I have 2 questions for cassiopaeans

[howe]

There is something I would like to say.What I know of the spiritual and the divine and what the cassiopaeans have said has many differences and I am left wondering which version is accurate.As knowledge that is permitted differ's with each entity level,I am patiencely learning.
howie howe

 

[vinny]

There is something I would like to say.What I know of the spiritual and the divine and what the cassiopaeans have said has many differences and I am left wondering which version is accurate.

That's impossible to say without more detail. Perhaps you could describe one of these differences in understanding, in simple terms if possible, and we can take it from there?

 

[Richs]

There is something I would like to say.What I know of the spiritual and the divine and what the cassiopaeans have said has many differences and I am left wondering which version is accurate.As knowledge that is permitted differ's with each entity level,I am patiencely learning.
howie howe

Hi howie,

I think it is fair to say that you are trying to figure out what to 'believe'. "Belief" is not very helpful or beneficial to us because it is generally something which is not actually based on any verifiable facts or data. It is usually better (especially when there is little or no hard data available) to use a 'range of probabilites' of what one thinks is the most likely to be 'true' about something, such as, "I give that a 75% probability of being true". In this way it is also very easy to change one's estimation of probablilty of what is most likely to be 'true' when additional data becomes available which may be helpful in finding an answer to whatever is the subject of interest.

Your statement "what I know of the spiritual and divine" indicates that you think you already "know" some things which may or may not actually be 'true'. This can cause a serious dilemma if you actually 'believe' these things are 'true' because it is much more difficult to change one's beliefs than an estimate of the probability of something being 'true'. And, how can one be sure in any case if there is no real data to verify this is so?

So far as can be determined at this time, the Cassiopaeans have been very consistently correct in as many areas as has been possible to verify with our current scientific knowledge. And, to my knowledge, there has not yet been any glaring errors in anything that we have been told. So, I personally think it highly probable that much, if not most, of what they have to say is 'true'. I still remain, as most others here do, able to change my thinking if new or additional data should become available.

As far as "accuracy" is concerned, it may well be that we are not able in our present state of being to understand an 'accurate' answer about some of the questions we ask of the C's. Kind of like trying to explain to a 2 year-old why the sky is blue! Also is the fact that the information from the sessions is gathered one letter at a time. Imagine them trying to figure out how they can explain something to us that would require a million words to even 'semi-adequately- explain something into '50 words or less'!

 

[Gimpy]

Just for the record, most Newbies have no idea what "external considering" is. It is not externally considerate for those who do know to expect it of them.

I got that in hindsight Laura. My apologies Howe.

 

[John G]

There is something I would like to say.What I know of the spiritual and the divine and what the cassiopaeans have said has many differences and I am left wondering which version is accurate.As knowledge that is permitted differ's with each entity level,I am patiencely learning.

For me, this place does both esoteric spirituality and modern physics as well as it can be done anywhere. That it can do both very well I think is important. As Nomad said, feel free to ask specific questions. There's a lot of stuff here, it's quite often very helpful for our learning to look at things again too.

 

[howe]

quote:That's impossible to say without more detail. Perhaps you could describe one of these differences in understanding, in simple terms if possible, and we can take it from there?

Dear Nomad,Thank you very much but I do not want to take away anymore of anybody's time. I shall find the answer through spiritual divination.
quote:"I think it is fair to say that you are trying to figure out what to 'believe'. "Belief" is not very helpful or beneficial to us because it is generally something which is not actually based on any verifiable facts or data."
Dear Richard S,You are misunderstanding me there.May I say that man's human nature of wanting hard facts and data for knowledge of the spiritual and the divine realm in the layman terms of the material sense is leading and making them on a longer and longer journey towards the divine realm. As the cassiopaeans said,you cannot explain the spiritual densities in the physical and material terms and sense.Words are not suitable in explaining what the spiritual is. There is no human terms to describe what the 5,6,7Density. If you choose to try to explain or proof what is in the realms above,you may or can never find the answer in the material level.
Sorry everyone,I deeply apologise for being a Disturbance in the Force here.
Please try not to misunderstand what I have written,because I have realise that different people read and understand it in a different way. It takes me a while to adsorb and see what those of you who have replied are saying to me,so it takes a little while to give you a reply.I mean't that I do not see what you wrote at face value.I try to find the deeper meanings.
I think we should not carry on in this thread,but I may go to the forum threads on anymore matters.
I would like to Thank everyone here for the communication here. Please go back to your efforts to learn what is important in helping you to elevate and work with it.
A Good Day to you All

 

[Laura]

Dear Psalehesost, Thank you for the post regarding the search program.
Dear Tigersoap,Thank you for your post.
Dear Laura,Thank you for posting the transcript to help me.

Q: (A) Okay. What was the origin of our universe. This I
don't know. This I want to know. This is okay to use
just words, but if you use mathematical models...
A: That is where you come in.

Laura, What gives you the idea that I know all the answers.I was told the answer to the first question,but I would like to hear what another source will tell me (if possible),Because I only half believe what I was told.

What gives you the idea that I think that you know all the answers and that I am even asking you? The snippet you have quoted above is from an exchange with the Cs and my husband Ark back in May of 1998. The Cs were telling HIM that, as a physicist, it was his job to develop the mathematical model.

 

[howe]

Quote: For me, this place does both esoteric spirituality and modern physics as well as it can be done anywhere. That it can do both very well I think is important. As Nomad said, feel free to ask specific questions. There's a lot of stuff here, it's quite often very helpful for our learning to look at things again too.

Dear BlueLamp,I thank You for using the energy to post a reply to me. There is no end to learning and I am trying to at all things.

I wish you a pleasant n enlightening day
Your's sincerely,
howie howe

 

[howe]

Quote:The snippet you have quoted above is from an exchange with the Cs and my husband Ark back in May of 1998. The Cs were telling HIM that, as a physicist, it was his job to develop the mathematical model.
I am very sorry I misunderstood that because I only absorbed this sentence:-" Q: (A) Okay. What was the origin of our universe."
Thank you for pointing that to me.

Quote:"What gives you the idea that I think that you know all the answers and that I am even asking you?"
This answer you give me:-"It is not externally considerate for those who do know to expect it of them. "

Again, Sorry for being a Bad Disturbance in the Force

 

[Gonzo]

Hi Howe,

I'm not sure what you meant When you said you will use spiritual divination for answers.

I guess my problem lies in the subjective nature of the term. For some, it could mean meditation, for others, using a pendulum and for yet another group, it could mean engaging non-human entities. I'm sure there are other possible subjective meanings as well.

Divination is a tricky business because of the interference of the ego, not to mention negative entities that are extremely good at mimicking and acting in ways that disarm the cognitive processes of an individual.

In all 3 examples above, outside forces could easily interfere and inject thoughts.

The Cassiopaean Experiment is a model of communicating that does not bypass the critical functions of the mind, but still required significant effort and practice to remove ego interference. With the critical processes intact, those using the board were able to differentiate between ego, low level astral beings and other entities before they finally reached a reliable channel.

So, in case you hadn't given it much thought, I would like to caution you on the validity of anything one might receive when diving on their own or in a trance (trance states tend to disconnect the critical functions of the conscious mind).

As well, networking through this forum provides a mechanism to further assess probabilities and to discuss possible interpretations. All learn and grow through participation and sharing of knowledge.

Fyi,
Gonzo

 

[howe]

Dear Gonzo. I live in the far east and I know enough to stay away from all forms of physical and material methods of seeking knowledge from the spiritual,including the western boards for communicating with the energy forms. I can only say that the knowledge is deep within and when the divine permits it will surface in my consiousness.I have no fear of anything,because I do not fear losing my individual universal existence as it does not hold dear to me. When it does happen,the essence that is left will merge with other good pure essence for the good of everything.

 

[henry]

howe, I get the impressions from a couple of remarks you have made that you may think that the label “Disturbance in the Force” was some sort of judgement on you. Just in case that is how you have interpreted it, let me clarify that all new members of the forum are welcomed with the category “A Disturbance in the Force”. As you may have seen, we use references to Star Wars for the categories that indicate how many messages people have posted to the forum. There is no judgement being made. It is rather a fun way to classify members. So don’t take it personally! :)

 

[truth seeker]

Quote:"What gives you the idea that I think that you know all the answers and that I am even asking you?"
This answer you give me:-"It is not externally considerate for those who do know to expect it of them. "

Hi howe,

I believe you mistook the above quote. It wasn't directed at you but rather those who may have been expecting that as a new member, you understood how the forum worked. Hope that clarifies. :)

 

[Laura]

I can only say that the knowledge is deep within and when the divine permits it will surface in my consiousness.

Too bad that way of getting knowledge does not seem to be serving you well as your complete misunderstanding of nearly everything said so far indicates.

 

[Gonzo]

Hi Howe,
I still don't understand how you differentiate between "the divine", your ego and ideas being broadcast directly to your mind by beings more clever than most can imagine.

...
I can only say that the knowledge is deep within and when the divine permits it will surface in my consciousness.
...

Can you accept the possibility that what you have been conditioned (or conditioned yourself) to believe is divine knowledge transferred to your consciousness is potentially corrupt?

It is this premise that the Ouija board method was utilized as a method that does not disconnect the critical observer from the channel. As an added level of critical awareness, more than one is required to work the board, so that enhanced critical assessment can be applied.

As well, work on the self is required to remove or minimize ego influence.

Finally, a network of individuals then consider the information to help in critical assessment and then attempt to validate with other sources.

Even the Cassiopaeans say the channel is not void of influence, although the influences continue to be reduced through ongoing "grooving of the channel", if I understand correctly.

To assume messages received from the self during meditation or contemplation as pure would be ignoring known variables of influence and, therefore, folly to expect it as pure divine truth or any truth for that matter.

I hope you can give this some consideration.

As well, I would be remiss to point out that your mention of being from the far East and assuming western methods lacking demonstrates certain programming you may not be aware of. By focussing on the apparent failures of methods you deem of lesser value, you automatically put the ones you believe to be better on a pedestal, far removed from critical assessment. It might be wiser to assess all against a stable, consistent set of criteria, where nothing is sacred and above inspection.

Regards,
Gonzo