/s that "rebelled" from the true creation and have imprisoned themselves and the true beings in matter. This "rebellion," from what i have gathered in my research, is an elaboration "classic" gnosticism.
I suppose fatalism is a good use of a word to describe many of her teachings and prophecies. Fatalism doesnt sound like a bad thing at all to me considering she promises that evil will be destroyed permanently. I dont understand what you mean by "little room for hope or escape from the curren situation." She vehemently promises that all beings of the true light whose willpower is aligned with good will be rescued and brought "home" to the existence of pure good, which contains no evil.
I consider myself a follower of the truth Amitakh reveals (the truth was only unlocked, it was in my heart to begin with), and have experienced name calling (based on my zeal i would presume) because i  have faith and KNOW in my heart  of much of what she says and try to attain and remain devoted to purity, which seems to frighten some beings.

montalk wrote:

This material may be just as imbalanced as the New Age movement it derides. The extreme dualism it expresses is no different from the overly simplistic system of judgment that fundamentalist Christians employ. No doubt Chiappalone and Amitakh can see things the average person cannot, such as the predatory nature of the Matrix and its demonic operators. But this material  demonstrates what happens when one accesses supernatural powers of perception without being mature enough to handle it without getting all fanatical, persecutory, contemptuous, self-righteous, and crazy eyed about it.

Your statement about fundamentalist christianity is simply not true, the two systems of judgement are very different. The judgement that Amitakh's writings implore (basing your judgement on the INTENTION of the person/action/thing/etc, using your heart to discern) is far different from the fundamentalist christian (the bible is the infallible word of god, anything opposing the bible is "satan", as well as basically adhering to the group mind rather than making a judgement yourself.).  Do you feel calling someone you disagree with or feel uncomfortable with "crazy-eyed" is "mature" behavior?

I did not post this to begin an argument, rather to address some open ended statements and remarks some of which are false.
I sincerely hope that anyone who resonates with the message of seperation from this evil reality based on suffering and exploitation, to return to the home of true love and goodness where NO evil exists, chooses to read her website xeeatwelve.com thouroughly and uses their heart to discern. Truth is above mind.

-Derek

  • From: Vicenza, Italy
  • Registered: 2006-10-05

Re: Creating One's Own Reality - The Deception Of The "New Age"

The Gnostic concepts can be used without the manichaean dualism.

And I think Montalk meant that the net and arbitrary distinction into a world of black-and-white is what is "no different" between the two. Having a couple different parameters in making the division isn't a world of difference.

For example, Fundamentalism and Manichaean Gnosticism compare thusly:

"Rapture" and salvation, i.e. leave the evil world of Moloch/Satan for "New Jerusalem", through certain "virtues" particular to the faith.

has the same mechanism as

"Gnosis" and retreat from matter i.e. leave the evil world of Samael/Yaldabaoth/"The Reptillians" for the "Pleroma", through certain "virtues" particular to the faith.

With different "virtues".

And different ways of justifying WHY WE ARE HERE IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Which to me seems the crux of any plan on how to "reverse the process".
The important thing in any system of judgement is that it be able to proccess situations for what they're worth. The two-category system (Nurturing or Noxious, Approach or Flee) is  the most primitive of living reactions. It is the first thing your mind (unconciously) does when presented with ANY new stimuli.

It is the most fundamental "handhold" or "loose string" that can be grabbed on to to push people around. How am I going to accurately judge the INTENTION of people/actions/things and categorize them all in evil/good? If you're psychic you can trust your heart, I guess. I'm not psychic. Any suggestions?

And would prime creator really create the evil from itself (it's gotta come from somewhere) to then ditch it?

God has cancer?

WTF?

Just about any system that has unity create dualism to then prefer either (+) or (-) leaves an unfinished equation.

Finding the "home of love and goodness where NO evil exists" is a first-circuit assgrab.   I never trust scare/safety or hell/heaven presentations.

Love is the law, love under will.
   
     Zejith Themis
      .:420-510:.
    FIAT IUSTITIA
    RUAT COELUM

Zejith_Themis's Website

  • From: Vicenza, Italy
  • Registered: 2006-10-05

Re: Creating One's Own Reality - The Deception Of The "New Age"

BTW that had no bearing on the actual material in question, as I have yet to start perusing the Amitakh material.

It was meant in general, I was ranting about dualist presentations in general.

I just reread it and realised how it sounded yikes

Sorry..

Love is the law, love under will.
   
     Zejith Themis
      .:420-510:.
    FIAT IUSTITIA
    RUAT COELUM

Zejith_Themis's Website

  • Registered: 2006-08-19

Re: Creating One's Own Reality - The Deception Of The "New Age"

thr33tim3 wrote:

This is an excerpt from a book I am currently reading that I have found to be very truthful and insightful regarding issues that had previously been very confusing, such as the New Age movement. Links to more material at the bottom.

"
CREATING ONE'S OWN REALITY

"The easiest thing of all is to deceive one's self; for what a man wishes he generally belives to be true."
Desosthenes 322B.C.

I have included the following extract from "Death of an Evil God" because I know it is very important.

The "in" thing with all those of the New Age (who are really all the old, evil robots and those whom they have managed to delude) is this spurious assertion: "People create their own Reality."
The Truth is that they certainly DO NOT!!!
Those who repeat this saying, "You create your own reality", are paraphrasing the Evil demigod who has said this through the channels such as "A Course In Miracles", Ramtha, Seth, Lazaris and many, many others.
This is nonsensical, for Reality cannot be recreated or manipulated by evolving consciousnesses at the level in which human consciousness find itself.
This is a spurious claim made by evil to appease people. In other words, in order to delude them, it tells them what they want to hear.
In the honesty and Truth of the Light, the claim is really as follows:
It is the Evil essence which assists individuals to create their own illusion!!!

Illusion is not Reality by any stretch of the imagination, not even for the ones convinced that the illusion they have created is reality.
For you see, as they live in their ILLUSION, they are affected not by the mechanism of their illusion which usually appears to be joyous and appeasing, but by the exploitative factors in the true reality which they have chosen not to perceive, once they have built their own illusion.
And that is why so many True Beings have been trapped and mercilessly exploited and spiritually assassinated.
Evil has often convinced beings to live an illusion of their making, while it went about physically, emotionally and spiritually destroying them. And through the agency of the spurious religious philosophies of the past and those of Ramtha, Seth, Lazaris, A Course In Miracles and others, evil has employed the same destructive mechanism.
"
- Making Sense Of The Madness, J. S. Chiappalone 1986


Annwn Publications: excerpts of J. S. Chiappalone material circa '86-'99:
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/prop … ntents.htm
Chiappalone's wife Amitakh, now Amitakh Stanford, writes currently at:
http://www.xeeatwelve.com
It is very provocative material but it rings true to me and I want to share it with others.
Peace
Tim

Though I agree with the author,  I dare say that the author has NOT provided proof on the true nature of reality creation to conclude how absurd it is to be able to create reality. I must also conclude that if the author is so close to the truth, he must be a god or something.

I know the dark demigod. There was an article called Realm Dynamics with his stench written all over it *checks my armpits*

He manipulates time and wraps crap around the few who those text books of the New Age beginnings were designed to trigger, just as the Sci Fi sublims and the sublims in various pop and alternative style music. triggering going on all the bloody time.

I really feared this selectivism to be true in 1987 when Marciniak came out. One has to follow the idea that certasin catalysts or subliminal or coded suggestions are designed for certain frequencies only. Hence, the group more likely to be interested in multidimensionality hold a relatively similar frequency range to the normal person. If filtering is happening, then the first phase of the New Age was aimed at only a certain few followers, whilst the books to the majority di nothing at all to their body mind matrix. Do a Google search on Nicholas De Vere and his fairy kingdoms stating the reasons why the fairies were marginalized.




Does the author tell how he met the demon god ?

The author reminds me of those magazine reporters of the 1960's who insisted that the newly discovered art of thousands of years old called Yoga, was nothing but a farce. Obviously, reporters find little time to do exercise to proove or disproove a singke thing. I suggest the author is playing an ego rush because he failed to still his mind.


Sorry, but this subject both scares me and excites the beast in me, because if the author is correct, enlightenment happens only to a few and the majority are really unteachable fodder. Sounds nice doesn't it. Maybe that's why they all hide. To maintain a relatively peaceful crop.

RED
BLUE
GREEN

Ganel's Website

52 Reply by derek (edited by derek 2006-12-22 13:31:12)

  • Registered: 2006-12-08

Re: Creating One's Own Reality - The Deception Of The "New Age"

Zejith, your questions about her writings about the origins of evil can be answered by reading, the eight evil minds piece on her website. Remember what she says in the first paragraph of the essay,

http://xeeatwelve.com/articles/eight_evil_minds.html wrote:

Hence, in this article my explanations of some very complex and esoteric issues are highly simplified. Further, analogies are used to try to make the explanations more understandable to the physical minds. Therefore, they will not be perfectly adequate explanations.

Remember to ALWAYS use your heart to discern. You do not need exceptional psychic abilities to sincerely ask in your heart and to sincerely listen.


zejith wrote:

And I think Montalk meant that the net and arbitrary distinction into a world of black-and-white is what is "no different" between the two.

I was commenting on exactly what montalk inferred with his short sentence which was false, and i felt i should address it. I briefly outlined both reccomended processes of judgement from both parties, showing that what he said is blatantly untrue.

Zejith, you should read her material, using your heart to discern the truth. You shouldn't make judgements about someones writing until you actually read it, though you seem to have understood and addressed that in your second post. I ask you this zejith, do you want to remain in a reality where evil, deaht, suffering, and exploitation exist, or would you prefer to live in a reality where there is truly unconditional love shared by all for eternity. This is a fundamental question you (and all readers) must ask yourself. Try to release your ego, and sincerely connect with your heart, and you will know the truth. Whether you trust in it or not, this "heaven" of eternal good exists and is where i came from, my heart has told me the truth.

As i said before i strongly suggest all readers adequetly read her xeeatwelve materials and use their hearts to ask and listen sincerely. If your spiritual origin is of the true light, and you are connected to your true self, your yearning will soon be fulfilled as we are rescued from this decaying reality and are purified and brought home. Only YOU can make the choice, and align your will. If you are truly interested and have not yet read Amitakh's writings i suggest reading "Jesus The Spiritual Warrior" located here: http://xeeatwelve.com/articles/jesus_warrior.htm , specifically the 99 sayings. As always use your heart to discern, and take jesus's advice, which is:

Do not take my words for a teaching. Always view them as a force in action uttered with a definite intent. They lose their true power if ever separated from that purpose.

I hope this writing has helped you, and all readers who appreciate it.

-----
Ganel, your questions can be answered by reading his writings on his website here : http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/prop … ntents.htm . You wrote:

I must also conclude that if the author is so close to the truth, he must be a god or something.

That is not true, he is not "a god" as you (sarcastically i assume) espouse. If you are interested in elaboration on his knowledge, read his website thouroughly.

-----

I forgot to mention in my comments about fatalism, that the divine rescue plan is a work in progress, therefor, based on the status of the mission, variables may change. The truth that IS fatalistic is that all true light beings whose wills are aligned with the light, are going to be rescued.

  • montalk
  • montalk
  • forum-keeper-upper
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2004-03-24

Re: Creating One's Own Reality - The Deception Of The "New Age"

derek wrote:

Your statement about fundamentalist christianity is simply not true, the two systems of judgement are very different. The judgement that Amitakh's writings implore (basing your judgement on the INTENTION of the person/action/thing/etc, using your heart to discern) is far different from the fundamentalist christian (the bible is the infallible word of god, anything opposing the bible is "satan", as well as basically adhering to the group mind rather than making a judgement yourself.).  Do you feel calling someone you disagree with or feel uncomfortable with "crazy-eyed" is "mature" behavior?

Just calling it as I see it. Reading the vibes of Amitakh's material reveals it to be crazy-eyed in the sense of being imbalanced and quixotic, intelligent yet off the mark, appealing to a naive crusader-like zeal that misses the subtleties and is therefore prone to making logical fallacies and false assumptions. It doesn't matter whether combative dualism comes from dogma or internal impulses, either way the absolute black-and-white interpretation applies binary logic to an analog world.

Let me show you an example from the Eight Evil Minds:

Amitakh wrote:

The most dangerous misconception about Evil is that It is believed to be necessary in order to balance the Light. This misconception actually justifies Darkness and is a deadly trap. It locks people into tolerating, and, worse still, embracing Evil, thus giving Evil the same glory and importance as Light. If that be the case, there would be no need to fight Evil, there would be no need to counteract Evil, and there would be no need to work on oneself towards Purity and goodness. If Evil were necessary to balance Light, then one's house should be open indiscriminately to marauders as well as friends at all times.

The fallacy starts with, "It locks people into tolerating, and, worse still, embracing Evil, thus giving Evil the same glory and importance as Light."  That is an example of being only able to see in the binary manner. In truth, believing that Evil is necessary does not allow tolerating and glorifying evil because, as I explained in my other post yesterday, if each has its place then any transgressions by  evil justifies hammering it back into its territory. What Amitakh is probably referring to here are those naive New Agers who allow themselves to be slapped around by their abusive spouses on the justification that they deserve it, and that to hinder the expression of others even if predatory is restricting an expression of the Creator. That idea is totally fallacious, but using this false idea to somehow justify the polar opposite leads to an equal and opposite fallacy. The third way, which is what I advocate, is not so simple, and is based on the ideas of freewill, balance, discernment.

As for discerning with the heart, well even the Christian fundies advocate acting from the heart. Even New Agers are into listening to the heart. Even the Nazis felt quivering in their hearts when gleefully envisioning their "glorious" future. What's wrong with all these? They are mistaking programming, chemical impulses, emotionalism, naive idealism, the internal predator licking its chops, the ego rubbing its hands together, for the true heart impulse. There is a difference between paying lip service to "using your heart" and proving it through one's words and actions. Real discernment comes through heart and intellect in combination, and in synch with the higher self and objective reality.

Preferring a positive reality where evil does not exist is a no-brainer, but does that alone fully justify combative dualism? Not a chance, because idealism is mere fantasy unless realizable, and as current conditions stand, evil exists because certain people choose to propagate or allow it. Evil starts with choice (the original Choice to reject the Creator) and ends with choice (the individual choice to disengage from committing or allowing it free reign in one's own life), yet even the personal choice to disengage from it does not require forcing its removal from others who still want it.

More examples:

Amitakh wrote:

Thus, it has taken extreme laboured efforts and Love for the Light to study Evil in order to gain sufficient understanding of Evil so that It can be effectively combated. Many people believe that love conquers all, but Love does NOT conquer all in this realm of Virtual Reality controlled by Evil. In fact, Love cannot conquer Evil in this evil creation. Love can only appear to conquer Evil in this Evil realm because Evil surreptitiously manipulates, suffocates, exploits and abuses True Love for Its own selfish purposes. It has often been observed that when Love no longer serves Evil's purposes, Evil can turn and reveal Its ugly face without remorse or conscience. It is only the viable True-Light beings who can be touched by True Love in this Virtual Reality.

Whoever says love conquers All, and fails in demonstrating it, has an incorrect idea of Love. What is their idea of Love? Probably smiling, caressing, allowing all others unconditionally to express themselves. That is not love in cases where it feeds evil, for then it is weakness and naivete. Real love is acknowledging your spirit evident in others and vice versa, and honoring the maximization of freewill in all others including yourself. Stopping someone from committing a freewill violation ultimately ends in greater balance even if their will is opposed, and that is an example of tough love. Effective love can only be achieved if love includes the idea of discernment, to use kind love and tough love where appropriate. Even then, people think discerning means love is no longer unconditional, but really conditional love is one where it is withheld out of ego judgments only, which leads to further imbalance, while love via discernment maximizes balance. Once you start with a false concept of "Love conquers All", you can use this to justify an equally false but opposite concept of "Love does not conquer All." Love does conquer all if you understand that Love is Light is Knowledge, that it's all wrapped up in one, and if any part is missing then it is not entirely love.

Things are not so simple, therefore a black-and-white perspective does not have proper resolution of detail to always make the right conclusions.

Acquiring fringe knowledge is like digging for diamonds in a mine field.

montalk's Website

54 Reply by derek (edited by derek 2006-12-24 00:50:31)

  • Registered: 2006-12-08

Re: Creating One's Own Reality - The Deception Of The "New Age"

Montalk-

Love is Light is Knowledge

That is a FALSE statement. Is knowledge of how to create suffering inducing viri love? Is knowledge of how to torture criminal suspects love? Is knowing the most efficient way to exploit the innocent love?
THEREFOR   Love = Knowlege   is NOT TRUE.
Im interested in hearing an explanation to how knowing the most efficient way to exploit the innocent can be considered "love?"

It is hard to pute unconditional love into a word definition, but "exploiting the innocent" DEFINATELY is not love.

Knowledge of certain things such as medicine can possibly be a tool of expressing love, but the knowledge itself is NOT the love.

All true beings understand and feel the unconditional love. This is a great piece on what true love is : http://xeeatwelve.com/articles/divine_love.htm , to anybody who is interested.

----

Once you start with a false concept of "Love conquers All", you can use this to justify an equally false but opposite concept of "Love does not conquer All."

Love DOES NOT CONQUER ALL. It is simply true. Take for example being mugged in the street. Is punching the mugger in the face a sign of unconditional love? Perhaps it could be the appropriate thing to do, but it is surely not showing the mugger love. Do you punch your wife/mother/dog to show love? There is a difference between expressing love, and properly reacting to evil.

----



I just pointed out the most obvious false statements, i plan on writing a more detailed response later tonight or tommorow or  sometime in the near future (edit).

I have a question for you to ponder and perhaps respond to in the meantime,  What purpose does evil serve? Does evil exploit unconditional love? Is the virtual reality evil? I remember reading you write that, the VR is controlled by "demonic" beings, so, Why is it "neccesary" that we suffer at the whim of thes "demons"?

55 Reply by Blue (edited by Blue 2006-12-22 16:28:04)

  • Blue
  • Thank you Tom
  • Offline
  • From: The bottom of my heart
  • Registered: 2006-07-10

Re: Creating One's Own Reality - The Deception Of The "New Age"

derek wrote:

Once you start with a false concept of "Love conquers All", you can use this to justify an equally false but opposite concept of "Love does not conquer All."

Love DOES NOT CONQUER ALL. It is simply true.

Confused by your reply.

Love is the absence of fear. fear is the opposite of love (not hate).

Knowledge is the opposite of ignorance. Ignorance is not evil, it is lack of knowledge.

Negative acts, created whilst knowledgeable and in the state of love, are not only abhorrant, but impossible.

Love = Light . Light = Knowledge.

What you term evil is just ignorance.
TPTB on this world manipulate us, we are intrinsically good, but tested beyond our means by supernatural powers.

We are all aspects of God. ALL of us.

Blue's Website

  • From: Vicenza, Italy
  • Registered: 2006-10-05

Re: Creating One's Own Reality - The Deception Of The "New Age"

Derek - perhaps you are confusing Information with Knowledge?

Information would be knowing of the "hooks" by which folk can be manipulated, it becomes knowledge when used with wisdom, otherwise its "intelligence" in the military sense of the term.

Knowing the logical fallacies (information) i can either use said info to persuade folks to my benefit (infowar - psyops) or "immunize" people from sophism (sharing knowledge)

In both cases the info I have is the same, get it?

On the mugging note, ever heard of tough love? Ever had to help someone who didn't realise they needed it? Maybe a catastrophic failure for the mugger is what they need to re-evaluate their path?

This cut-and dried view I keep hearing gives me some VERY bad vibes. I have no info with which to underscore this impression, I'm just following my heart...

Blue >> Sounds like Socrate's view there. I tend to agree on a profound level. I also have this concept of "not mixing the planes" that lets me SEE the other point of view, while not letting it become THE point of view... There's ignorance and there's choices. This ties in with the comments I made in #49

Love is the law, love under will.
   
     Zejith Themis
      .:420-510:.
    FIAT IUSTITIA
    RUAT COELUM

Zejith_Themis's Website

57 Reply by Ganel (edited by Ganel 2006-12-23 12:22:03)

  • Registered: 2006-08-19

Re: Creating One's Own Reality - The Deception Of The "New Age"

Love= the creative act via emotive will.
Light= the vehicle, tool of creativity.

I followed a book, i studied the common principles in magic and found the same expression of energy with love/will and events are created. hence my vision of love and light without the witchery still creates amazing results. Thought creation. that is the only balanced love I know.

You guys sure know your stuff. nice thread this.

RED
BLUE
GREEN

Ganel's Website

  • Registered: 2006-11-12

Re: Creating One's Own Reality - The Deception Of The "New Age"

Montalk wrote:

Things are not so simple, therefore a black-and-white perspective does not have proper resolution of detail to always make the right conclusions.

From our limited 3d perspective it might be better to consider the duality love-hate (from fear?) as at right angles (a different dimension) from truth-lies and joy-suffering. As an example: recently I was at a performance where a musician was singing and playing a guitar with complete ecstasy; I could feel his joy from his performance radiating from him. Then I started listening to what he was singing; it was all about blood and rape and death. He was full of personal joy but speaking lies and spreading hate. Think of the Nazi rallies where thousands of people, in paroxysms of joy, dedicated themselves to atrocious evil. Beauty is not always truth (at least not here) and "good" may be a mixture of love, joy and truth. Maybe that's part of the "discernment" we're supposed to learn.

We're all butterflies flapping our wings and changing the world.