What a year - 2015

[Chester]

I found the Avalon forum 4 years ago. Soon after (and not related to this or any forum), I experienced what I later believed was an "archontic attack" where I found myself on the brink of ending my physical life. Having ended up with a jacket and two suitcases of all my worldly possessions I then ventured to Colombia where my wife lived. But I also carried with me an energy sucking depression which became a two and a half month long true "dark night of the soul" event where I had to leave my wife for the US. I left because my energies were so horrific, I could see I was harming two of the five most loved ones in my life - my wife and her daughter (the other three being my three sons) - so I left on March 10, 2012 and flew to Texas with $300 in my pocket and a small monthly pension and nothing else but those same two suitcases and jacket.

I had no where to live except with my ex-wife's father (he and I had always remained friends) who offered me a room in his home - how ironic.

Somehow a former employer offered me some work and lent me the money I needed to buy the computer required to do the work.

And with the PC I dove back into Avalon. I used this forum to pour out everything, to share my anomalous experience where at least folks didn't call me a lunatic. Over the next 5 weeks I read and read and read... and posted, posted, posted. The depression was still all consuming. I prayed every day to die.

And then, April 26th, 2012 someone shared the link to Houman's Horus-Ra thread. I read the first post (excerpts from Eve Lorgen's site) and went to her site for further information. I found that perhaps the voice I heard in my head - the voice that told me I had to kill myself to save the world - the voice that also told me it was related to Horus and Ra... was perhaps not "the voice of God" as I had always thought. I now had what I felt was a real answer... that for this information to be shared on a forum meant that I wasn't a complete loon but that others had also had these same experiences and perhaps a specific "non-human" source which was anything but God could be behind my experience.

Instantly... the depression vanished. I announced to my ex's father that day - "Guess what? Depression gone." And it truly vanished... but not permanently.

Over the next two or so years I participated in all sorts of discussions on this forum. I researched all sorts of materials suggested by folks from the Avalon Forum. I explored all sorts of ideas and concepts stimulated by me reading of this forum. I sought further answers to my one extraordinary anomalous experience I had when I was six years old. I explored the deeply the question, "who/what am I?"

In time I reached out to other members and some reached out to me. Relationships began via the technology of the internet, e-mail and and the program, Skype. I began the process of re-creating my foundational world view and in fact, accepted that my world view would continue to change more and more over time. And I was OK with this knowing that my shifting views sometimes seemed threatening to others. I felt my truth in the moment was important to honor and that I served no one by pretending to be what I might have been in the past even though I could see the new versions of me that would come forth challenged these new relationships.

By the time I got to the middle of 2014, I found that I had formed some pretty deep relationships, powerful relationships... relationships where I also experienced some uncannily magical experiences. What I did not recognize was what I only finally realized after a very difficult year - the year 2015. Events occurred over the course of this year where once again I found myself in a very dark place... the depression I thought I would never again experience, had returned.

Yes, this OP has been long and if the reader is still with me, here is why I have started this thread -

I wish to share what I experienced and the mistakes I, with hindsight, made and then (of course) the lessons I see as opportunities that only if my now and future demonstrates I have actually learned them, could it be said that I did... perhaps upon my grave and perhaps eternity (and eternal opportunisty) prevents this from ever becoming true.

I also wish to ask some questions I am finding difficult to answer. I suspect some folks might read between the lines of the posts I will make in this thread and draw a conclusion I believe I have an answer to some of these questions but I know that I don't. Some may wonder why I would ask these questions as is this not avoiding my own responsibility in making my own mind up? Here we go... I already have revealed one of the questions. Does one avoid personal responsibility by asking others their opinions? Is it not the actions one takes that are the indicators of the decisions made by the actor in relation to what is behind the actions? Are we not ultimately always responsible for our actions?

Anyways - I will state a few things I believe I have learned that came out of 2015.

Though not necessarily in order of importance (perhaps all of these things may not fall into any order) - one lesson I learned is -

Do not allow others to determine for me my own opinions of another... let my own experiences be the basis for my opinions.

There is a part two to this statement which is: If I have experiences with an individual which seem to repeat and which impact me negatively, do not assume the individual cannot change.

More of these lessons will be posted in this thread... none of these lessons are meant to apply to anyone else. We all make up our own minds (if we even do at all) about these types of things.

And lastly... I always reserve the right (and warn those who might think they have me figured out - which is using other words for being able to place me in a box and predict my behavior or thinking) - I always reserve the right to...

...change my mind.

May 2016 be smoother.

[Jean-Marie]

Thank you for sharing Sam!

2015 for me was a year I learned the following:

- Not to get sucked in by Guru's or people who want to tell you things about yourself, (make you feel special), demand a tight loyal group of followers, etc.....

- Do not follow groups who want loyalty to their beliefs.

- Be true to myself and follow my own path.

- Really listen to my gut instincts. They rarely fail me.

- Spend time everyday if possible connecting to nature.

- Be grateful, appreciative in regards to all experiences in my life. Even the tough experiences have taught me important lessons, helped me become who I am today!

-jean-marie

[betoobig]

Love it, Thanks.
I learned that all is perfect.
Much love

[animovado]

Hello Sam,

thank you for sharing.


Does one avoid personal responsibility by asking others their opinions?

Asking life for offerings isn't a bad idea. I can share one simple example. I'm a rock and sports climber and boulderer (climbing without rope up to usually 4,5 meters with a crashpad underneath).
We call the routes we like to make "problems" :bigsmile:. It`s really a challenge to climb at my limit and sometimes I try a problem maybe 50 times and it doesn`t work, just one move is too tricky, or I'm too weak or whatever.
The 51st try works out perfectly!
What happened? It's like a wonder!
But it's not, because I don't see the 50 times (that haven't worked out in the way I would've liked them to be) in the right light and don't honor the process accordingly in that moment.
Now, sometimes I take a kind of shortcut and ask a fellow climber how he does a certain problem. And that works out fine. My body consciousness understands the movement patterns he shows me and is capable of reproducing it in an instant, if it's not too far above the strength or the flexibility of the body. The way to approach the goal is definitely another, but the social aspect of the latter is beautiful too.


Is it not the actions one takes that are the indicators of the decisions made by the actor in relation to what is behind the actions?
Yes, actions are decisions. In the flow or quite the opposite (-something I can chew on).


Are we not ultimately always responsible for our actions?
Yes.
But what is left when I strip off the idea of guilt?
Love?

[Chester]

Another 2015 lesson adopted.

With all the various ways that thoughts might be implanted in my head... ranging from thoughts that arise via a manipulated subconscious to the thoughts planted in one's head via synthetic telepathy, the thoughts that arise due to influence of black magic or demonics, archons, extra-dimensionals... along with my own thoughts which I might look upon as emanating from what I later look upon as "not my best self" if I instead employ a bit of discipline and examine my thoughts as they arise and then decide which thoughts I now might wish "to own" I eliminate the worry as to from where my thoughts might come and instead speak, write and act in a way in which I am fully responsible - thoughts being foundational to those actions.

I have also enjoyed a benefit of employing this process all because of the possibility not all my thoughts originate all and only from within me... that benefit being that I no longer experience guilt from any of my thoughts.

So the axiom that I am responsible for my thoughts, words (written and spoken) and deeds is no longer a part of my operational protocol as I have modified it to this:

I am responsible for all the thoughts I own, all words (written and spoken) and all deeds.

The difference is subtle yet, for me, has been a major life changer and in a very positive way.

I no longer worry about what "they" might "put in my head" and I no longer suffer guilt for the thoughts that arise. I still sometimes make mistakes that I regret but I greatly reduce my participation in the blame game.

[Chester]

The following likely will be difficult to read and comprehend as to the points I wish to make but I hope the reader will give it all a try.

We have what we might call “real world” experiences… experiences in physicality, in this 5 sense world… experiences which, when observed by others are usually described in the same way (not always precisely) but overall and generally the same way by different observers. We usually have no problems coming to an agreement that these experiences did occur. In these cases, all of these experiences are occurring within what we call the physical… the 5 sense reality - the material realm. This is a paradigm and we all have a general mutually agreed upon understanding as to what it is... what is best defined by... (though far from perfectly and with far more understandings to uncover) ...by physical science.

And then we have what I refer to as “unprovable, other worldly” experiences. These experiences may be dreams and/or vivid dreams, may be visions, may be astral travel experiences, OBEs and NDEs, may be abduction experiences, contact experiences, encounters not in (or entirely in) the 5 sense, material world as we know it.

And what I have experienced from others, when it comes to these unprovable, other worldly experiences is that quite often the experiencer will draw conclusions from these experiences as to the dynamics of a paradigm. Essentially their experiences lead them to conclusions about the realm within which they appear to be having these experiences which I refer to here as a paradigm. That paradigm may be one that already exists in lore, etc. or is similar to one that can be found in lore, myths, writings and/or otherwise relayed in some form or it may be a completely new paradigm.

In almost all cases such as this, I find that when another paradigm is brought forth by another experiencer where the logical mind might perceive it impossible for both paradigms to exist… in other words, that in some way or another aspects of one of the paradigms is perceived as impossible to exist if aspects of the other paradigm exist… what almost always seems to follow is “paradigm wars.” People begin to argue whose unprovable other-worldly paradigm is real and whose is some delusion! Note, I haven't even touched the arguments about any ethical or moral implications of competing paradigms - best saved for another post.

A perfect example involves the “Ascended Master” paradigm. I had a friend not so long ago share with me one of her astral journeys. In that journey (I believe she said she was heading towards “Source”) she came upon a thin band of light. Either as she got close or as she penetrated this thin band of light she realized that this band held the “Ascended Master” paradigm.

I know another being who is convinced the “Ascended Master” paradigm is not simply real but that the whole entirety of this paradigm makes up the whole entirety of reality… or at least the whole of reality that should concern us humans who are very, very low on the ascension scale and in fact I believe we are essentially on the lowest level possible according to their view and our entire journey is destined to ascend up the ladder of dimensions until we ultimately become one again with “Source.”

So using a logical view it would seem that one of the two may be correct yet it would be impossible for both of them to be correct.

So I ask… What if the experience (and thus the paradigms one’s experiences suggest) is actually at least partially dependent upon the observer? It could then be possible that both paradigms are true as to how each one views them, yes? True at least for the particular individual that experiences them but certainly the experience of one no longer invalidates the realm experienced by the other, yes?

So the lesson I have learned in 2015 is that I cannot definitively claim one way or another that in cases where someone’s unprovable, other worldly experiences occur where a paradigm (or many paradigms) are suggested to exist actually do or do not exist. I have also learned that it is entirely possible that two seemingly contradictory paradigms could exist as who can say what the rules are for other worldly possibilities anyways? In physicality, I cannot put a tree in the exact same spot as I have a light pole planted, but does this mean multiple seemingly contradictory other worldly paradigms cannot simultaneously exist? This is the gross realm and unprovable other worldly experiences are of the subtle realm, yes? How can one person's subtle realm experiences ever prove another persons subtle realm experiences are false?

OK. I have made the same point several times and regardless if my point is valid, at least what I am attempting to convey should be understood now.

So expounding further on this lesson…

Though no one can prove their unprovable other worldly experiences actually occurred much less prove the related paradigms suggested by these experiences actually exist, one cannot disprove another’s other worldly experiences as well as cannot disprove the paradigm(s) suggested by their other worldly experiences exist.

So then what then can we use to decide if or if not there is a likelihood of truth that their experiences actually occurred?

How many times have we heard this one?

Discernement.

How many times are we told – “You must use your discernment.”

Yet isn’t it a fact that regardless of how much the experiencer passionately relates their experience, regardless of how much that experience might fit into already “accepted to exist” paradigms, regardless of how many of the current “in vogue” alternate media personalities beat the drum about any particular paradigm (AI, evil Draco ETs, Archons, Angels and Demons, Black Goo, OT level III evil Xenu tossing us all in a valcano, “giants,” light traps and mantids and bears oh my… and on and on and….), as long as it is unprovable, even if all sorts of seemingly unrelated individuals all experince similar experiences or similar paradigms, we can never know for sure if these realities are simply group creations or perhaps even implanted by a yet to be identified third party. We just can’t know. I might believe something so strongly that I call it my gnosis but the truth is I truly cannot know like I know I am banging on a black Logitech keyboard at this moment.

So when it comes to others who share unprovable other worldly experiences, is there anything we could consider with regards to the degree to which we might realistically remain open that they are sharing truths? At least being truthful as to what they truly believe they have experienced?

I would think that if the individual sharing stories of an unprovable other worldly nature would at least be expected to be truthful regarding everything they say, even if it is making statements as fact regarding claims of experiences which involve anything in the 3D, 5 sense reality. Why? Because when one tells fantastical stories and then tells people (maybe not publicly but tells individuals in one one one situations all the stories are true) then it would seem reasonable to expect them to be 100% truthful with everything they say for if not, then how can they expect anyone to believe their fantastical other worldly experiences?

For example, if someone states they were the author of a book even though the author of that book named on the cover is someone else (and I don't mean by using a fake name), as long as they could prove it, then they have maintained a high degree of believability and are more likely to be believed when it comes to the stories of their unprovable other worldly experiences.

But if, in fact, it was proven that their claim of authorship was untrue, then it could be said that the one who claimed the false authorship had told a lie. Yet, just because someone told a lie about one thing does not mean they are lying about other things, yes? Yet, in our world, where we are surrounded by lies and liars all day every day, it is not unreasonable to lower the odds that someone’s unprovable other worldly experiences are fabrications when we have caught them lying in 3d, 5 sense reality.

This, for me, is the type of research I rely upon when it comes to whether I should believe someone regarding unprovable other worldly stories… not “discernment” not “gnosis” not “soul-knowingness” or any other unprovable, other worldly form of investigation as regardless of how accurate any of those methods (like remote viewing) may actually turn out to be sometimes, they all still involve the observer which increases the subjectivity of the conclusion and reduces the odds for anything close to perfect accuracy.

[Chester]

Dedicated to 2015 - well... actually dedicated to the ending of 2015!

9kd_Do4AFhY

[Chester]

The following post requires that the reader understand my view of who/what I am (and hope to be) which is described as follows -


There is the being I am which is this one life known as Sam Hunter. (Level 3)

There is "the timeless, formless eternal one life" which I am (and I operatively assume is true for all) (Level 1)

There is the essence of "me" which may extend beyond the death of Sam's physical body (and thus may have preceded the birth of Sam's physical body). (Level 2)

The first I claim to know exists and is real.

The second I realized via years of investigation.

The third is all and only a hope, a desire... yet I operate under the assumption that there is an individuated me that will continue beyond the demise of this one life's physical container.

Whereas Tim Freke has come up with his term, "paralogical perception" (also paralogical thinking), the three levels of being I cited above I call "trilogical perception" (Tim being my inspiration for my own term).

And now the point of my post -

It is my metaphysical view that at Level 2 I am responsible for every single experience I attract. Regardless of whether I consciously recognize at any given moment every single thing "happening to me" it is my opinion that I attract all these things into my experiences (some of these experiences may be lifetimes).

At Level 3 I can look at various experiences and perceive (and often accurately) causes and effects. In some cases I can see that certain experiences I have are caused by what could be called external agencies (others, nature, the unexplained, etc.) This means that some experiences I have had which I might wish I had not experienced were enacted upon me by one or more others where (again, at Level 3), Sam Hunter, can honestly and truthfully state "this person did this to me."

What I learned in 2015 is that I have often played a game on myself where, depending on my experience, I will either state I am responsible or will blame another. What I see that I am doing when I play this sort of game is that I am selecting the convenient level of Levels 2 and 3 depending on what I might wish to project to myself or others. After examining this habit closely, I find that it is hypocritical to play this game without making sure both I and/or any listener understand that I am making said claim from which level of my being.

I have decided that Level 2 (which is all and only a hope and desire) trumps any Level 3 experience.

This means that whenever I play the blame game, the fact that I a responsible for all my experiences trumps that game completely.

By accepting full responsibility for all my experiences, I also accept having full power to change what I need to change about me such that I no longer attract the unwanted experiences.

[Lancet]

Hi Sam,

thanks for sharing, and happy New Year. can you describe a bit more about your depression, was it thoughts or emotions that was primarily driving the depression?

Thanks

[animovado]

By accepting full responsibility for all my experiences, I also accept having full power to change what I need to change about me such that I no longer attract the unwanted experiences.

Hi Sam,

a happy new year to you on all levels!

It might be true, that the only change we can make, is to take full responsibility for all our experiences. Wouldn't make that every unwanted experience disappear and leave just an experience?
Isn't it the term "unwanted" that describes the glue with which the experience is sticking to our soul as an imprint and emotionally charged seed for further exploration of that given specific theme?
What's the difference between responsiveness and resistance?

[Chester]

By accepting full responsibility for all my experiences, I also accept having full power to change what I need to change about me such that I no longer attract the unwanted experiences.

Hi Sam,

a happy new year to you on all levels!

It might be true, that the only change we can make, is to take full responsibility for all our experiences. Wouldn't make that every unwanted experience disappear and leave just an experience?

Well... I go at this in a different way because I sometimes experience unwanted experiences. The first step in finding my responsibility is sometimes identifying something I wish no longer to experience. I could play the game that at the deepest level of my individuated being (the deepest areas of Level 2), I actually "want" the experience and in fact, I see this as true... yet where it is unwanted is at Level 3 and perhaps most of Level 2 as well.



Isn't it the term "unwanted" that describes the glue with which the experience is sticking to our soul as an imprint and emotionally charged seed for further exploration of that given specific theme?


For me on this one... No. I have found that when I experience clearly similar (and thus repetitive) forms of experience which my waking state, conscious mind does not desire to keep recurring, I look deep within to seek understanding as to why I keep bringing that experience into my life (Level 3). I then seek to identify what within my world view that generates this recurring, unwanted experience. I then examine this component of my world view to determine why I made that a foundational component of my world view. I then re-examine the why's ( I look at the why of the whys) until I see the choice I made such that I can consider making another choice. If I do make another choice at the deeper level, it would be important that choice is one my heart now backs.

So when I do this process, I have found that I can make a profound change in the being I have been expressing which results in the attraction of different experiences... usually better yet sometimes not.

All the above I have explained in detail such that perhaps another reader might wish to consider employing this process.

This does not mean I have eliminated all unwanted experiences from arising. But this process works well for the repetitive, reoccurring experiences I am tired of experiencing. The new ones that arise are another matter.

I have found that the very first motivation for everything unfolding in my life is based on boredom. But by resolving the boredom issue, I began a path that I could see would eventually lead to utter loneliness. This I am now primarily motivated by two primal urges - boredom and... the desire not to burn ever single bridge (ie. loneliness).

I enjoy the realms of form immensely by the way and at this moment am hopeful my individuated journey is eternal.



What's the difference between responsiveness and resistance?

My process above is responsive... so perhaps I answer this last question via describing my process.

One last note: I have been able to develop this (so far) successful process in large part due to the Avalon Forum... my participation here and the dynamic experienced between my individuated self and other individuals. I am thankful for this forum.

[Chester]

Hi Sam,

thanks for sharing, and happy New Year. can you describe a bit more about your depression, was it thoughts or emotions that was primarily driving the depression?

Thanks

I have shared the details of this period of my life on this very forum... yet I doubt I could find those posts buried among the thousands of posts... I will see what I can put together again. I do know that some of my conclusions in those posts have been changed or have been modified or expanded.

[animovado]

Thank you for your explanation.

Funily, it doesn't seem to me that different from what I do. I would say that my post above was just describing the process in a condensed form. It appears sometimes as an unfortunate interaction of laziness and love for abstraction.

When I experience something and call it "unwanted", it feels like I'm resisting it in a way.
This resistance is like a signpost for me to look deeper (or higher?) and start a query.
In a responsive state I can embrace the resistance, come close to it and it's motivations and underlying beliefs. Part of a solution is this process itself, because the
cause of many unwanted experiences emerges as a ridiculous belief.

What you call "level 2" could be a very responsive and supporting, non-judgmental part of our being and maybe at some point these two levels, one and two, can merge. Or they already merged or have never been apart, working hand in hand from the beginning?
That last question is interesting, imo, in relation to your desire and hope and the subject of "time".

[Chester]

Thank you for your explanation.

Funily, it doesn't seem to me that different from what I do. I would say that my post above was just describing the process in a condensed form. It appears sometimes as an unfortunate interaction of laziness and love for abstraction.

When I experience something and call it "unwanted", it feels like I'm resisting it in a way.
This resistance is like a signpost for me to look deeper (or higher?) and start a query.
In a responsive state I can embrace the resistance, come close to it and it's motivations and underlying beliefs. Part of a solution is this process itself, because the
cause of many unwanted experiences emerges as a ridiculous belief.

What you call "level 2" could be a very responsive and supporting, non-judgmental part of our being and maybe at some point these two levels, one and two, can merge. Or they already merged or have never been apart, working hand in hand from the beginning?
That last question is interesting, imo, in relation to your desire and hope and the subject of "time".

wow - beautiful further explanation which has me agreeing that we see this quite similarly.

If I am being completely honest... from the POV of what I call Level 1 (the timeless, formless eternal one life), I see all the rest as illusion. Yet, when "i" drop that heavy brick on my toe, I find myself fully immersed in what I call Level 3 (my individuated being experiencing through a physical body in physical reality) hoping up and down shouting expletives.

Level 2 (for me) is simply a hope, a desire... that being that there would be an individuated "me" which continues beyond the death of the body (and thus may have been "here" before the body was born). Thus at Level 2, all that I might imagine about it is at best hopeful speculation YET, it is at the very first point where my individuation began as to where I must accept complete, full, inarguable responsibility for every single experience the "I" (the individuated self) might experience which includes experiences where my viewpoint is anchored in Level 3.

We seem to be using quite the similar process and I like not feeling alone.

To all readers, these three levels are nothing which I am telling anyone is the truth for anyone else. It is a verbal formation of a complexity as to how I see "me" which is true for me and only true for me today. Tomorrow I may change my mind about some or all of this structure. If someone finds this view helpful for them, then by all means, explore it... try it on like a new pair of clothes and wear it until you like something else better. This is how I see all my world views which I have experienced to be constantly changing.

Suggestions only, opinions only... Perhaps some may get sick of me stating this as perhaps some get sick of others imposing their other worldly unprovable "reality/paradigm/all encompassing isness/God's creation/etc." (put whatever word you like - I use the word "paradigm" as a pointer for those who have the inner vision to see that to which I am pointing to) as THE truth and anything else is labeled fiction.

[animovado]

Suggestions only, opinions only... Perhaps some may get sick of me stating this as perhaps some get sick of others imposing their other worldly unprovable "reality/paradigm/all encompassing isness/God's creation/etc." (put whatever word you like - I use the word "paradigm" as a pointer for those who have the inner vision to see that to which I am pointing to) as THE truth and anything else is labeled fiction.
The good thing is that I can see this "being sick about..." as a reminder to look at my own issue with dogmatism, because my
emotional response indicates such. In that way I can value the dogmatism in others, or at least don't devalue it.

[Chester]

Suggestions only, opinions only... Perhaps some may get sick of me stating this as perhaps some get sick of others imposing their other worldly unprovable "reality/paradigm/all encompassing isness/God's creation/etc." (put whatever word you like - I use the word "paradigm" as a pointer for those who have the inner vision to see that to which I am pointing to) as THE truth and anything else is labeled fiction.
The good thing is that I can see this "being sick about..." as a reminder to look at my own issue with dogmatism, because my
emotional response indicates such. In that way I can value the dogmatism in others, or at least don't devalue it.

Hi animovado and other readers -

Just to clarify... I have no issue even with dogma (though I would stay away from it and I wish that so many Earth humans would no longer be attracted to it or to propagating it).

What I do not like and which does cause an emotional reaction in me... (and note: I have no problem that it does) ...is when a dogmatist calls their own dogma truth while simultaneously calling anything outside of their dogma to be fiction... whether this be someone else's dogma or simply open mindedness to possibilities which the dogmatist does not see as possible to co-exist along with their dogma and the paradigms their experiences and dogma suggest to exist.

What is interesting is that I have encountered few human beings who (regardless of whether they agree with me or not) understand the point I am trying to make.

[animovado]

What is interesting is that I have encountered few human beings who (regardless of whether they agree with me or not) understand the point I am trying to make.

Why is that interesting for you, Sam?

[Chester]

What is interesting is that I have encountered few human beings who (regardless of whether they agree with me or not) understand the point I am trying to make.

Why is that interesting for you, Sam?

Because it seems obviously hypocritical to state as fiction one person's other worldly unprovable "paradigm" while simultaneously insisting one's own unprovable other worldly paradigm is true and universally true for all.

One cannot know that there could be multiple, equally valid other worldly paradigms where one or more beings could experience those varying paradigms.

You'll find folks justifying the exclusive existence of their own with words or phrases such as "one's gnosis," one's "soul knowingness," etc.

Some will form groups and share descriptions of their other worldly experiences where they conclude they have experienced the same paradigm which they may very well have. But (all in my opinion only) they will then claim this is the precise and only other worldly reality and anyone not in agreement (because their own experiences are too different to fit into the paradigm of the group) to be delusional.

And the above statement doesn't even begin to explore the possibility the other worldly experiences of one being or even a group of beings are not artificially generated by a third party which has the ability to implant such experiences. Do not read into my statement I know or think this is happening because I don't. Yet I am not closed minded enough not to consider it as possible.

Just like I consider it possible for what appear to be logically competing paradigms to exist and be valid simultaneously.

[animovado]

What is interesting is that I have encountered few human beings who (regardless of whether they agree with me or not) understand the point I am trying to make.

Why is that interesting for you, Sam?

I asked the above question, because it would've been a miracle if you haven't found no one who's understanding the point you're making. And i asked to make sure if it's meant to reassure and reinforce the response you were getting out of your pondering.

Ray's insistence on claiming his cosmology as THE truth is also a miracle for me.
But I'm sure that his firmness in this is for a reason and is of good service for him and people he is in touch with.

How can it serve me?
Honestly, the discussion on TH's thread was bit disappointing for me and I could feel, like you said yourself, "I do not like" this.
This feeling of resistance brought me to the process we were talking about earlier and to the subject of humility, acceptance and the necessity to say "no" at certain times.
And all the thoughts about responsibility and the insights you had in 2015.

My reality, the world seen from my perspective, is literally "me" to a certain degree.
When I take into account that there must be something like a consent of the broader context I'm living in, then it's actually totally "me".
So, how would I like me to respond to myself? How can I value my world?
How do I treat myself? "Me", "myself" and "others" are interchangeable, because what I do to others, I do to myself.
My response is a validation and reinforcement of the idea of separation or, dare I say, the reality of oneness and coherence.

This is nothing new, I guess.....:Angel:

[Chester]

What is interesting is that I have encountered few human beings who (regardless of whether they agree with me or not) understand the point I am trying to make.

Why is that interesting for you, Sam?

I asked the above question, because it would've been a miracle if you haven't found no one who's understanding the point you're making. And i asked to make sure if it's meant to reassure and reinforce the response you were getting out of your pondering.

Ray's insistence on claiming his cosmology as THE truth is also a miracle for me.
But I'm sure that his firmness in this is for a reason and is of good service for him and people he is in touch with.

How can it serve me?
Honestly, the discussion on TH's thread was bit disappointing for me and I could feel, like you said yourself, "I do not like" this.
This feeling of resistance brought me to the process we were talking about earlier and to the subject of humility, acceptance and the necessity to say "no" at certain times.
And all the thoughts about responsibility and the insights you had in 2015.

My reality, the world seen from my perspective, is literally "me" to a certain degree.
When I take into account that there must be something like a consent of the broader context I'm living in, then it's actually totally "me".
So, how would I like me to respond to myself? How can I value my world?
How do I treat myself? "Me", "myself" and "others" are interchangeable, because what I do to others, I do to myself.
My response is a validation and reinforcement of the idea of separation or, dare I say, the reality of oneness and coherence.

This is nothing new, I guess.....:Angel:

Thanks again for the response.

Again we are of a somewhat similar view and yet at the end of my post I will share my difference. First let's look at this.


How do I treat myself? "Me", "myself" and "others" are interchangeable, because what I do to others, I do to myself.

So let me ask a hypothetical question.

If you are in the street and a vulnerable one is standing there near you and then a third one came up to the vulnerable one and struck that vulnerable one down to the ground, how might you respond?

There are many choices and one is no response and that it is none of your business and you might walk away.

Another response might be to go up to the offender and let them know that if they continue their attacks they may have to deal with you next.

A third response may be that you simply go up to the offender and knock them to the ground just like they just did to the vulnerable one.

You might also attempt to share with the offender your view that what one does to another one is doing to themselves (a view which I agree) so that your reasoning may turn the light on and the offender may not just stop, they might also apologize.

There are probably other choices yet I see those the likely and most obvious ones.

So, what might you do, animovado?




Also -


My response is a validation and reinforcement of the idea of separation or, dare I say, the reality of oneness and coherence.

Because my view is "trilogical" then at Level 3 there is a "myself" and there is "others" and I honor this level and appreciate this level for the experience it offers "me" (meaning the "Big Me" as well as the hope I have for an extended journey of individuation I would label as "Me"). I don't see it as separation. I see it as a way the timeless, formless eternal one life can experience itself. I see it as a natural response to boredom and via that experience another response comes forth instigated by loneliness. This is all and only my personal cosmology and is not in any way meant to be foisted upon another as what they chose to develop as their own cosmology is all and only their own choice.

Yet I see your point because it appears obvious most have lost touch with Level 1 or never apprehended the Level 1 or that Level 1 may be all and only my own delusion. Still... where those are left would likely lead to an over enamorization with Level 3. Thus I understand the logic that any honoring of Level 3 risks the other to take that in a way that validates and reinforces the sense of separation.


In addition, to communicate at Level 3 with other expressions of Big Me, I (me, myself) uses language and inferential words that would help "others" (the other expressions of Big Me) understand what I am attempting to communicate.

So to rephrase, my response would be to communicate from the level the other can understand and then, when/where opportunities reveal themselves, to expose the other to the possibility of the Big Me such that they may see the timeless, formless eternal one life I believe them to be - something I cannot prove and thus also cannot know yet if they see this too... then that is all up to them, yes?.

[animovado]

I don't cultivate such scenarios in my mind. When they appear, I let them go. My answer to your question is: I don't know.

But in my teens I was a witness to a violent act like that. I was standing in shock and rigor, helplessly watching a physical superior male acting out his "worldview" with another teenager.
Afterwards a friend of mine and I called a cab and drove the injured to a hospital.

And the difference you're describing at the end of your post is, in my view, a subdivision under the premise that there is separation even possible. We can have the idea of separation, but it's just an idea, whereas the individual existence itself is more than that.

Here's a post on the "Here and Now" thread that may illustrate a bit what I mean:
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?30405-Here-and-Now...What-s-Happening&p=1031587&viewfull=1#post1031587

[Chester]

I am an odds maker by trade and thus I cultivate and make odds on all possible scenarios.

I once experienced an individual abusing another. I saw both the abuser and the abused as myself (Level 1). The justification used by the abuser was that the abuser was right and the abused was wrong even though the abuser could make no case he was right and neither could he make a case the abused was wrong.

I pointed out the ludicrous logic the abuser (Level 3) used hoping to appeal to the abuser's logical mind (as clearly they there was no attention paid to any heart). I then left the area for awhile. When I returned, I saw once again the abuser (Level 3) doing the same thing to another (Level 3). Once again I saw both as myself (Level 1).

Since I was tired of my Level 1 "being that I am" being abused and tired of the self abuse the abuser (Level 3) was performing on his Level 1 being as well as his level 3 being and possible Level 2 being, I pointed the hypocrisy out again.

I am hopeful that one day that Level 3 expression of myself might get it.

I call what I have done - "doing." Doing is action.

As a living being I am and I do.

I am is a state.

I do is an action.

My three level view I have labeled as "trilogical perception" (as explained above).

I (Level 1) and many at Level 3 and hopefully Level 2 as well as myself at Level 3 and hopefully Level 2 have experienced benefits from applying this operational protocol.

[Chester]

I learned one good thing about the physical universe.

When enough is enough, you can just walk away.