PDA

View Full Version : What Role Technology?


David Dodson
04-08-2003, 05:30 AM
This is a question of great concern for me recently. I will say from the outset
that for the longest time I have believed that technology in the hands of the
ignorant society could prove to be the death of this era of humanity. I still
believe that, but I question which perspective I say that from. Allow me to
explain.

[the following is very subjective and should not be regarded in anyway as
universal fact but merely the metaphor for reality as I have come to understand
it]

The 3D world is where we have been sent to understand the mistakes of our past
through either experiential correction, or karmic fugue. Now experiential
correction allows ones receptivity to the many layers of universal understanding
to be broadened. Conversely, karmic fugue is the the downward spiral into the
orphaic realm of self hatred.

Perhaps the phrase self hatred seems harsh, a bit over the top, an ill advised
assumption, but consider this. To repeat the same mistakes over and over again
to the infinity of phi decimals, is beyond the mere excuse of ignorance. Sure
we are talking repetition through lifetimes, and scientifically there's no way
we can say that people 'know' the mistakes of their former lives, but in my
opinion, to assert a path of reincarnation without minimal soular memeory
retention, seems quite useless. Reincarnation would seem to require, for
purpose, that even if we are not receptive to them, these memories lie dormant
inside of us.

[A little unneccessary tangent here, which I am only writing because it does me
no good to keep it in my head. I wonder how much David has studied the mistakes
of Cayce. Not the predictive mistakes, but the blemishes in his personality,
spiritual errors, etc. I personally do not know of any, but I'm no Cayce
expert. I ask because, if David is indeed a reincarnation of Cayce he has the
unique privilage of being able to study the mans life thoroughly. In so doing
he may learn those two things which Cayce was wrestling with in his lifetime
which required he be born again into David's. End of tangent.]

So, if we are choosing through our incarnations to deny our past mistakes,
requiring that we repeat them again, on a soular level it indicates a
dissatisfaction with ourselves. It's like when you're mad at yourself and you
bang your hand on the wall, and you keep banging it until it hurts. It is our
souls, and instead of banging our hand, we plunge ourself into the same life
cycle (incarnation) over and over again, repeating the same mistakes over and
over again until it hurts. It's not sucidal (though technically we do push
ourselves to our own deaths), you just don't want to feel this way about
yourself anymore.

[This is probably not the half way mark and I'm realizing how far this is going
to take me, and I know that there are many items for debat up to this point, and
I don't want this to get into a debate about my opinions. Still I'm wordy, and
want to be clear about the ideas that I'm presenting so please forgive me if I
seem dogmatic in anyway as that is not my intent. In fact my intent with all of
this is actually to present a question to you for which I am unclear of an
answer. I think I said as much in the first paragraph, but perhaps my tangents
have thrown you off track. Bear with me please I promise I'll get there.]

Now to flip from the universal to the social, we are now in a social paradigm
which exploits our soular instability, for material gains. A paradigm has been
devised which keeps people confused about the source of their distress. It
urges that all experiences have a physical root cause, and as such the science
of religion prevails. And where it is inadequate to deal with our soular
issues, the cycle continues.

Move this from an individual level to a more global one and you realize that
this planet is a home to billions of disstressed souls, so incarnated to serve
the material plane. Taking this to be true, the level of overpopulation that we
are now experiencing is itself a statement of the soular condition of the
universe.

And so these billions of souls are banging their hands away, creating this wave
of global pain which is pushing the threshold of our tollerance. Those who have
constructed the social paradigm have very successfully hidden our soular pains
from us on some level. So we continue banging away at the wall almost
instinctually.

There are a few of us who are more conscious of our banging, and make that
conscious effort to stop banging, but even we slip every now and then. It is
like a good rhythm which of course relates to frequency and rhythm. With the
whole globe banging the same rhythm, it becomes difficult for you not to
harmonize, even if the globe is out of tune.

This is the mechanism of our demise. The sheer inertia of the paradigm
indicates that on a global level we will continue to bang away untill all that
is left are our bloody knuckles. Taken out of the metaphor, we will arrive at
the pole shift without the awareness to see it as the culmination of our
collective mistake and opportunity for global repair.

[That last sentence is rather profound. Rather profound indeed]

But there is time left.

Yes there is time left. And indeed in time the events which we are experiencing
right now that seem so horrible, are exactly what is needed soularly, as they
provide the grounds for correction. As these things persist, daily more and
more people are starting to notice their hands banging. They may not be able to
stop it but just being able to notice is what is needed, because if you can
recognize it at the time of shift, you can act upon it.

Okay but lets bring this back around to technology so I can ask my question.
See the problem with computers are that we are only equipped to feed them our
own confusion. Because of this they too bang their 'hands' but at a speeds
beyond human comprehension. As such they have become a tool for the hand
banging under the guise of global communication.

But what if it were not so? What if there were so to speak a soular computer
which was attached to the global network, and began counteractive measures which
helped humanit and the computers we created begin recognizing their hand.

This is my question. I ask because I believe it is possible to build such a
'computer' but worry about reprecussions I cannot forsee. So I ask you all to
ponder over this and advise. Would you build the soular computer? Why or why
not?

Wonderful as always to be able to share these thoughts of mine. Hope this
message reaches you in good health and spirit.

incarnations...
DPLD

Be careful... one day you will have to accept the truth.

waterflame5
04-08-2003, 12:55 PM
--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=PiWJfz6uPqr0RIHhM8UDVrCOgjwvv3nUX71c-52jfuIPt60tlC3tSdp8WX1KUgm87caI6lwKncS578Bb9A), David Dodson <incarnateisa@e...> wrote:
> Would you build the soular computer? Why or why not?
> Wonderful as always to be able to share these thoughts of mine.
> Hope this message reaches you in good health and spirit.
> incarnations...
> DPLD
> Be careful... one day you will have to accept the truth.

Hi David,

Technology and repetition.
Maybe part of our problem
is that we are technology,
biotechnology...that the
non-living technology we
take joy in is simply crude
creativity that gives us a
taste of the problems of
creation - trade offs. It
seems you fix one problem
then create another and so
on.

The boredom in repetition
is alleviated by variation,
which reduces to a universal
principle of art, alternation.
Can the internet alleviate
boredom?

Is the internet a start to the
generation of a soulcomputer?
If people write to each other
so much that they start to
transcendentally connect - then
maybe they don't need internet
after a while - they become
connected, sharing energies
without words...maybe that is
part of our biotechnological
purpose, knowingly or not.

Transcendentally,
Pat

Jeremy Weiland
04-23-2003, 09:19 AM
Hi David,

I really enjoyed this post :-) and wanted to save it
and wait till I had the time to give it that it
deserved. I know you don't want to debate (believe
me, I don't want to go throught that again either) but
maybe you would appreciate some feedback. If nothing
else, I need the opportunity to manifest my reaction
to such profundity.

> I will say from the outset that for the longest
> time I have believed that technology in the hands of
> the ignorant society could prove to be the death of
> this era of humanity. I still believe that, but I
> question which perspective I say that from. Allow
> me to explain.

To me, technology is merely a form of power, from a
spiritual point of view. The difference is that, in
our society, this power doesn't derive from a very
sophisticated understanding of self, so it's use is
very coarse and undirected. It makes normal human 3D
experience more intense - and in that way is another
function of the energetic buildup we're experiencing
here on earth.

> The 3D world is where we have been sent to
> understand the mistakes of our past through either
> experiential correction, or karmic fugue. Now
> experiential correction allows ones receptivity to
> the many layers of universal understanding to be
> broadened. Conversely, karmic fugue is the the
> downward spiral into the orphaic realm of self
> hatred.

I understand that this is your opinion and I respect
it, but I must say it is much darker than my outlook
on life. For example, the idea of our experience in
3D being an excercise in self-hatred is accurate, I
believe. I guess it's a matter of perspective, given
that belief: what is the motive for such a choice of
experience?

The idea of self-hatred seems to be that of the
uncontrolled, disordered, unrealized individual - the
concept of distortion. What I mean is, it seems like
a major part of the 3D excercise lies not only in not
accepting the self but not knowing the self, to put it
in Ra's terms (sorry). And what you have to ask
yourself is whether that distortion is a wise choice
or a mistake.

For me, personally, when I was a student of A Course
in Miracles I proceeded on the basis that our
experience of limitation and unrealization is a
mistake to be corrected. But why would an initially
perfect, complete, and loving entity make a mistake?
How would it be possible to do that which is "wrong"
or "unintended" if that entity was all that is? There
would be nothing it could do that would not be
unknown.

When I started studying Ra and the idea that this
experience of limitation was not only chosen but it
was also part of a discrete functionality within a
larger experience, it was, as D.W. describes it, "like
slipping on a pair of old shoes". Basically, it makes
sense that, if I accept the premise that I once
existed in a state of unity and omnipotence,
omniscience, and complete potential, and if I were
"everything", there could have been nothing "outside"
of me to make me a victim of some terrible "mistake".
A mistake would imply an incomplete knowledge of my
own nature.

Conclusion: this 3D excercise in the denser
experiences was *chosen*. And within that paradigm, I
can accept the harshness of this experience because I
can be assured that there's more to my daily life than
what I immediately see. Because let's face it, my 3D
life in and of itself is pretty goddamn meaningless.
:-) I say that both jokingly and seriously.

> Reincarnation would seem to require, for
> purpose, that even if we are not receptive to them,
> these memories lie dormant inside of us.

I agree - because if you are accepting the premise of
reincarnation, you're accordingly accepting the idea
that our experience and potential is WAY more than we
understand right now - specifically, that our identity
and functionality stretch past the normal boundaries
of 3D experience, including those of time. And
because this illusion is based in finity, the veiling
must be limited in some way - it cannot be absolute.
In fact, the only thing that must be absolute is unity
and our own existence (which might be getting too
philosophical - sorry). Everything else is open to
negotiation.

> I wonder how much David has studied the mistakes of
> Cayce. Not the predictive mistakes, but the
> blemishes in his personality, spiritual errors,
> etc. I personally do not know of any, but I'm no
> Cayce expert. I ask because, if David is indeed a
> reincarnation of Cayce he has the unique privilage
> of being able to study the mans life thoroughly. In
> so doing he may learn those two things which Cayce
> was wrestling with in his lifetime which required he
> be born again into David's.

Good tangent. Check out:
http://ascension2000.com/intro.html
if you haven't already. This will give you an idea of
how David understands the Cayce incarnation and the
lessons from it and what it means for him and his work
now.

I would also stress that while I think it's helpful
that he has a documented, concrete past life to
research and learn from, it's probably his psychic
abilities that make the understanding truly
comprehensive. Know what I mean? I mean, it's that
connection, that bridge of experience between lives
that makes that past life phenomena able to be
actualized in our current life - without that, it's
just a really cool theory.

> So, if we are choosing through our incarnations to
> deny our past mistakes, requiring that we repeat
> them again, on a soular level it indicates a
> dissatisfaction with ourselves.

Only if we regard them as mistakes. In Ra's
philosophy it is not so regarded.

> It is our souls, and instead of banging our hand, we
> plunge ourself into the same life cycle
> (incarnation) over and over again, repeating the
> same mistakes over and over again until it hurts.

Yes, but the question is what is the purpose for this?
Is it to correct the mistakes, or is it to learn from
the experience? I think it's a combination as far as
the here and now on earth is concerned.

> It's not sucidal (though technically we do push
> ourselves to our own deaths), you just don't want to
> feel this way about yourself anymore.

I'm sure 3D limitation gets old for the true self
after awhile.

> Now to flip from the universal to the social, we are
> now in a social paradigm which exploits our soular
> instability, for material gains.

If I were to express a very similar idea on my own
terms, I would say we have a social paradigm by which
a group of individuals exploit the soular instability
of a group of individuals, seemingly for material
gain. And if I were to express that idea, I would
follow it up with the contention that the exploitation
is about more than material gain - it is about
negativity, illusion, or the philosophy that self is
all (STS).

> A paradigm has been devised which keeps people
> confused about the source of their distress.

But it is not a paradigm that was "unchosen"... is it?

> It urges that all experiences have a physical root
> cause, and as such the science of religion
> prevails. And where it is inadequate to deal with
> our soular issues, the cycle continues.

I'm not sure that the paradigm is a prerequisite for
an individual to deal with soular issues. But as we
abstract out to the human collective, I agree. But to
talk about the collective as the motor of 3D is mixing
terms IMHO - the prime mover of 3D existence is the
individual. It is the premise upon which 3D
experience rests, both positive and negative.

> Move this from an individual level to a more global
> one and you realize that this planet is a home to
> billions of disstressed souls, so incarnated to
> serve the material plane. Taking this to be true,
> the level of overpopulation that we are now
> experiencing is itself a statement of the soular
> condition of the universe.

Is it? I realize you don't desire to defend your
statements but you might want to consider why you hold
this belief.

> And so these billions of souls are banging their
> hands away, creating this wave of global pain which
> is pushing the threshold of our tollerance. Those
> who have constructed the social paradigm have very
> successfully hidden our soular pains from us on some
> level. So we continue banging away at the wall
> almost instinctually.

Wait a minute. If anybody is hiding my pain away from
me it is *me*. Society might make it easy but it is
ultimately my decision to think and discover self, or
to ignore myself and not think. Speaking for myself,
I refuse to be a victim.

> There are a few of us who are more conscious of our
> banging, and make that conscious effort to stop
> banging, but even we slip every now and then. It is
> like a good rhythm which of course relates to
> frequency and rhythm. With the whole globe banging
> the same rhythm, it becomes difficult for you not to
> harmonize, even if the globe is out of tune.

Thus the concept of the wanderer is introduced, i.e.
an entity here to raise the frequency and rhythm by
their very nature as higher density agents.

> This is the mechanism of our demise. The sheer
> inertia of the paradigm indicates that on a global
> level we will continue to bang away untill all that
> is left are our bloody knuckles. Taken out of the
> metaphor, we will arrive at the pole shift without
> the awareness to see it as the culmination of our
> collective mistake and opportunity for global
> repair.

I don't understand. How can you posit ultimate
oneness, unity, and peace, and reconcile that with
such a victimized approach? I *chose* this "mistake".
I must have faith that I am not self-destructive. I
must believe that, in my truest, most complete
consciousness, I have the ability to determine my
fate. If I do not, then all the understanding in the
world will not make me happy. And I will only operate
within a paradigm in which it is possible for me to be
happy.

> See the problem with computers are that we are only
> equipped to feed them our own confusion. Because of

> this they too bang their 'hands' but at a speeds
> beyond human comprehension. As such they have
> become a tool for the hand banging under the guise
> of global communication.

To me, they seem to serve the exact same function as
the rest of experience. If they increase the rate at
which conflict is possible, then they increase the
speed of experience and ultimately hasten the
enlightenment that is inevitable.

> But what if it were not so? What if there were so
> to speak a soular computer which was attached to the
> global network, and began counteractive measures
> which helped humanit and the computers we created
> begin recognizing their hand.

Our souls, in touch with a larger identity than that
we assume in 3D, are just such a device IMHO. What
you're asking is to be conscious of the process - that
requires learning the operation of the device: in this
case, learning to work with the soul and the nature of
the higher energies and planes.

But it still always hinges on choice, as you are about
to observe.

> Would you build the soular computer? Why or why
not?

This is, to me, basically the question of whether or
not you are going to change the premise on which you
operate. Whether you are going to accept the premise
that there is more to you than what you now conciously
know, and that that "more to you" is worth learning
about. Whether you are going to use the soul
(computer) you already possess or not. Technology,
I've heard it said, is merely the forebearer of those
abilities we will possess later in our evolution (for
example, telecommunication is the predecessor of
telepathy. We seek out the technology to learn about
how to deal with our future natural abilities that are
actualized. The paradigm, the pattern for the very
pursuit of the technology rests in our acknowledgement
of those abilities in potential).

Thanks for starting such an interesting conversation.
I hope you found my ideas worthwhile.

Jeremy

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com