Sandy
08-03-2001, 03:25 PM
--- in asc2k@y..., "mawk" <mawk109@o...> wrote:
>
> hi sandy,
>
> i would like to thank you for providing that very interesting post
on "the
> dangers of channeling". my concern with the article though is that
it does
> not point a "seeker" on to a positive path.
you are right, mawk. the sinister side of the new age is but one
chapter of a book offering a complete solution.
this book may be downloaded for free at:
http://www.tfel.global.net.au/ctabook1.htm
>in fact, for those who have
> limited experience in things metaphysical, the article could
instill fear
> and discourage a potential seeker.
yes, it may well do. i am sorry if that happened for anyone here.
>further, if someone has already been
> lured off their path the article/post does not provide any
solutions. i
> would therefore humbly like to address what i perceive to be these
> deficiencies based on my limited experience.
>
> so the first question to answer is "who does one trust?" from my
experience
> the question is usually resolved by the unconditional giving test.
that is
> the person or institution will freely provide their information or
aid with
> absolutely no strings attached. of course the cost maybe subtly
disguised
> and a classic example of this is the feeding of another's ego, this
was
> eluded to in your post.
was that a rhetorical question, then?
> the next question is am i being empowered or disempowered? this
question
> should also be mirrored to the person or institution providing the
guidance.
> a true guru/mentor will relish the fact that his student may
eventually
> supersede him or her. the tibetan buddhists are one group who seem
to
> embrace this philosophy.
yes, i agree. love just wants the very best for everyone.
>strangely the impetuous for me to explore this
> issue came about by reading winston churchill's series of books
titled "the
> history of english speaking people". what intrigued me about the
2000 year
> history that the series of books covered was the cyclical nature of
who had
> power (i.e. the church, the monarchy, the parliament e.t.c.).
>
> i personally do not like being constrained to one guru or
institution.
this is the aquarian consciousness/disposition, as opposed to the
piscean.
>this
> may change in the future but the information can be found now with
out
> having to be aligned to a particular group or individual.
well, perhaps it always was available, but is easier to find today
for the earnest seeker due to the grace of the times?
>my intuition tells
> me that this may be one such place. certainly david has provide an
> incredible wealth of information with no strings attached!!
yes.
> before one can even start the spiritual quest a process of looking
at ones
> belief structures is paramount. i found ingo swann's site excellent
for
> entertaining the possibilities of my potential. he maintains
through all his
> essays that everyone has the potential to get in touch with the
higher
> aspects of themselves. the only thing that holds people back is
their belief
> structures. he has a great term for this called consensus
realities. if you
> look at his articles you will find his explanations.
thank you.
<snip>
> it took me 3 months to work out that the bulk of the information
was about
> self defense. i finally realised that there were three levels.
cheers,
>
> mawk
with regard to self-protection/defense, may i proffer this list the
following:
protection against evil
q. do you also experience aggression from the invisible worlds? how
to protect ourselves?
a. always. but the clouds pass swiftly because i do not struggle with
lucifer*, but instead - and in understanding well the nature of this
world and the law of cause and effect - i ignore him. "resist not
evil." - jesus.
* - lucifer: personification of collective ignorance/evil.
it is not wise to think in terms of "protection". what part of your
self (the one life that is god) do you feel that you need to protect
or segregate yourself from? remember, love is the greatest protector
and benefactor for all. love requires no protection; it does not
think in this way. only fear thinks in terms of protecting itself,
hence, since like attracts like, fear opens itself wide for lucifer's
attack.
there was once an abbot of a tibetan buddhist monastery who decided
to clairvoyantly observe two of his monks as they took part in a
public chanting. he watched as the first monk, realising that he was
surrounded by the dense and desirous thought-forms of the general
public, created an astral and etheric shell around himself which
appeared like a very fine crystal auric field and prevented anything
of a lower vibration from entering his personal consciousness.
the abbot then turned his penetrating gaze upon the second monk. he
noticed how this other monk, in his selfless devotion, had a pure
white vertical link with divine realms through his crown chakra as he
was simultaneously radiating a beautiful pink and blue light all
around himself, blessing others in the group yet without necessarily
being conscious of such a positive side effect of his devotions.
the abbot concluded that the second monk was actually far better
protected and much more advanced in his methods of chanting and
worship than the first.
the abbot would have concluded thus because personally-constructed
protective fields are limited in that they are only effective in
proportion to the personal development of the individual who creates
them, and they last only as long as the personal will of the
individual has the strength to maintain them. whereas the second type
of 'protection', being fed by inexhaustible divine energy, would have
been infinitely more powerful and not prone to wane as long as the
monk held fast to his selfless devotion which, as far as the sincere
personality is concerned, is as relatively effortless as it is joyful.
union is harmony and strength. but before we can qualify for group-
communion with the fellowship of god's angels and so thereby partake
in all the ineffable advantages of such divine solidarity, we must
prove our worth alone and in darkness. this is what isaiah was
speaking of when he wrote about "the treasures of darkness".
as long as we cannot love (accept) lucifer unconditionally as well as
everything else in divine creation, we shall necessarily invoke him
as our teacher, especially at this time of the quickening. evil is
grace, if we would but see it.
s
>
> hi sandy,
>
> i would like to thank you for providing that very interesting post
on "the
> dangers of channeling". my concern with the article though is that
it does
> not point a "seeker" on to a positive path.
you are right, mawk. the sinister side of the new age is but one
chapter of a book offering a complete solution.
this book may be downloaded for free at:
http://www.tfel.global.net.au/ctabook1.htm
>in fact, for those who have
> limited experience in things metaphysical, the article could
instill fear
> and discourage a potential seeker.
yes, it may well do. i am sorry if that happened for anyone here.
>further, if someone has already been
> lured off their path the article/post does not provide any
solutions. i
> would therefore humbly like to address what i perceive to be these
> deficiencies based on my limited experience.
>
> so the first question to answer is "who does one trust?" from my
experience
> the question is usually resolved by the unconditional giving test.
that is
> the person or institution will freely provide their information or
aid with
> absolutely no strings attached. of course the cost maybe subtly
disguised
> and a classic example of this is the feeding of another's ego, this
was
> eluded to in your post.
was that a rhetorical question, then?
> the next question is am i being empowered or disempowered? this
question
> should also be mirrored to the person or institution providing the
guidance.
> a true guru/mentor will relish the fact that his student may
eventually
> supersede him or her. the tibetan buddhists are one group who seem
to
> embrace this philosophy.
yes, i agree. love just wants the very best for everyone.
>strangely the impetuous for me to explore this
> issue came about by reading winston churchill's series of books
titled "the
> history of english speaking people". what intrigued me about the
2000 year
> history that the series of books covered was the cyclical nature of
who had
> power (i.e. the church, the monarchy, the parliament e.t.c.).
>
> i personally do not like being constrained to one guru or
institution.
this is the aquarian consciousness/disposition, as opposed to the
piscean.
>this
> may change in the future but the information can be found now with
out
> having to be aligned to a particular group or individual.
well, perhaps it always was available, but is easier to find today
for the earnest seeker due to the grace of the times?
>my intuition tells
> me that this may be one such place. certainly david has provide an
> incredible wealth of information with no strings attached!!
yes.
> before one can even start the spiritual quest a process of looking
at ones
> belief structures is paramount. i found ingo swann's site excellent
for
> entertaining the possibilities of my potential. he maintains
through all his
> essays that everyone has the potential to get in touch with the
higher
> aspects of themselves. the only thing that holds people back is
their belief
> structures. he has a great term for this called consensus
realities. if you
> look at his articles you will find his explanations.
thank you.
<snip>
> it took me 3 months to work out that the bulk of the information
was about
> self defense. i finally realised that there were three levels.
cheers,
>
> mawk
with regard to self-protection/defense, may i proffer this list the
following:
protection against evil
q. do you also experience aggression from the invisible worlds? how
to protect ourselves?
a. always. but the clouds pass swiftly because i do not struggle with
lucifer*, but instead - and in understanding well the nature of this
world and the law of cause and effect - i ignore him. "resist not
evil." - jesus.
* - lucifer: personification of collective ignorance/evil.
it is not wise to think in terms of "protection". what part of your
self (the one life that is god) do you feel that you need to protect
or segregate yourself from? remember, love is the greatest protector
and benefactor for all. love requires no protection; it does not
think in this way. only fear thinks in terms of protecting itself,
hence, since like attracts like, fear opens itself wide for lucifer's
attack.
there was once an abbot of a tibetan buddhist monastery who decided
to clairvoyantly observe two of his monks as they took part in a
public chanting. he watched as the first monk, realising that he was
surrounded by the dense and desirous thought-forms of the general
public, created an astral and etheric shell around himself which
appeared like a very fine crystal auric field and prevented anything
of a lower vibration from entering his personal consciousness.
the abbot then turned his penetrating gaze upon the second monk. he
noticed how this other monk, in his selfless devotion, had a pure
white vertical link with divine realms through his crown chakra as he
was simultaneously radiating a beautiful pink and blue light all
around himself, blessing others in the group yet without necessarily
being conscious of such a positive side effect of his devotions.
the abbot concluded that the second monk was actually far better
protected and much more advanced in his methods of chanting and
worship than the first.
the abbot would have concluded thus because personally-constructed
protective fields are limited in that they are only effective in
proportion to the personal development of the individual who creates
them, and they last only as long as the personal will of the
individual has the strength to maintain them. whereas the second type
of 'protection', being fed by inexhaustible divine energy, would have
been infinitely more powerful and not prone to wane as long as the
monk held fast to his selfless devotion which, as far as the sincere
personality is concerned, is as relatively effortless as it is joyful.
union is harmony and strength. but before we can qualify for group-
communion with the fellowship of god's angels and so thereby partake
in all the ineffable advantages of such divine solidarity, we must
prove our worth alone and in darkness. this is what isaiah was
speaking of when he wrote about "the treasures of darkness".
as long as we cannot love (accept) lucifer unconditionally as well as
everything else in divine creation, we shall necessarily invoke him
as our teacher, especially at this time of the quickening. evil is
grace, if we would but see it.
s