Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 65

Thread: on being true to oneself

  1. #1
    Petrus Guest

    Default on being true to oneself


    although this has happened a few times before and we've ended up resuming
    things, this evening, to quote david's analogy about the buddhist monk, i
    finally got tired of being hit. ironically, on this particular occasion i
    actually literally was hit...my girlfriend threw a plastic bottle at me
    which hit me in the face. i was glad she did though, as that gave me the
    necessary push to finally end things conclusively. she tried to talk me
    into resuming things, but i was adamant. irrespective of all the other crap
    i've put up with her, i'm not going to accept it becoming physical. in her
    mind there is such a double standard as well...she'd probably call the
    police if i'd hit her, but because she's the female, she is supposedly
    allowed to.

    i'm finally realising i think that there is a limit to sto behaviour, and
    that sooner or later a controlled amount of beneficial sts is necessary.
    the way i'm also looking at it though is that if she threw something at me
    she was obviously feeling sick of things herself, and therefore by ending it
    i'm actually helping both of us.

    i'd like to possibly enter into another relationship in the future, but i
    have a lot to learn about self-worth first, i think. i also need to enter a
    period of fairly intense constructive sts as well, as even within this
    relationship, my economic situation was precarious; outside of it, i'm going
    to be doing well keeping a roof over my head.

    of course, my gf is claiming i'm the worst human being alive for doing this,
    and i'm trying not to take too much notice of that. i had some trouble
    psychologically with what david was saying about action being a "luciferian
    force," but i'm hoping that if i do it in a controlled way and try to avoid
    harming others with it, that it won't cause problems. i do at least need an
    income, and getting a property that i either own or can at least rent
    reliably would also be good. i don't want to take over the world...at the
    moment i just want to survive, which is actually a change. there were times
    not long after i got into this recent relationship where i felt suicidal...i
    actually *want* to advance myself now.


  2. #2
    David Wilcock Guest

    Default RE: on being true to oneself


    from: asc2k@yahoogroups.com [mailto:asc2k@yahoogroups.com] on behalf of
    petrus

    >although this has happened a few times before and we've ended up resuming
    things, this evening, to quote david's analogy about the buddhist monk, i
    finally got tired of being hit. ironically, on this particular occasion i
    actually literally was hit...my girlfriend threw a plastic bottle at me
    which hit me in the face. i was glad she did though, as that gave me the
    necessary push to finally end things conclusively.

    dw: i consider this to be a very important step for you. some of your
    previous letters have sounded dangerously codependent, and these types of
    situations rarely ever improve. in fact, the person who instigates the
    majority of the conflict seems to only intensify their behaviors with time,
    not relax. my ex actually got so over-the-top that she literally called 911
    while we were having an argument and i was standing up for myself and the
    right to keep doing this spiritual career, and she told them she was a
    "victim of domestic abuse." when they asked her if she was being physically
    threatened, she said no, and after a few more questions they basically told
    her to deal with it. nonetheless i saw the massive potential that this
    volatile situation had to completely ruin my life. the legal system is
    highly reactionary and i have seen people cook up blatant lies for revenge -
    both men and women.

    in my own case, the nightmare truly began with sabrina getting hit by a car
    and almost dying, then coming home with a right-brain injury and
    yelling/screaming at me a minimum of 2 hours a day. i was so exhausted and
    out of my body that i ended up lacerating myself with a drinking glass i was
    carrying into the kitchen late at night while we were fighting. i fell and
    caught the glass on the countertop on the way down. this was a very
    aggressive confirmation of how far i was being driven. i knew that this type
    of bloody accident did not occur if your karma was clean, and just in trying
    to stand up for myself (once i finally cracked under the pressure) i
    undoubtedly had become heavily involved.

    i remember being so warped in this thing that i actually felt some relief
    that i had a bloody accident, as finally this might make her have some
    sympathy for how much her abuse was injuring me - not just that she was the
    one with the damaged body and i was just care-free and easy, with not a
    concern in the world. it is true that i was able to use this accident to say
    that "the yelling and screaming has got to stop, as this whole thing has
    gotten so insane that the karma we are creating is literally going to kill
    us, just like it almost killed you last year."

    i would also say, throughout that whole last year, very calmly but
    definitively, "you do realize that i am going to leave you. we have very
    different expectations of our partners based on two diametrically opposite
    upbringings. i was raised by hippie intellectuals and you were raised by
    fundamentalist christians. we both say we're hip new age people, but when we
    are pushed into a corner, we revert back to the way we were raised as "the
    way things are done."

    "neither of us are right or wrong, but this is just how we have been
    conditioned to think. my mother turned burping into a hilarious game where
    we would verbalize nonsensical words or even sentences - you think even
    hearing it at all is disgusting. i was forced to constantly clean the house
    - your mother cleaned up after you and you still leave messes i consider to
    be intolerable everywhere. the whole time you've lived with me you've only
    ever made your bed when i demanded it - and if i say nothing you can
    literally end up leaving a two-foot-high mound of blankets and pillows on
    the bed, right out in the open for all to see, all day long. and the list
    goes on and on and on.

    "the bottom line is that these basic differences in how we prefer to live
    are what make or break a relationship. neither of us are willing to
    compromise an inch on these core principles. you don't want to make your
    bed; i don't want to stop focusing on my work; you don't want to speak to me
    like a normal human being when you get angry; i do not want to raise my
    voice at you even if you are yelling. you think it's ok to throw things like
    a child when you get mad; i just put my shoes on and leave the house as soon
    as you start acting up and it drives you crazy.

    "you do realize that this is not going to work out. we tried it, we've lived
    together, we've been through all this, but it's not going anywhere. i know
    you think you have nowhere else to go, but you are an adult and you can take
    care of yourself. i am not going to continue playing these games with you;
    my soul is tired and my body is weak and the drama is making it impossible
    for me to eat, sleep or even breathe without wondering when we are about to
    explode again. our intimate life has completely collapsed, and i don't see
    that ever changing, so i really think we need to call it quits."

    then, after something like this (and this is a shortened version of the
    kinds of essays i would go through) there would be the obligatory teary-eyed
    "new promises" conversation. if i focused on one thing, like making the bed,
    then she might make it once or twice... but you end up continually returning
    back to this place of complete, grinding dysfunction. eventually you wake up
    and realize something fundamental:

    serving others does not mean doing everything they ask. sometimes the best
    way to help someone is to hold up the mirror to them. if they are
    consistently abusing you, then your own energy field is being kept in
    darkness, and you are not contributing much to the ascension of humanity on
    the vibrational level. you have to be in a state of peace and gratitude in
    order to truly be "online" for the planetary ascension team, to directly
    contribute your own higher energy to humanity. as absurd as this sounds,
    this is the main thing that wanderers are here to do. your most important
    assignment is "to radiate the realization of oneness with the creator"
    because of how that affects the whole planet, vis- *-vis the maharishi
    effect.

    you can't do your job, which is to peacefully and joyfully seek your own
    evolution and share that realization with others, if you are mired in drama
    all the time. you may be trying to please the other person, do what they
    ask, make them happy, and think that only then will you be happy, but in
    fact you are "enabling" abuse and manipulation to continue. you are not
    providing an adequate mirror to the person that allows them to see how their
    behavior is affecting others. you are failing in your primary responsibility
    to keep communication open in a relationship. and you are forcing the
    universe to come up with other means to blast them with karma since you are
    not contributing your own fair share. the situation gets worse and worse
    until something outrageous happens. be glad that this plastic bottle did not
    cause a physical injury of any consequence.

    >she tried to talk me
    into resuming things, but i was adamant. irrespective of all the other crap
    i've put up with her, i'm not going to accept it becoming physical. in her
    mind there is such a double standard as well...she'd probably call the
    police if i'd hit her, but because she's the female, she is supposedly
    allowed to.

    dw: no, you absolutely should not accept it becoming physical. each new
    offense that you "allow" only further raises the ante. if you allow yourself
    to be hit, you will be hit again. if you allow the other person to throw
    things, the next time they will throw bigger things and more of them.

    we all want to espouse an ideal of 'true love' and 'working through it,' but
    according to a strict law of one interpretation, the idea of a legal
    contract marriage is the aftereffect of sts tampering with human social
    institutions. spiritual partnerships should last for as long as both people
    find them beneficial and uplifting - even in the case where children are
    involved. there is no purpose in spending months and months, or years and
    years, arguing over the same little square of turf as if suddenly someone is
    going to change.

    if you are the one doing all the changing, and the other person keeps making
    all the rules, and the rules keep changing as you try to adopt them into
    your routine, then you do need to realize that you are stuck in a game that
    cannot be won. each new "rule" will only further strip you of your dignity
    and ability to function, and continue to serve the other person's ego needs
    and desires more and more - and you have a chaotically unbalanced
    relationship.

    part of why francine and i are doing the "show me how to be a man" cd is
    that there are many, many women, in a variety of countries (and this
    includes my japanese ex, yumi,) who 'just know' that they are 'not getting
    something' from their male companion but they do not know what it is.
    strangely the more you try to do what they demand, the less interesting you
    become, because they are now the "mother" and you are now the "child."

    you will probably see this for yourself in this situation... as soon as you
    start standing up for yourself, displaying some masculine archetypal energy
    and saying "that's it... you are interfering with what i want to do with my
    life and i won't put up with it any more", you become a lot more interesting
    to them. this is the ickiest aspect of this that keeps dragging you back in
    over and over again. you stand up for yourself, grow a backbone and suddenly
    she "loves" you again. and the drama restarts from scratch.

    >i'm finally realising i think that there is a limit to sto behaviour, and
    that sooner or later a controlled amount of beneficial sts is necessary.

    dw: aagh! petrus... petrus... petrus... with all due respect, up until this
    brief glimmer we see here, you have had no idea what sto and sts really are.
    your law of one scholarship is sorely, sorely lacking in this crucial area,
    because you are reading your own assumptions about "good" and "bad" behavior
    into a philosophy that does not agree with what you are saying.

    you cannot judge what these paths mean by simply reading the words "service
    to others" and "service to self". these are shorthand descriptions of
    something that is far more complex - ra just used very simple words to
    approximate what each path is about, so as to have a label that could be
    used more easily. we've been telling you this over and over again and you're
    only barely starting to figure it out - and only when it finally gets to a
    point that you are being violently attacked!

    you are not serving others by letting them walk all over you and abuse you.

    you are not engaging in the negative path by standing up for yourself.

    again: "sts", i.e. "service to self," in the law of one definition as a
    negative path, means the deliberate control, manipulation, deception and
    betrayal of others for the blatant benefit of the self. at other points in
    the material, ra attempted to boil all of this concept down to the word
    control. within this same definition the positive path was the path of
    acceptance.

    look... if you want to really study law of one, and not just hang out with
    cool and enlightened people, then you must know that the material teaches us
    that we unify the positive and negative polarities - acceptance and control.
    the negative path is not to be avoided - it is to be experienced, understood
    and integrated, making you a complete person who accepts and becomes the law
    of one. this only begins to occur in fifth-density, but by sixth-density it
    is fully in place. this does not mean that 5d and 6d entities will
    manipulate and betray; it does mean that they have learned how and when to
    take control, and not just "accept" everything as is.

    sixth-density entities, like your own higher self, will break your bones,
    slice your flesh, bring disease and degenerative conditions and even kill
    your physical form, as required, to uphold karmic law and keep you in
    balance. ignorance is no excuse for the law. the higher self will carry out
    these functions knowing that it is what is required. yet we just call it
    "karma" and do not attack our higher self for being "service to self." it is
    just what is done to keep you on track. this is way more control than we are
    allowed in third-density by the law of free will, but it does serve to
    illustrate the point. these higher self behaviors are not "sts" - they are
    precisely what is required.

    we live in a very highly structured "matrix" that only appears to be
    composed of random events. these events are, in fact, highly scripted for
    karma to be kept in balance, and very few people really understand this.

    you have very deep, subconscious judeo-christian biases that seem to take a
    literal interpretation of jesus' way of martyrdom and turning the other
    cheek as being the ultimate truth. again, though the reptilian brain may
    hiss in horror at this law of one principle, jesus was basically said to
    have lacked wisdom in his self-martyrdom. this was holding him back from
    being able to evolve into fifth-density. i am not reading my own bias into
    the material here; that is what it says.

    it is true that if you have a genuinely negative person who is not
    'ascension compatible,' the big turnaround into self-martyrdom can be a
    large enough swing to achieve graduation. that appears to be part of the
    intent for why jesus squeaked in at the last minute of the cycle to give us
    this lesson, knowing that it would be distorted into a religion. lots of
    people were not going to make it and this created an archetype that allows
    people in this category to make a very big shift in a very short time.
    offering one's own life like that is a very powerful sacrifice that can undo
    lifetimes of karma in one fell swoop.

    however, petrus, you and everyone else here are not a predominantly negative
    person. i can't think of anyone on this list who is clearly not already
    ascension compatible. you do not have enough negativity to benefit from
    self-martyrdom. you are working a higher path of the integration of
    polarities, not the slavish worship of the "service to others" path and the
    paranoid fear of the "service to self" path. you have all the philosophical
    underpinnings in place to elevate this discussion beyond such a simplistic
    focus.

    >the way i'm also looking at it though is that if she threw something at me
    she was obviously feeling sick of things herself, and therefore by ending it
    i'm actually helping both of us.

    dw: absolutely. stop worrying about whether you are sto or ascension
    compatible, and just deal in reality. this situation is not going to work
    out with the two of you together. almost everyone is being given challenges
    like this because it makes you so much stronger and wiser to work through
    them. you have not done the work if you keep clinging and clinging as it
    gets worse and worse.

    >i'd like to possibly enter into another relationship in the future, but i
    have a lot to learn about self-worth first, i think. i also need to enter a
    period of fairly intense constructive sts as well, as even within this
    relationship, my economic situation was precarious; outside of it, i'm going
    to be doing well keeping a roof over my head.

    dw: dude... just drop the sts and sto stuff. for real. it is not serving
    you. as the law of one says, paraphrased, "to learn something without
    teaching it is almost completely without value." by your excessively loose
    definition of sts, teaching could be 'self serving,' because you think you
    have something to share that others would want to hear. take it from a
    well-read scholar... you're not getting what the negative path is really
    about. i actually consider it self-indulgent to be so myopic as this.

    it is, in a sense, another form of selfishness to be so focused on your own
    spiritual evolution that you try to create this artificial reality box where
    any self-worth or self-caring behavior is the enemy. you have become
    poisoned into inactivity and ineffectual behavior by your zeal for ascension
    and enlightenment. paradoxical, but true, in my holy opinion.

    i feel like i have to kick your @$$ because you're only just starting to do
    it for yourself, and it is ever-so painful to watch this from the outside
    and shout at you through the glass, hoping that once in a while you will
    actually look at your own reflection- in the eyes of another.

    it is your responsibility to pursue economic stability. you may have only
    had a few human incarnations here and you would love it if you could just
    float freely through the world without having to worry about such things.
    nonetheless, there is a reason for why you came here, with a human body that
    needs clothing, feeding, shelter and companionship. so get some masculine
    archetypal energy going and start thinking about what you can do to improve
    your situation - all across the board.

    >of course, my gf is claiming i'm the worst human being alive for doing
    this,
    and i'm trying not to take too much notice of that. i had some trouble
    psychologically with what david was saying about action being a "luciferian
    force," but i'm hoping that if i do it in a controlled way and try to avoid
    harming others with it, that it won't cause problems.

    dw: again you contort the words. i did not say that "action is luciferian."
    i did say that the benefit of the corrupt, negative force we see here on
    earth is that it inspires movement and growth. so even in its perverse,
    unhealed, unhinged form, the negative path creates benefit for humanity by
    blowing out "comfort zones" and encouraging people to go beyond their own
    limitations and change.

    stop worrying about whether you are a "bad boy" or not and f=ing take some
    responsibility, man! you owe it to those you serve, in the greater good
    sense of the term, to be in a balanced, peaceful, financially stable and
    uplifting configuration in this lifetime. you have to pay in some pain to
    get there, but it is attainable.

    >i do at least need an
    income, and getting a property that i either own or can at least rent
    reliably would also be good. i don't want to take over the world...at the
    moment i just want to survive, which is actually a change. there were times
    not long after i got into this recent relationship where i felt suicidal...i
    actually *want* to advance myself now.

    dw: good. the suicidal ideation shows how backwards this line of reasoning
    is, and how much it needs to fall away with wisdom.

    don't worry about trying to own property now - that's probably an
    unreachable goal. i know from personal experience that i got through four
    years of college in the dorms, never having lived on my own, and when i got
    out of college and was living with my mom, i was terrified of getting a job
    and paying rent, joining 'the system.' yet my mother became so abusive, in
    not allowing me to stay home, that i felt i had no choice but to leave. i
    was sick to my stomach, i went through extreme, abject terror, but i did it
    anyway. i quickly discovered that being responsible for myself with a job
    felt far better than living under a dictatorship.

    it is amazing, though, how much we fear freedom.

    thank god you're starting to break free of the illusion.

    peace be with you -

    - david


  3. #3
    Petrus Guest

    Default Re: on being true to oneself


    >kinds of essays i would go through) there would be the obligatory
    teary-eyed
    >"new promises" conversation.

    oh yes! we went through that.

    in terms of how i got into this mess though...i was living with my parents
    (this was in early 2003) and the immediate family basically imploded. we'd
    had relatives commit suicide and dying left and right, an uncle had recently
    gone to jail for an incident involving one of my cousins, (his niece) there
    were a lot of issues surrounding my father having repeatedly engaged in
    infidelity where my parents' marriage was concerned, as well as basically
    destroying things economically (we lost a former house, and had to move to
    one of the worst parts of melbourne) via being in amway, and the upshot of
    all of it was that my mother was attempting suicide on a semi-regular basis,
    and the rest of us were barely keeping our heads above an ocean of alcohol
    and other substances. i'd known my current gf for a year at this point;
    we'd sort of been friends, but if i was honest it was primarily that i'd go
    to her place for a few hours every now and then simply because it was less
    traumatic than being at home.

    anyway, dad came into my room one day and basically went completely nuts.
    he essentially wanted me out of the house so that he could start the process
    of getting into another relationship. i also know that he wouldn't probably
    have done that if he hadn't thought i'd had anywhere else to go...but there
    was already a question about whether or not i was in a relationship with
    sheena, (my now ex-girlfriend) and so i'm fairly sure he thought i could
    simply move in with her. he didn't technically kick me out...i volunteered
    to leave...but that's really like talking about a situation where someone is
    either fired from a job or "voluntarily resigns." there were a couple of
    times afterwards where i wanted to move back home, but didn't, primarily
    because i felt like i was doing what dad wanted in staying with sheena.

    the single main reason though why i've dragged my feet so much in leaving is
    because the relationship was initially good for me; apart from anything
    else, it gave me the space to radically change my belief system, which of
    course included finding this list. i'm also worried that once sheena leaves
    the picture my father is essentially going to rush back in to fill the void
    where dominance is concerned, or try to. if i'm honest, the single main
    reason why i've stayed in the relationship is because i've found sheena's
    dominance more tolerable than my father's, if only incrementally. the other
    reasons why i've tried to hold onto the relationship is because i'm autistic
    and neurologically disabled in a few other different ways, and have also now
    completely lost my teeth...so physically speaking anywayz, i'm not exactly a
    prize catch. i have had to look at the idea that after leaving this one, i
    may genuinely be unable to obtain another relationship whether i want to or
    not.

    >if you are the one doing all the changing, and the other person keeps
    making

    i have been. the reason why the illusion in this respect has been so
    compelling is because they've generally been changes that i did genuinely
    need to make...but whenever i've tried to ask her to change, it either
    hasn't happened, or has temporarily. the only permanent change she's made
    has been to incrementally tone down the level of aggression she used to use
    with me at the beginning of the relationship.

    >become, because they are now the "mother" and you are now the "child."

    the relationship with sheena was never one between equals. i basically
    latched onto her because i felt like my parents had ditched me, i was still
    massively freaked out by all the other crap that had happened in the family,
    and i felt like i didn't have anybody else. she has known that, and has
    tried to take advantage of it.

    >negative path, means the deliberate control, manipulation, deception and
    >betrayal of others for the blatant benefit of the self. at other points in

    at times i've suspected that, but i think my tenure in amway screwed up my
    thinking in that regard as well...from the point of view that for a while
    anyway amway caused me to believe that there was no way to help myself (at
    least economically) without inevitably screwing someone else. i've got to
    the point now though where i feel like i have to try whether that is true or
    not. i also know that it isn't completely true anyway, though.

    >the negative path is not to be avoided - it is to be experienced,
    understood
    >and integrated, making you a complete person who accepts and becomes the
    law
    >of one. this only begins to occur in fifth-density, but by sixth-density it

    the thing is, i actually thought i'd done that. a three year chemical
    smorgasbord with a backdrop of angel and 9/11 was certainly enough to make
    me feel as though i'd integrated my negative elements...i guess that was
    unbelievably presumptuous.

    >any self-worth or self-caring behavior is the enemy. you have become
    >poisoned into inactivity and ineffectual behavior by your zeal for
    ascension
    >and enlightenment. paradoxical, but true, in my holy opinion.

    you're right. leaving amway caused me to develop the attitude that even if
    i was dirt poor i could still be happy because at least i'd feel that i was
    doing the right thing. i need to try and dump that as well.

    >and paying rent, joining 'the system.' yet my mother became so abusive, in
    >not allowing me to stay home, that i felt i had no choice but to leave. i

    well, that's another problem. i'm turning 29 in a month, and i've got a 9th
    grade education and no prior employment experience. i've managed to learn a
    lot of net and computer related stuff in the last ten years, but it's all
    self-taught and informal...hence, the kind of stuff employers couldn't care
    less about. anywayz, i'm going to have to figure it out.

    you've helped a lot.


  4. #4
    Tobey Wheelock Guest

    Default Re: on being true to oneself


    on sun, jan 08, 2006 at 11:38:35pm -0500, david wilcock wrote:
    > you have very deep, subconscious judeo-christian biases that seem to take a
    > literal interpretation of jesus' way of martyrdom and turning the other
    > cheek as being the ultimate truth. again, though the reptilian brain may
    > hiss in horror at this law of one principle, jesus was basically said to
    > have lacked wisdom in his self-martyrdom. this was holding him back from
    > being able to evolve into fifth-density. i am not reading my own bias into
    > the material here; that is what it says.

    this comment is much like another that was posted about a month ago:
    on fri, dec 09, 2005 at 01:03:03pm -0500, david wilcock wrote:
    > 1. jesus being a 4d wanderer who was not quite able to let go of the
    > self-martyring / codependent aspects that would have allowed him to ascend
    > to fifth-density understanding.


    while it is certainly true that martyrdom lacks wisdom, and that
    martyrdom may not be the highest or purest course for any given
    incarnation, there doesn't seem to be any basis in the law of one
    material for saying that jesus's martyrdom held him back from evolving
    into fifth density, or that he was unable to let go of codependent
    aspects that would have let him ascend. perhaps there is such a basis;
    if so, please point me to it.

    what i have found, instead, seems to affirm that jehoshuah/jesus
    completed the task for which it/he incarnated (session 84), and that
    it/he is now in fifth density (session 17).

    this quote, from session 84, seems especially relevant:
    questioner: the instrument asked the following question: ra has
    implied that the instrument is on the path of martyrdom, but
    since we all die are we not all martyred to something, and when,
    if ever, does martyrdom partake of wisdom?

    ra: i am ra. this is a thoughtful query. let us use as exemplar
    the one known as jehoshua. this entity incarnated with the plan
    of martyrdom. there is no wisdom in this plan but rather
    understanding and compassion extended to its fullest perfection.
    the one known as jehoshua would have been less than fully
    understanding of its course had it chosen to follow its will at
    any space/time during its teachings. several times, as you call
    this measure, this entity had the possibility of moving towards
    the martyr's place which was, for that martyr, jerusalem. yet in
    meditation this entity stated, time and again, "it is not yet
    the hour". the entity could also have, when the hour came,
    walked another path. its incarnation would then have been
    prolonged but the path for which it incarnated somewhat
    confused. thusly, one may observe the greatest amount of
    understanding, of which this entity was indeed capable, taking
    place as the entity in meditation felt and knew that the hour
    had come for that to be fulfilled which was its incarnation. it
    is indeed so that all mind/body/spirit complexes shall die to
    the third-density illusion; that is, that each yellow-ray
    physical-complex body shall cease to be viable. it is a misnomer
    to, for this reason alone, call each mind/body/spirit complex a
    martyr, for this term is reserved for those who lay down their
    lives for the service they may provide to others. we may
    encourage meditation upon the functions of the will.

    l/l,
    tobey w.


  5. #5
    David Wilcock Guest

    Default RE: Re: on being true to oneself


    from: asc2k@yahoogroups.com [mailto:asc2k@yahoogroups.com] on behalf of
    tobey wheelock

    > while it is certainly true that martyrdom lacks wisdom, and that
    martyrdom may not be the highest or purest course for any given
    incarnation, there doesn't seem to be any basis in the law of one
    material for saying that jesus's martyrdom held him back from evolving
    into fifth density, or that he was unable to let go of codependent
    aspects that would have let him ascend. perhaps there is such a basis;
    if so, please point me to it.

    dw: right... in my copious spare time... with boxes and upheaval surrounding
    me at every turn as i am knee-deep in the midst of moving....

    i did glance through my self-annotated copy of book one and saw that yes,
    the entity jesus fulfilled the mission that it had chosen. i am very keen on
    not making errors in how this material is presented, and making a clear
    differentiation between what the original texts say as opposed to what my
    own ideas and / or readings may have added - as i would hope would be the
    case for everyone else, including carla and her q'uo material - so i thank
    you for pointing out an error in my own understanding.

    while the judeo-christian subconscious bias towards martyrdom has been
    extremely problematic for a large majority of wanderers, the martyrdom was
    chosen in this entity's case, and therefore did not retard his 5d progress.
    so in generalizing how it does not work for the average person, i remembered
    that this path for jesus "lacked wisdom" while forgetting that it also said
    it was still right for him in this one very unique instance.

    if i had more time i would dig up the quote where it said that martyrdom
    lacks wisdom because it removes further opportunities for service. trust me,
    after counseling more than 500 paid clients and performing readings, this
    has become perhaps the biggest problem with wanderers today. there is no way
    that i am ever going to support self-martyrdom for evolving beings. real
    human beings are nowhere close to the level of purification of love and
    acceptance that the entity jesus came in with, nor are they on any
    singularly messianic mission.

    the reason why we were given the law of one series, in my own opinion, is
    that we now have a system in place that allows us to really work on
    sixth-density / law of one levels of integration. martyrdom is one of those
    behaviors that falls away as you go higher up the levels of density. many
    wanderers have brought in great information to help overturn this; the
    "codependent no more" book by melody beattie - the standard text for
    codependents anonymous - is very obviously a product of a divinely inspired
    wanderer trying to ameliorate many distortions, and is of inestimable value.


    peace be with you -

    - david


  6. #6
    Tobey Wheelock Guest

    Default Re: on being true to oneself


    in asc2k@yahoogroups.com, "david wilcock" <djw333@i...> wrote:
    > i did glance through my self-annotated copy of book one and saw that
    > yes, the entity jesus fulfilled the mission that it had chosen. i am
    > very keen on not making errors in how this material is presented, and
    > making a clear differentiation between what the original texts say as
    > opposed to what my own ideas and / or readings may have added - as i
    > would hope would be the case for everyone else, including carla and
    > her q'uo material - so i thank you for pointing out an error in my own
    > understanding.

    i hear you and agree about the importance of clarity, for all of us.


    > if i had more time i would dig up the quote where it said that
    > martyrdom lacks wisdom because it removes further opportunities for
    > service. trust me, after counseling more than 500 paid clients and
    > performing readings, this has become perhaps the biggest problem with
    > wanderers today.

    found the quote, in session 75:
    questioner: the chink then, as i understand it, was originally
    created by the decision of jesus to take the path of martyrdom?
    is this correct?

    ra: i am ra. this is, in relation to this instrument, quite
    correct. it is aware of certain over-balances towards love, even
    to martyrdom but has not yet, to any significant degree,
    balanced these distortions. we do not imply that this course of
    unbridled compassion has any fault but affirm its perfection. it
    is an example of love which has served as beacon to many.

    for those who seek further, the consequences of martyrdom must
    be considered, for in martyrdom lies the end of the opportunity,
    in the density of the martyr, to offer love and light. each
    entity must seek its deepest path.

    while i don't have david's experience with client readings, i can affirm
    that the urge to martyrdom is one that must be carefully and prayerfully
    evaluated, as ra suggests that jesus/jehoshuah himself did. in session 4,
    ra said that part of learning to heal at this time on our planet is
    learning "the balance between love and wisdom in the use of the body in
    its natural functions." any time you're balancing love and wisdom,
    you're probably not choosing martyrdom.

    l/l,
    tobey w.


  7. #7
    E. Drake Guest

    Default RE: Re: on being true to oneself


    david wilcock <djw333@...> wrote:

    <snip> "i am very keen on not making errors in how this material < the loo >
    is presented, and making a clear differentiation between what the original texts
    say as opposed to what my own ideas and / or readings may have added - as i
    would hope would be the case for everyone else"

    __________________________________________________ ___________

    drake: bravo. statements such as these are truly hallmark to opening doors,
    opening discussion, opening dialog, and opening further study into "the law of
    one" , and thus our understanding, our primary task here, as surely no man may
    lay claim to usurping this understanding, or conversation thereof, of an
    esoteric search such as is the one we are on.

    at very best, and only in sincere diligence, and this in the shadows of faith
    only, may we here in 3d minimally hope for glimpses in periphery, and that
    through a finite understanding, to that which lies solely within the domain of
    infinity. dogmatism, conversations in stone, and the refusal to search as
    consequence, as though truth is already found, and thus claiming irrefutable,
    unilateral understanding as though authority, ultimately always plants the seeds
    of the beginning of the opening doors to infinity of slipping gently away as
    though the very wisp it always was.

    grasping it is delicate, fragile, and can only be done by not claiming any
    portion of righteousness about it, lest the very thing held dearest would leave
    ones reach forevermore.

    faithfully,

    drake


    ---------------------------------
    yahoo! photos
    ring in the new year with photo calendars. add photos, events, holidays,
    whatever.

    [non-text portions of this message have been removed]


  8. #8
    David Wilcock Guest

    Default RE: Re: on being true to oneself


    from: asc2k@yahoogroups.com [mailto:asc2k@yahoogroups.com] on behalf of e.
    drake

    david wilcock <djw333@...> wrote:

    <snip> "i am very keen on not making errors in how this material < the loo
    > is presented, and making a clear differentiation between what the original
    texts say as opposed to what my own ideas and / or readings may have added -
    as i would hope would be the case for everyone else, including carla and her
    q'uo material."

    __________________________________________________ ___________

    drake: bravo. statements such as these are truly hallmark to opening
    doors, opening discussion, opening dialog, and opening further study into
    "the law of one" , and thus our understanding, our primary task here, as
    surely no man may lay claim to usurping this understanding, or conversation
    thereof, of an esoteric search such as is the one we are on.

    dw: right on... but we're still going to moderate this list, i.e. the
    "conversation thereof", exactly as it is spelled out in the guidelines!

    (drake and i have history... behind the scenes... regarding moderation, and
    it caused me a great deal of emotional stress this autumn while i was in la-
    which he is aware of. few people have ever complained about our moderation
    in as much detail and with as much persistence as has drake - he is
    certainly our record-holder for 2005! i'm not sure that we will ever really
    agree on this issue, which is fine. arguments about moderation should be
    kept strictly private between the arguer and the moderators. each guideline
    was installed as a direct response to various negative attacks that we have
    endured since we started out in 2000.)

    in a case like this, when there's a history that is this substantial, and
    one person's actions were able to upset me that much, our audience deserves
    some context. otherwise people don't really know the reasons for why certain
    people might say certain things.

    it is interesting how much drake's prose reminds me of the wording of the
    masonic rituals, which i have been reading as i work through duncan's ritual
    monitor of freemasonry each night before bed. i guess that could be
    construed as a compliment. jabulon, my friend! now you've just got to
    understand that the lodge must be tyled if we are to have a discussion...

    peace be with you -

    - david


  9. #9
    E. Drake Guest

    Default RE: Re: on being true to oneself


    david wilcock <djw333@...> wrote: david wilcock
    <djw333@...> wrote:

    <snip> "i am very keen on not making errors in how this material < the loo >
    is presented, and making a clear differentiation between what the original
    texts say as opposed to what my own ideas and / or readings may have added - as
    i would hope would be the case for everyone else, including carla and her
    q'uo material."


    drake: bravo. statements such as these are truly hallmark to opening doors,
    opening discussion, opening dialog, and opening further study into
    "the law of one" , and thus our understanding, our primary task here, as surely
    no man may lay claim to usurping this understanding, or conversation
    thereof, of an esoteric search such as is the one we are on.

    <snip> dw: drake and i have history... behind the scenes... regarding
    moderation,

    <snip> dw: i'm not sure that we will ever really
    agree on this issue,

    drake: we are already agreeing. i honor your statement deeply to "staying keen
    to the material" and 'searching for error and correction', as did even ra
    themselves. this is grand to be sure, and not always the easy task.

    <snip> dw: it is interesting how much drake's prose reminds me of the wording
    of the masonic rituals, which i have been reading as i work through duncan's
    ritual
    monitor of freemasonry each night before bed. i guess that could be construed as
    a compliment. jabulon, my friend! now you've just got to understand that the
    lodge must be tyled if we are to have a discussion...

    drake: "jabulon" to you in turn my friend. "the secret name revealed" is
    indeed our path and search. for some it is a substitute for a less than perfect
    life, weary of hardship and worry, and a better one hoped for. for others,
    seemingly content and happy to carnal eye, abundant with health and wealth,
    family and love, and blessed with much, feel it as perhaps not a longing for
    substitute, but perhaps explained otherwise and better as a summoning, an
    unrelenting one, a nudge and pull, almost maddening at times, and one that begs
    and demands be answered if dared ignored.

    both paths are as legitimate as is the other. both are to be honored. let us
    then continue this, the sacred search, and this the sacred walk, and tyle the
    ground we walk in deeper understanding together. my prose, as you shared
    privately, has once before reminded you of carla's, and now yet again of masonic
    ritual. i honor both compliment deeply, as i do us, and our growth together. i
    shall always be in truth to the search, the walk, the work, our path, and honor
    the straight line. let us continue in the task of honesty, each to the other,
    and all to ourselves, the higher road, the truer way, and honor the straight
    line. we have grown, as has the work in consequent result.


    faithfully,

    drake










    sponsored links
    astronomy gift astronomy magazine material science astronomy
    telescope astronomy star name astronomy book

    ---------------------------------
    yahoo! groups links


    visit your group "asc2k" on the web.

    to unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    asc2k-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

    your use of yahoo! groups is subject to the yahoo! terms of service.


    ---------------------------------






    ---------------------------------
    yahoo! photos
    got holiday prints? see all the ways to get quality prints in your hands asap.

    [non-text portions of this message have been removed]


  10. #10
    Abrient Guest

    Default Re: on being true to oneself


    i'm not a doctor, and i don't play one on tv. but i'll put this out
    there petrus, and see what you think.

    the first distortion, in all creation, is free will, and it is
    possible, to be too attached to the "effects" of sto or sts, when
    truly it is a matter of intention, that you actually start to infringe
    upon your own free will. so when you pull back and resist giving, to
    your own detriment, that doesn't make you evil and therefore
    automatically on the same level as the other selfish and predatory
    entities in the universe, and it doesn't make you that much sts for
    not outright martyring yourself... you are simply restoring the
    balance, and rescuing yourself in the process. free will can't be
    violated, by its necessity, so by being a slave, that is using your
    free will to go against your free will because of your free will in
    this case, to one or the other will ultimately cause very real
    problems, real fast. because it's inherently flawed.

    and sometimes we think we're okay with sacrificing ourselves, little
    by little, boiling ourselves away, which puts the object of sacrifice,
    when the meaning is lost, in the role of a parasite. sometimes the
    poison tastes sweet. sometimes we get confused, and think pleasure and
    continually empowering ourselves, living our own lives, is pain, and
    that self-emaciation and denial are eventual, ultimate pleasure.

    *sometimes*.

    so. sometimes by being the taker you give the other person the
    opportunity to _give_. sometimes by being the giver, you _force_ the
    other person to be the taker.

    the key is love.

    sometimes by feeding yourself, you make yourself strong, and be able
    to more strongly serve others. sometimes by depleting yourself in your
    efforts to give you only wind up harming yourself, which is just as
    grievous and needless as depleting any other being.

    in the end, the most desirable and the most hated, in the face of the
    one, are just the same. there isn't a difference between taking care
    of another and taking care of yourself _in love_, in the face of the
    one, so long as a body is taken care of. the key is love. don't beat
    up on your self. be kind to your self. be free, play, have faith, have
    courage, stay fluid, and don't be guilty. if the end comes, it comes--
    it still doesn't change the fact you are loved and you are just as
    much the face of the creator as everything else.

    anyway, with the impersonal, waxing intellectual reckonings aside,
    i'll say this now. i don't know you, and of course there is the
    possibility that i am reading my own problems into what you're saying,
    and so i deeply and sincerely apologize if i say something wrong or
    misconstrue you (in your truly infinite being, and i really mean
    that). but i only put this out there because i feel like i sense a
    congruence between us in this regard. but judging from what you said,
    it sounds like you have had to endure dominating, self-feeding,
    predatory and manipulative people, and you have survived this by
    flying low, if the situation is totally unavoidable, or by
    "retreating" to a different but similar environment. different in that
    the severity of the pain is mitigated, which is honest human nature to
    just do, but similar in that nothing is actually resolved, and you
    still encounter the same problems in the form of following the old
    patterns you've laid out for yourself in your relationships and your
    roles (the exception for you, and what has started to give you your
    leverage, is the expounding new beliefs you have acquired within
    yourself). and i would venture to guess this is mainly because you are
    afraid to take care of yourself since you associate that with the
    hellaciously selfish and negative figures and influences in your life.
    though these individuals are paradigmatic of the worst ways we can
    take care of ourselves, and not positive role models *at all*,
    sometimes we give them that privelidge by default if they are the only
    ones there.

    i mean all this in the sense that this is the _reality_ of what you've
    had to live with, and there are others out there who can sympathise.
    you have had to live with people who suffer in their addictions.
    petrus, this is one of those _for real_ problems, despite what the
    addicts and bloodsucking takers who actually live their whole lives in
    denial would have you think. living in an emotional environment of
    predatory, self-defective, manipulative addicts, whether its sexual
    addiction/abuse, chemical addiction, rage, etc. is not normal, though
    you are constantly surrounded by it. it's like the kid who gets beaten
    by their drunk, alcoholic parent every day, and goes to school,
    thinking it happens to everyone else. people think "normal" when
    really what they're thinking is "common"-- that is, if it happens all
    the time, then it's automatically "normal".

    anyway, for instance. your father bursting into your room and chewing
    you out because you haven't "done something with your life" is him
    dumping is own shame onto *you*, though i think david's liberal use of
    the "$" word here is definitely appropriate. the fact is that's
    exactly how he feels about himself. and the fact of the matter is you
    can do whatever you want with your life regardless of what he says,
    and this is what you have been doing and will continue to do, the best
    you know, though you minimize it and don't appreciate your own talent
    and worth. the reason you feel this way is you acquired this attitude
    about yourself from having been surrounded by people who, in one way
    or another, feel that way about themselves and forced it on you/
    infected you with it. because, remember, what people attract and put
    out into their environment is just a reflection of their inner states
    (my weak attempt to imply lo1-ness to this conversation, lest i feel
    the iron-hard, surly, loving arm of the moderatorr, who is awesome for
    putting up with us, by the way, and reading everything we write,
    despite the gnashing of teeth and fire spitting). anyway. no one
    should have to put up with that, because that is not normal, or
    healthy, or good. standing up for yourself in courage doesn't make you
    the predatory bully. getting your way just long enough to simply free
    yourself doesn't make you evil. you don't have to constantly sacrifice
    yourself all the time, despite what good intentions you may have--
    this is what makes the takers around you, sts if you want to call them
    that, feed off you. and standing up to them because of this no more
    makes you sts than having a wooden leg makes you a chair-- like i
    said, you are simply rescuing yourself. if you can do good for just
    one person, at least have that person be you.

    ultimately you will choose, on one level or another, when your time is
    right, and no one can put that on you except yourself, no matter how
    hard others try to convince you and control you. there are the
    green-ray "feminine" attributes which we strive to integrate into
    ourselves, because when 2012 rolls around, we all want to make the cut
    when the confederacy busts all up through our little neighborhood, and
    do the right thing and be good sto humans so we can be invisible and
    fly through time and hang out with buddha and stuff... i'm
    deliberately being superficial here. but should that matter anyway?
    what about the male "attributes" of courage (to avoid using the
    parlance of our time for decency), to dare to do the right thing, out
    of love, for its own sake? without the yellow-ray there would be
    nothing for the green-ray to be built on, or use. this applies in the
    cosmic sense and the personal sense. but this is a completely
    different discussion, raging on somewhere else on the list. but don't
    feel like your efforts are wasted.

    my point is, you shouldn't feel guilty taking care of yourself,
    because you see people around you screwing up taking care of
    themselves, or because they have tricked you into playing a role for
    them that uses you to elevate themselves. your intention needs to be
    to take care of "everyone", of course. but short of that, at least
    make sure _you_ are taken care of. your ability to pursue your own
    interests, along with the personal knowledge and experience you have
    accumulated throughout this whole process, however insignificant and
    unenviable you might think it is, are actually your strengths and
    greatest assets. it doesn't matter what you are, what you look like,
    what you earn, who you're stuck with. don't worry about what being
    "good", sto, whatever, "seems to be". don't put these expectations on
    yourself, because they'll just weigh you down.

    anyway, i'm done.

    love


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •