on being true to oneself

[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. 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.

[David Wilcock]

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-ãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚â‚ムâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚â‚ãƒâƒ ã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚â‚ãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚â*-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

[Petrus]

>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.

[Tobey Wheelock]

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.

[David Wilcock]

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

[Tobey Wheelock]

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.

[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"

__________________________________________________ ___________

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]

[David Wilcock]

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

[E. Drake]

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]

[Abrient]

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